后革命时代的权利范畴反思

发布时间：2018-04-14 02:36

本文选题：后革命时代 + 权利　；参考：《山东大学》2010年硕士论文

【摘要】： 从十七十八世纪开始,以理性主义、自然权利(自然法)等思想为主的革命性概念日益充溢于整个近现代以至当今社会历史过程中。“权利”自其成为重要的社会“语言性”工具,便已然侧重于其革命性内涵——平等主体间、个人与国家间的冲突。尤其是在世界历史大革命潮流中,反抗封建王权、批判宗教教权,抵御外敌侵略、实现民族独立,争取政治权利、社会利益……诸如此类的目标都禁不住令每个历史时期的人们强调“权利”作为革命性工具的作用。当然,“革命性”的权利范畴也真正发挥了其应有的作用。然而,当今的历史现实似乎表明：革命性的权利范畴需要一定的反思。无论是国内还是国际视角下,蕴含革命性意味的权利似乎走到了岔路口——究竟继续沿着对抗性的道路前行,还是寻找或选择其他可能更适合现今时代的道路?尤其是现今所面临的地区性以及国际性的经济、政治以及社会问题——如全球性的金融危机,世界气候问题,地区安全问题,重大的疾病及自然灾害问题等等——令我们不得不站在一个更具理性意蕴和人文关怀的视角反思权利以及法律。本文正是以此为背景,对权利进行思辨性反思的。这种思辨性反思,贯穿了一种兼顾价值、社会和规范的研究方法。本文主要分为四部分：第一部分是导论,主要对基本研究背景和“后革命时代”这一概念进行了界定。前者涉及权利的发达与面临的问题,西方和国内关于权利(及法律)的研究状况等；后者涉及“革命”、“时代”以及“后”等概念在本文中的具体内涵。第二部分是对权利范畴的性质作了宏观的描述,包括第一章权利范畴的“革命性”与“非革命性”和第二章传统权利范畴之保守性：第一章对于权利范畴的两个性质之描述主要通过平等主体间及国家与个人间纵横两个维度描述其革命性,通过社会历史现实来宏观定位其“非革命性”：第二章着重从表现、特征及原因上描述传统权利范畴之保守性,尤其是对工具理性进行了反思。第三部分是对权利范畴进行的微观反思,即第三章基于利益、社会和规范的反思：这一部分从价值、社会和规范角度对权利进行了阐释——价值方面,权利所蕴含的利益是冲突与消除解突两个对立过程同时进行的；社会方面,权利是矛盾与合作的统一体；规范方面,权利不是实用主义的修辞,而是规范主义的描述。第四部分是对权利范畴进行的制度视角的反思,即第四章国家与社会的二元互动：这一部首先解释了国家政治权力对于权利的积极作用,进而基于国家与社会二分并将“市民社会”作理念性解读,从而将“国家与社会二元互动”作为权利和法治实现的制度基础。
[Abstract]:Since the 17th century, the revolutionary concepts, such as rationalism, natural rights (natural law) and so on, have become increasingly abundant in the whole modern and modern society and history.Since it became an important tool of social "language", the "right" has already focused on its revolutionary intension-the conflict between the equal subject and the individual and the state.Especially in the tide of the world historical revolution, they resist the feudal Wang Quan, criticize the religious right, resist the invasion of foreign enemies, realize national independence, strive for political rights and social interests.Such goals cannot help urging people in every historical period to emphasize the role of "rights" as revolutionary tools.Of course, the "revolutionary" category of rights really played its due role.Today's historical reality, however, seems to suggest that a revolutionary category of rights requires some reflection.From both domestic and international perspectives, revolutionary rights seem to have reached a fork in the road-to continue along the confrontational path, or to find or choose other paths that might be better suited to the present age?In particular, the regional and international economic, political and social problems facing us today such as the global financial crisis, the world climate problem, the regional security problem,Major diseases and natural disasters, among other things, force us to reflect on rights and laws from a more rational and humane perspective.It is against this background that this paper reflects on the rights.This reflective reflection runs through a research method that takes value, society and norms into account.This paper is divided into four parts:The first part is an introduction, which defines the basic research background and the concept of "post-revolutionary era".The former involves the development of rights and the problems faced by them, and the research status of rights (and laws) in the west and at home, while the latter involves the specific connotation of the concepts of "revolution", "time" and "post" in this paper.The second part is a macroscopic description of the nature of the category of rights.It includes the "revolutionary" and "non-revolutionary" of the category of rights in Chapter I and the conservatism of the category of traditional rights in Chapter II: chapter one describes the two properties of the category of rights mainly through the relations between equal subjects and between states and individuals.The vertical and horizontal dimensions describe its revolution,The second chapter focuses on describing the conservatism of the traditional right category from the aspects of performance, characteristics and reasons, especially on the reflection of instrumental rationality.The third part is the microcosmic reflection on the category of rights, that is, the third chapter is based on the reflection of interest, society and norms: this part interprets the rights from the perspective of value, society and norms.The interests contained in rights are the two opposing processes of conflict and elimination of outburst; in the social aspect, rights are the unity of contradiction and cooperation; in the normative aspect, rights are not the rhetoric of pragmatism, but the description of normalism.The fourth part is the reflection of the institutional perspective of the category of rights, that is, the fourth chapter of the dual interaction between the state and society: this part first explains the positive role of state political power on rights.Then, based on the dichotomy of state and society and the conceptual interpretation of "civil society", "dual interaction between state and society" is regarded as the institutional basis for the realization of rights and the rule of law.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2010
【分类号】：D08

【相似文献】