罗尔斯的基本自由优先论：原则与论证

发布时间：2018-04-22 06:36

本文选题：罗尔斯 + 基本自由权项　；参考：《吉林大学》2011年硕士论文

【摘要】：约翰·罗尔斯是20世纪美国乃至西方思想界最重要的哲学家之一,毕生致力于构筑其正义理论,也使得他的“公平的正义”理论为多元现实下正义问题的解决提供了迄今为止最为系统、合理和可行的论证。他所提出的基本自由优先论在他的法律哲学与政治哲学中占有一个突出重要的地位。自由作为法律产生和发展的前提和基础,是推动法律发展的重要因素,追求自由的真谛也是法律的价值理想之一。本文试图从罗尔斯对基本自由的理解着手,探究其对自由优先性的论证,并进一步剖析隐藏在罗尔斯自由优先论背后的根本理论诉求以及这种理论诉求背后的社会与伦理关怀,从而厘清罗尔斯自由主义政治法律思想的内在理路。罗尔斯的两个正义原则中的第一个原则,集中概括了他的自由理念。罗尔斯认为,公民的自由是与社会基本结构或社会制度性环境存在着紧密的内在联系的。从社会正义的意义上,罗尔斯提出每个人都有平等的基本自由。他所指的基本自由并不是抽象的自由,而是可以开列出清单的具体而特殊的自由,并且为了实现“平等的”自由,罗尔斯对“自由”与“自由的价值”做出区分,以调和物质财富不平等与平等自由的实现之矛盾。同时,他将自由区分为“基本自由”与“非基本自由”,从而给予基本自由以特殊保护。赋予基本自由以优先性可以说是罗尔斯自由理论的力量之所在,这体现了罗尔斯作为自由主义者对自由的重视,同时也构成对功利主义传统的批判。自由的优先性主要是通过第一优先规则体现的,即平等自由原则优先于第二个正义原则。对罗尔斯来说,提出基本自由的优先性是远远不够的,他还需要提供令人信服的证明。因为一旦不能证成自由的优先性,他对功利主义的批评便会大为削弱。罗尔斯最初基于心理学与经济学的证明受到了学界的严厉批判,此后他几经修改其论证方式,最终诉诸于一种社会合作和道德人的理念,将基本自由作为保证了道德人格形成和发展所必须的社会条件,进而将这种“最高层级的利益”作为优先性的基础。同时,他将“重叠共识”的理念引入正义观的形成过程,以期增强其正义理论在合理多元现实中的稳定性。本文认为,罗尔斯对基本自由及其优先性的论证策略的转变与其说是为了应对学界的批评意见,不如说是罗尔斯对变化中的社会现实的进一步思索与回应。这一思索反映在两个方面,一是对合理多元现实下的稳定性的寻求,二是对法治社会下社会成员的生活价值、生存质量问题的社会伦理关怀。罗尔斯的基本自由理论接续了西方自由主义的传统,受到了霍布斯、洛克、卢梭、康德的社会契约论及休谟、西季维克和密尔的功利主义等多个学术传统的深刻影响,他的理论既有对前人的承继与突破,亦存在理论本身的局限性。对罗尔斯基本自由优先论的探究对于我们思考当下中国社会的法学理论与法律实践问题具有相当重要的意义,同时也为我们理解和反思自由主义理论提供了一种新的视角。
[Abstract]:John Rolls is one of the most important philosophers in the American and western ideological circles in the twentieth Century. He devoted his life to the construction of his theory of justice. It also makes his "fair justice" theory provide the most systematic, reasonable and feasible argument for the solution of the problem of justice under multiple realities. His legal philosophy and political philosophy occupy a prominent and important position. As the prerequisite and foundation for the emergence and development of the law, freedom is an important factor to promote the development of the law. The true meaning of freedom is also one of the ideal of the value of the law. This article tries to explore the priority of freedom from Rawls's understanding of the basic self. The argument, and further analysis of the underlying theoretical demands hidden behind Rawls's free priority theory and the social and ethical concern behind this theoretical appeal, thus clarifies the inherent logic of Rawls's liberal political and legal thoughts.
The first principle of Rawls's two principles of justice concentrates on his idea of freedom. Rawls believes that the freedom of the citizen is closely related to the basic structure of society or the social institutional environment. In the sense of social justice, Rawls suggests that everyone has equal basic freedoms. Freedom is not an abstract freedom, but a specific and special freedom to list the list, and in order to achieve "equal" freedom, Rawls distinguishes between "freedom" and "the value of freedom" to reconcile the shield of the realization of the unequal and equal freedom of material wealth. At the same time, he distinguishes freedom into "basic freedom". And "non basic freedom", thus giving basic freedom to special protection. Giving basic freedom to priority can be said to be the power of Rawls's freedom theory, which embodies the importance of Rawls as liberalist to freedom and also constitutes a criticism of the utilitarian tradition. The priority of freedom is mainly through the first priority. The rule embodies that the principle of equality and freedom takes precedence over the second principles of justice.
It is far from enough for Rawls to put forward the priority of basic freedom. He also needs to provide convincing proof. Because once he is unable to prove the priority of freedom, his criticism of utilitarianism will be greatly weakened. Rawls's initial proof of psychology and economics was severely criticized by the academic community. After that, he has been repaired several times. In the end, it recourse to the concept of a social cooperation and moral man, and the basic freedom as a necessary social condition to guarantee the formation and development of moral personality, and then the "highest level of interest" as a basis for priority. It will enhance the stability of its theory of justice in a reasonable pluralistic reality.
This paper argues that Rawls's transformation of basic freedom and its priorities is not so much as to respond to the criticism of the academic world, rather than the further reflection and response of Rawls to the social reality in change. This reflection is reflected in two aspects, one is the pursuit of stability under reasonable multiple realities, and the two is the rule of law. The social ethics concern for the life value of social members and the quality of life. Rawls's basic freedom theory continues the tradition of western liberalism, and has been influenced by Hobbes, Rock, Rousseau, Kant's social contract and the profound influence of Hume, Western Ji Weike and mill's utilitarianism and other academic traditions. There is a limitation to the successors and breakthroughs of the predecessors, and the limitations of the theory itself. The exploration of Rawls's basic free priority theory is of great significance for us to think about the legal theory and legal practice of the present Chinese society, and also provides a new perspective for us to understand and reflect on the theory of freedom.

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D09

【参考文献】