论克劳斯科对罗尔斯政治义务理论的拯救

发布时间：2018-04-28 21:21

本文选题：公平原则 + 自然责任　；参考：《道德与文明》2017年01期

【摘要】：罗尔斯的公平原则与正义的自然责任原则是两种影响深远的政治义务理论,但是它们各自也面临着无法解决的难题:公平原则无法解释那些不情愿收到非排他性公共产品的公民的政治义务,正义的自然责任理论则无法证明公民对其所属国家的政治义务。与其他的政治义务理论一样,罗尔斯的理论也没能避免"普适性-特殊性"悖论的困境,但是罗尔斯已经尝试利用多种道德原则论证政治义务(责任)。为了拯救罗尔斯政治义务理论面临的困境,克劳斯科提出了由公平原则、自然责任原则和"共同利益"原则联合构成的多元-原则政治义务理论。尽管这个理论尚在雏形并且仍有缺陷,但是它对政治义务的解释力和前途就在于它符合了当今政治生活的复杂性和联系性。
[Abstract]:Rawls' principle of fairness and the principle of natural responsibility of justice are two far-reaching theories of political obligation. But they each face problems that cannot be solved: the principle of equity cannot explain the political obligations of citizens who are unwilling to receive non-exclusive public goods. The theory of natural responsibility of justice cannot prove the political obligation of citizens to their country. Like other theories of political obligation, Rawls' theory can not avoid the dilemma of "generalizability-particularity" paradox, but Rawls has tried to use a variety of moral principles to demonstrate political obligations. In order to save the dilemma of Rawls' theory of political obligation, Crouzco put forward the theory of multi-principle political obligation, which is composed of the principle of fairness, the principle of natural responsibility and the principle of "common interest". Although this theory is still in its infancy and still has defects, its interpretation of political obligation and its future lies in its consonance with the complexity and connection of political life today.
【作者单位】：中国人民大学哲学院;
【分类号】：D091

【相似文献】