哈贝马斯对现代法治国的商谈论重构
|
摘要
首先,哈贝马斯批判了主体哲学和意识哲学的实践理性概念,提出了交往理性概念和交往行为理论,揭示了主体性原则的主体间性意义以及理性在现代社会中的一体化功能,为法律的规范有效性以及规范性共识基础上的法律共同体奠定了基础。其次,批判了主观自由论和自然权利论,强调交往自由和交往权利的始源性和优先性,阐明了权利和法律之间的构成性关系。再次,在商谈论民主观基础上揭示了法律和政治权力之间的构成性关系。主张交往权力对于行政权力的优先性,以便把行政权力置于法律之下,防止社会权力直接转变为行政权力。
Firstly, Habermas criticized the practical rationality concepts in both the subjective philosophy and the consciousness philosophy. He instead put forwards the theory of communicative rationality and communicative behavior, and revealed the significance of intersubjectivity in subjectivity principle and the function of rationality for social integration and a legal community based on normative consensus. Secondly, Habermas criticized the subjective freedom and the natural rights theory. He emphasized the fundamental roles and priorities of the communicative freedom and communicative rights and illustrated the rights-and-lawrelationship. Thirdly, Habermas explained the constructive relationship between lawand political power based on the democracy in Discourse Theory. He insisted on the priority of the communicative power over political power,in order to put the administrative power under law, thus preventing social power from becoming administrative power directly.
Firstly, Habermas criticized the practical rationality concepts in both the subjective philosophy and the consciousness philosophy. He instead put forwards the theory of communicative rationality and communicative behavior, and revealed the significance of intersubjectivity in subjectivity principle and the function of rationality for social integration and a legal community based on normative consensus. Secondly, Habermas criticized the subjective freedom and the natural rights theory. He emphasized the fundamental roles and priorities of the communicative freedom and communicative rights and illustrated the rights-and-lawrelationship. Thirdly, Habermas explained the constructive relationship between lawand political power based on the democracy in Discourse Theory. He insisted on the priority of the communicative power over political power,in order to put the administrative power under law, thus preventing social power from becoming administrative power directly.
引文
[1]尤尔根·哈贝马斯.在事实与规范之间[M].童世骏,译.北京:三联书店,2003.
[2]马克思恩格斯选集:第3卷[M].北京:人民出版社,1995.
[3]约翰·罗尔斯.政治自由主义[M].万俊人,译.南京:译林出版社,2011.
[4]尚塔尔·墨菲.政治的回归[M].王恒,臧佩洪,译.南京:江苏人民出版社,2005.
[5]尤尔根·哈贝马斯.现代性的哲学话语[M].曹卫东,译.南京:译林出版社,2004.
[6]迈克尔·桑德尔.自由主义与正义的局限[M].万俊人,等译.南京:译林出版社,2001.
[7]尤尔根·哈贝马斯.合法化危机[M].刘北成,曹卫东,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2009.
[8]尤尔根·哈贝马斯.重建历史唯物主义[M].郭官义,译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2000.
[9]A·麦金太尔.追寻美德[M].宋继杰,译.南京:译林出版社,2003.
[10]威尔·金里卡.当代政治哲学[M].刘莘,译.上海:上海三联书店,2004.
[11]乔万尼·萨托利.民主新论[M].冯克利,阎克文,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2009.
[12]弗雷德里克·沃特金斯.西方政治传统[M].李丰斌,译.北京:新星出版社,2006.
[13]汉娜·阿伦特.人的境况[M].王寅丽,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2009.
[2]马克思恩格斯选集:第3卷[M].北京:人民出版社,1995.
[3]约翰·罗尔斯.政治自由主义[M].万俊人,译.南京:译林出版社,2011.
[4]尚塔尔·墨菲.政治的回归[M].王恒,臧佩洪,译.南京:江苏人民出版社,2005.
[5]尤尔根·哈贝马斯.现代性的哲学话语[M].曹卫东,译.南京:译林出版社,2004.
[6]迈克尔·桑德尔.自由主义与正义的局限[M].万俊人,等译.南京:译林出版社,2001.
[7]尤尔根·哈贝马斯.合法化危机[M].刘北成,曹卫东,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2009.
[8]尤尔根·哈贝马斯.重建历史唯物主义[M].郭官义,译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2000.
[9]A·麦金太尔.追寻美德[M].宋继杰,译.南京:译林出版社,2003.
[10]威尔·金里卡.当代政治哲学[M].刘莘,译.上海:上海三联书店,2004.
[11]乔万尼·萨托利.民主新论[M].冯克利,阎克文,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2009.
[12]弗雷德里克·沃特金斯.西方政治传统[M].李丰斌,译.北京:新星出版社,2006.
[13]汉娜·阿伦特.人的境况[M].王寅丽,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2009.