功利概念之辨:休谟与边沁
摘要
尽管休谟与边沁都对功利概念做了深入的论述和研究,但由于各自秉持的道德根据不同,使这一概念在他们的道德哲学中发挥着不同的基础性作用,进而导致的理论结果和意义也不尽相同。休谟坚持道德以情感为源,通过引入功利概念,在一定程度上克服了道德诉诸情感的主观性,使道德判定具有了客观倾向;而边沁则坚持用功利定义善恶,将其作为唯一的道德根据和来源,并以此发展出了一门道德学说。鉴于此,二者在处理功利与正义、功利与幸福之间的关系上也体现出明显的差异。因此在讨论相关问题时,我们需要对他们的功利概念做出辨析,以避免混淆和误读。
引文
(1)[法]埃利·哈列维:《哲学激进主义的兴起--从苏格兰启蒙运动到功利主义》,曹海军等译,长春:吉林人民出版社,2006年,第11页;参见[英]边沁:《政府片论》,沈叔平译,北京:商务印书馆,2017年,第147-149页脚注。
(2)休谟使用的“利益”(interest)、“用处”(use)均与“功利”(utility,或译为“效用”)含义相同,故本文不再做区分。
(3)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,edited by Thomas Hill Green and Thomas Hodge Grose,Aalen:Scientia Verlag,1964,p.117.
(1)共有四个标准:对他人有用的行为或品格、对自己有用的行为或品格、直接使他人愉快的行为或品格、直接使自己愉快的行为或品格。满足其中任何一种,休谟认为这种行为或品格就是善的或正当的,否则就是恶的或不正当的。
(2)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,pp.258-256.
(3)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,p.204.
(4)Jeremy Bentham,An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation,edited by J.H.Burns and H.L.A.Hart,London:Methuen&Co.Ltd.and New York:Methuen,Inc.,1982,p.11.
(1)Jeremy Bentham,Theory of Legislation,translated from the french of etienne dumont by R.Hildreth,London:Kegan Paul,Trench,Trübner&Co.Ltd.,1911,p.3.
(2)Jeremy Bentham,An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation,p.11.
(3)Jeremy Bentham,An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation,p.12.
(4)Jeremy Bentham,An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation,p.12 note.
(1)根据休谟的观点,无论是物质条件极为丰富的“黄金时代”,还是环境恶劣的极端状态,都不会有正义产生,因为前者自然会使各种美德盛行,而后者会滋生各种贪婪和罪恶。但是,通常的社会状态只会是处于极端情形下的中间状态,而正义在这种状态下就会变得十分有用。它可以起到约束私心、稳定财产的作用,它的价值和道德责任就会立刻体现出来(David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,pp.179-187)。
(2)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,p.179.
(3)自洛克将财产权作为天赋人权后,历来的政治哲学家都重视财产权,这成为他们论述问题的一项基本原则。
(4)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,p.195.
(1)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.II,1964,p.263.
(2)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,pp.274-275.
(3)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,p.196.
(4)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,pp.299-300.
(5)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.II,p.263.
(6) David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.II,p.263.
(1)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.II,p.252.
(2)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.II,p.293.
(3)Jeremy Bentham,An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation,p.120 note.
(4)Frederick Rosen,Classical Utilitarianism from Hume to Mill,Taylor&Francis e-Library,2005,p.54.
(5)参见[英]约翰·穆勒:《功利主义》,徐大建译,上海:上海世纪出版集团,2008年,第65页。
(6)Jeremy Bentham,An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation,pp.11-12.
(1)Jeremy Bentham,An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation,pp.38-41.
(2)Frederick Charles Copleston,“Utilitarianism to Early Analytic Philosophy”,A History of Philosophy,Vol.8,London·New York:Continuum,2003,p.3.
(3)参见[美]弗农·布尔克:《西方伦理学史》,黄慰愿译,上海:华东师范大学出版社,2016年,第232-233页。
(4)Frederick Charles Copleston,“Utilitarianism to Early Analytic Philosophy”,A History of Philosophy,Vol.8,2003,p.2.
(2)休谟使用的“利益”(interest)、“用处”(use)均与“功利”(utility,或译为“效用”)含义相同,故本文不再做区分。
(3)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,edited by Thomas Hill Green and Thomas Hodge Grose,Aalen:Scientia Verlag,1964,p.117.
(1)共有四个标准:对他人有用的行为或品格、对自己有用的行为或品格、直接使他人愉快的行为或品格、直接使自己愉快的行为或品格。满足其中任何一种,休谟认为这种行为或品格就是善的或正当的,否则就是恶的或不正当的。
(2)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,pp.258-256.
(3)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,p.204.
(4)Jeremy Bentham,An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation,edited by J.H.Burns and H.L.A.Hart,London:Methuen&Co.Ltd.and New York:Methuen,Inc.,1982,p.11.
(1)Jeremy Bentham,Theory of Legislation,translated from the french of etienne dumont by R.Hildreth,London:Kegan Paul,Trench,Trübner&Co.Ltd.,1911,p.3.
(2)Jeremy Bentham,An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation,p.11.
(3)Jeremy Bentham,An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation,p.12.
(4)Jeremy Bentham,An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation,p.12 note.
(1)根据休谟的观点,无论是物质条件极为丰富的“黄金时代”,还是环境恶劣的极端状态,都不会有正义产生,因为前者自然会使各种美德盛行,而后者会滋生各种贪婪和罪恶。但是,通常的社会状态只会是处于极端情形下的中间状态,而正义在这种状态下就会变得十分有用。它可以起到约束私心、稳定财产的作用,它的价值和道德责任就会立刻体现出来(David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,pp.179-187)。
(2)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,p.179.
(3)自洛克将财产权作为天赋人权后,历来的政治哲学家都重视财产权,这成为他们论述问题的一项基本原则。
(4)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,p.195.
(1)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.II,1964,p.263.
(2)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,pp.274-275.
(3)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,p.196.
(4)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.IV,pp.299-300.
(5)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.II,p.263.
(6) David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.II,p.263.
(1)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.II,p.252.
(2)David Hume,The Philosophical Works of David Hume,Vol.II,p.293.
(3)Jeremy Bentham,An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation,p.120 note.
(4)Frederick Rosen,Classical Utilitarianism from Hume to Mill,Taylor&Francis e-Library,2005,p.54.
(5)参见[英]约翰·穆勒:《功利主义》,徐大建译,上海:上海世纪出版集团,2008年,第65页。
(6)Jeremy Bentham,An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation,pp.11-12.
(1)Jeremy Bentham,An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation,pp.38-41.
(2)Frederick Charles Copleston,“Utilitarianism to Early Analytic Philosophy”,A History of Philosophy,Vol.8,London·New York:Continuum,2003,p.3.
(3)参见[美]弗农·布尔克:《西方伦理学史》,黄慰愿译,上海:华东师范大学出版社,2016年,第232-233页。
(4)Frederick Charles Copleston,“Utilitarianism to Early Analytic Philosophy”,A History of Philosophy,Vol.8,2003,p.2.