| 契约论的问题域转换 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 任俊.契约论的问题域转换[J].华中科技大学学报(社会科学版),2012,26(4):81-86. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 任俊 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 华东师范大学哲学系,上海,200241 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 契约论本身不是一个哲学问题,而是解答问题的思想框架。传统契约论作为一种标准的政治义务理论,诉诸实际的同意来解释政治义务的产生。当代契约论主要关注的不是政治义务问题,而是为正义原则和社会制度提供道德辩护。道德辩护不同于我们通常所说的政治义务问题,因而"假想的契约不能产生义务"这类批评对当代契约论构不成挑战。
|
| 关 键 词： | 契约论 政治义务 道德辩护 |
On the Transformation of the Topic of Contractarianism |
| |
| REN Jun.On the Transformation of the Topic of Contractarianism[J].Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology(Social Science Edition),2012,26(4):81-86. |
| |
| Authors: | REN Jun |
| |
| Institution: | REN Jun(Philosophy Department,East China Normal University,Shanghai 200241,China) |
| |
| Abstract: | Contractarianism itself is not a philosophical issue but a thought framework to solve the problem.Traditional contractarianism,as a theory of political obligation,appeals to the conception of actual consent to account for how political obligation arises.Contemporary contractarianism,however,is not concerned with the political obligation.Rather,its aim is to justify the principles of justice and social institutions.Moral justification differs from what we normally call political obligation,so the objection that hypothetical contract cannot generate obligations doesn′t challenge contemporary contractarianism. |
| |
| Keywords: | contractarianism political obligation moral justification |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 万方数据 等数据库收录！ |
|
