論邦斯的性別形上學與性別詞理論

本文剖析邦斯於〈性別與性別詞〉一文中所提出的性別形上學與性別詞使用理論。邦斯認為，當代性別理論的謬誤在於將性別形上學跟性別詞的適用條件混為一談，他主張，後者屬於語言使用的範圍，可以（而且應該）從形上學的工作劃分出去。在形上學部分邦斯採取並修正了哈斯蘭格（Sally Haslanger）的社會位置論；在語言使用的部分，他強調形上學雖然不提供性別詞的適用條件，但仍會規範語言的使用。本文指出邦斯理論的可議之處，闡釋其性別詞分析的明顯缺失，並且質疑邦斯並未提出具足的論證，說明區分出形上學跟性別詞的使用，就必然更能達成改良型性別理論所追求的性別正義。

關鍵字

性別；性別形上學；性別詞；社會位置論；改良型分析

並列摘要

This paper introduces and critically evaluates the view Elizabeth Barnes (2020) proposes in ＂Gender and Gender Terms.＂ According to Barnes, contemporary gender theories mistakenly conflate the task of a metaphysics of gender with the task of figuring out the application conditions of gender terms. She contends that we can and should separate the two, as the former is to explain the social reality of gender, which need not give us the definitions or truth conditions for sentences involving gender terms. Regarding the metaphysical component of her account, Barnes adopts and ameliorates Haslanger's social position theory; for the semantic and conceptual component, she emphasizes that though the metaphysics of gender does not provide the application conditions of gender terms, the former nevertheless constraints the use of the latter. We argue that Barnes' semantic analysis is far from satisfying. Moreover, it is not clear that separating the metaphysics of gender and the analysis of gender terms leads to more effective attainment of the ameliorative goal of gender equality.

並列關鍵字

gender ； metaphysics of gender ； gender terms ； social position theory ； ameliorative project

參考文獻

吳忻穎、林晉佑 (2020)。〈責任能力調查與監護處分執行現況之探討〉，《矯政期刊》，9, 1: 71-107。(Wu, H.-Y., & Lin, C.-Y. [2020]. Exploring the present situation about investigating criminal responsibility and the enforcement of rehabilitative measures. Journal of Corrections, 9, 1: 71-107.) https://doi.org/10.6905/JC.202001_9(1).0003

林家伃 (2019)。《醉態抗辯與原因自由行為——借鏡美國法觀點》，國立政治大學法律學系碩士班碩士論文。(Lin, C.-Y. [2019]. A study on intoxication defense and actio libera in causa: A lesson from the United States. National ChengChi University Master Thesis.) https://doi.org/10.6814/NCCU201900094

法思齊 (2016)。〈割喉魔之審判──精神障礙與死刑〉，《月旦法學教室》，167: 56-64。(Fa, S.-C. [2016]. Trial of the cutthroat demon: Mental disorders and the death penalty. Taiwan Jurist, 167: 56-64.) https://doi.org/10.3966/168473932016090167011

Andoh, B. (1993). The M’Naghten Rules—The story so far. Medico-Legal Journal, 61, 2: 93-103. https://doi.org/10.1177/002581729306100205

Dressler, J. (2020). Kahler v. Kansas: Ask the wrong question, you get the wrong answer. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 18, 1: 409-425. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3601780

主題瀏覽