正義脈絡與論證權利：以健康照護為對象的理論反思

Context of Justice and Right to Justification：Theoretical Reflection on the Health Care

郭蕙心(Hui-Hsin Kuo)

指導教授 ： 顏厥安

國立臺灣大學/法律學院/法律學研究所/碩士(2016年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201600405

摘要

國內處理羅爾斯正義論與健康照護的議題，大多注重於Norman Daniels在公共衛生的發展。本文首先指出，羅爾斯的政治哲學，應用於公共衛生的領域，會間接影響政府判斷疾病概念以及資源分配的依據。在其中，所引起不同平等觀的關注，可視為政治自由主義內公民興趣與偏好的不同，但不能等同於公民彼此間善觀念的差異，即民主社會合理多元的事實，而屬公共理性處理的範圍。

Rawlsian以首要善清單論證的方式，使理論與健康照護制度在面對社會中的障礙者有經驗上困難。然而，本文發現健康照護權之預設，間接支持了羅爾斯首要善清單內的社會自尊，說明了理性契約論者由霍布斯式的自我保存至康德式自我尊重的進展，其中，「合理的」法權個人預設，是論證規範性的前提。

另一方面，由政治自由主義與健康照護的制度議題，推導出民主社會有著合理多元的事實，更有可能是自由平等公民，如何協調彼此經驗上差異的問題。本文認為，Rainer Forst以理由建構的論證權利，透過互為主體、在情境中以相互性、普遍性原則定義「好理由」，不倚賴善的預設，提供我們論證的另類思考方案。

關鍵字

首要善 ； 自我尊重 ； 合理的 ； 公共論證 ； 道德性

並列摘要

John Rawls and the issue of health care often focus on Norman Daniels and the public health. This thesis would like to point that the background of Rawlsian and health care will raise different conceptions of equality. Otherwise, the criteria under Rawlsian will affect government’s power to classify disease and distribution of resources. I tried to point that we can discuss different conceptions of equality under variations in preferences and tastes are seen as our responsibility, but different conceptions of equality isn’t equivalent to variations in conceptions of good. According to Rawls, the fact of reasonable pluralism is the scope of public reason.

Rawls presupposed primary goods in his theory, this thesis would point that Rawlsian can’t actually solve the problem of disability. In context of justice, although the primary goods’ status have moved to service for political, not for originally moral person in Kantian sense, we can still found that self-respect is the most important primary goods. From Hobbes’ self-preservation to self-respect, this argument proved Liberalism is progressive and reasonable person is the conditions for legal person to justify legal norms.

In addition, the fact that variations in conceptions of good, is a history and empirical concept in a democracy society. Rainer Forst provides the right to justification is inherent in the principle of justification, which has to be recursively reconstructed, by means of argumentative threshold which are reciprocity and generality principles. What reason is a good reason can be definite and accepted intersubjectivity in every situation. This approach could be an alternative for our justification rather than presupposing a theory of goods.

並列關鍵字

primary goods ； self-respect ； reasonable ； public justification ； morality

參考文獻

2005a〈溝通、制度與民主文化－由哈伯瑪斯的法理論初探社會立憲主義〉，載：顏厥安，《幕垂鴞翔：法理學與政治思想論文集》，臺北，元照：頁153-200。

Brink, David-Owen

1989 Moral Realism and the Foundations of Ethics. Cambridge University Press.

Buchanan, Allen/ Brock, Dan / Daniels, Norman

Busfield, Joan