人權普世性與多元文化的批評

Universality of Human Rights and the critic of multi-culture

林庭安(Ting-An Lin)

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(2022年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU202200235

摘要

人權是現代政治與法律規範國家權力的重要誡命之一，並被認為是許多權利的集合。人權普遍被認為是作為人就享有的權利，而具有普世性。然而人權的普世性受到許多挑戰，而基於多元文化的批評則是屢見不鮮。本文認為人權的普世性最基本分成概念的普世性和內涵的普世性，後者往往是爭議所在。本文檢視了基於多元文化對人權內涵普世性的批評，包括多元文化主義、文化相對論、民族中心論，並概稱為多元文化的批評。這些批評基本著眼於人權內涵往往是由所謂西方所發展的，而帶有西方文化的優越性或中心性，忽略了其他文化對於人權的不同看法；他們對於避免人權成為新的意識形態霸權有所貢獻。然而這些批評也並非毫無疑問。人權論者對此做出了回應。本文主要選取了四位學者，檢視他們的回應態度。羅爾斯從國際政治角度將人權清單縮減但極大化人權侵犯後果。Donnelly則提出相對的普世性，認為人權理論中只有交疊共識、國際法律、功能性的普世性可以被辯護。An-Na’im提出對話理論修正人權內涵的普世性，為人權普世性提供文化正當性。陳瑤華較為強烈地質疑了人權是西方的命題和多元文化的批評在這方面的方法論問題。本文希望為人權的普世性提供更為清楚地對多元文化的批評的回應，這些回應包括承認這些批評部分言之成理而對人權普世性進行修正，也包括對多元文化的批評的質疑，避免立意良善的多元文化的批評反而用以規避人權誡命。

關鍵字

人權普世性 ； 多元文化主義 ； 文化相對論 ； John Rawls ； Jack Donnelly ； Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im ； 陳瑤華

並列摘要

Human rights is one of the most important imperatives that are served as restraint on state power. It was considered as a collection of rights. Human rights are generally believed as the rights one simply has as a mankind, and thus it is universal. However, the universality meets lots of challenges, and one of the most constant critics is the critic of multi-culture. This thesis subdivides universality into two basic ideas: the conceptual universality and the substantial universality, the latter of which is the main controversy. I examine the critics that are based on multi-culture, including multiculturalism, culture relativist and ethnocentrism, and generalize them as “critic of multi-cluture”. These critics mainly argue that human rights is mostly developed in the western, and it is with western-superiority or western-centrism, ignoring the different ideas on human rights in other culture. The critic has its contribution in preventing human rights from becoming an imperialistic ideology. Yet they are with problems. Human rights theorists reply to the challenges. This thesis mainly discusses four scholars. John Rawls cuts the bills of human rights from international politic perspective and thus justifies international intervention against human rights invasion. Jack Donnelly support a relative universality, arguing only overlap-consensus, international legal, functional universality can be defended. Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im offers dialogue theory to build up culture legitimacy for universality, especially for substantial universality. Jau-hwa Chen strongly questioned the proposition that human rights is western and the methodology of the critic. This thesis hope to clarify the reply to multi-culture critic, which includes accepting the critic and revising the universality as well as defending, so as to avoid the good faith multi-culture critic is abused to serve for avoiding human rights norms.

並列關鍵字

Human Rights ； Universality ； Multi-culturalism ； Culture Relativist ； John Rawls ； Jack Donnelly ； Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im ； Jau-hwa Chen

參考文獻

America in the World (2010). The United States Is a Beacon to the World. In L. S. Friedman (Ed.), Human rights (pp.46-52). Greenhaven Press.

An-Naʿim, A. A. (1992). Introduction. In A. A. An-Naʿim (Ed.), Human Rights in Cross-Cultural Perspectives: A Quest for Consensus (pp. 1–16). University of Pennsylvania Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt3fhr99.4

An-Naʿim, A. A. (1992). Toward a Cross-Cultural Approach to Defining International Standards of Human Rights: The Meaning of Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. In A. A. An-Naʿim (Ed.), Human Rights in Cross-Cultural Perspectives: A Quest for Consensus (pp. 19–43). University of Pennsylvania Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt3fhr99.5

An-Na’im, A., A (2003). Introduction: “Area expressions” and the universality of human rights: mediating a contingent relationship. In D. E. Forsythe P. C. McMahon (Eds.), Human rights and diversity: Area studies revisited (pp.1-21). University of Nebraska Press.

Arendt, H. (1951). The origins of totalitarianism (new ed.). Harcourt.