「修正共和主義」與「新共和主義」的理論困境及其成因

The Theoretical Dilemma of ＂Revising Republicanism＂ and ＂Neo-Republicanism＂ and Its Causes

劉岫靈(Hsiu-Ling Liu)

《人文及社會科學集刊》 32卷2期 (2020/06) Pp. 239-270

摘要

Skinner的「修正共和主義」與Pettit的「新共和主義」同爲當代共和理論的新典範，它們都是以西塞羅的res publica理論作爲主要參照而建構的共和理論。一方面，Skinner爲了使共和主義調和於消極自由，採取權利中心詮釋建構了「修正共和主義」。另一方面，Pettit爲了使共和主義適用於當代多元民主，採取無支配自由中心詮釋建構了「新共和主義」。然而這兩種近代共和理論都出現了理路矛盾與理論困難。本文將採用觀念圖式的分析方式，說明Skinner與Pettit在參照西塞羅圖式的同時，是如何更動了西塞羅圖式中的詞彙使用傾向與聯結關係，最終導致兩組理論的理路矛盾與理論問題。

關鍵字

修正共和主義 ； 新共和主義 ； 消極自由 ； 無支配自由 ； 觀念圖式

並列摘要

Skinner's ＂revisionist republicanism＂ and Pettit's ＂neo-republicanism＂ are the new emerging paradigms of contemporary republican theory. They both use Cicero's ＂theory of res publica＂ as the main source to construct republican theory. On the one hand, Skinner adopted juristic discourse to construct ＂revisionist republicanism＂ in order to reconcile republicanism with negative freedom. On the other hand, Pettit adopted freedom as non-domination discourse to construct ＂neo-republicanism＂ in order to make republicanism applicable to contemporary pluralist democracy. However, the two kinds of republican theories suffer from the problem of internal logical contradiction and the theoretical confusion. This paper will use the method of scheme analysis to explain how Skinner and Pettit refer to and change the scheme of Cicero at the same time, which finally leads to two paradigm contradictions and theoretical problems.

並列關鍵字

revisionist republicanism ； neo-republicanism ； negative freedom ； freedom as non-domination ； scheme of ideas

參考文獻

陳思賢 1998 　《西洋政治思想史—近代英國篇》。臺北：五南。(Chen, Sy-shyan, 1998, A History of Western Political Thought: Modern British Period. Taipei: Wunan Publishing.)

陳思賢 1999a 　《西洋政治思想史—古典世界篇》。臺北：五南。(Chen, Sy-shyan, 1999a, A History of Western Political Thought: Classical Period. Taipei: Wunan Publishing.)

陳思賢 1999b 〈近代自由主義政治的古典前驅：希臘化時代反城邦政治與自然法的興起〉，《政治科學論叢》10: 195-225。(Chen, Sy-shyan, 1999b, “The Classical Antecedence of Modern Liberalism: A Study of Hellenistic Political Thoguht,” Taiwanese Journal of Political Science 10: 195-225.)

劉岫靈 2017 〈西塞羅的共和主義式國家理論—「國家—邦國模式」的穩定性〉，《政治與社會哲學評論》63: 1-64。(Liu, Hsiu-ling, 2017, “Cicero’s Republican Theory of State-The Stability of the Model of Civitas-Res publica,” SOCIETAS: A Journal for Philosophical Study of Public Affairs 63: 1-64.)

蔡英文 1999〈古典共和公民社會的理想與奧古斯丁政治神學之解釋〉，《台灣哲學研究》2: 71-107。(Tsai, Ying-wen, 1999, “The Ideal of Civil Society in Civic Republicalism and the Critique of St. Augustin’s Political Theology,” Taiwan Philosophical Studies 2: 71-107.)