建構「人類世」的動物保護治理機制

To Construct an Animal Governing Mechanism in the ＂Anthropocene＂

吳宗憲(Chuang-hsien Wu)

《中外文學》 49卷1期 (2020/03) Pp. 95-132

https://doi.org/10.6637/CWLQ.202003_49(1).0004

摘要

自由主義政治制度是人類的發明，使得歷史中弱勢的人類，逐漸在這個治理框架下得到自由與平等，但隨時間邁入「人類世」，動物能不能繼續放入這個治理架構中，得到應有的權利，將會是人類能否解決「人類世」困境的重要因素。本文將先說明學術圈將動物納入自由主義治理的新架構之嘗試，將「動物」僅僅作為「個人動物保護道德」而存在的理念「客體」，提升為像人類一樣，具有能動性的「主體」，並且務實地解決動物「理性能力」、動物「代表性」及動物「疆界」問題。但本文進一步闡述，為了使動物權利在當代自由主義治理架構變得可行，必須進一步引進當代的動物行為學，以協助完善金柏莉．史密斯提出的治理架構，惟若欲使此一設想得以成為動物保護的途徑，動物行為學還有研究資源侷限、方法論分歧，以及代理人本身的價值等數項困境必須克服。

關鍵字

自由主義 ； 動物行為學 ； 道德能動者 ； 道德容受者 ； 治理

並列摘要

Liberalism, an all too human construct, is founded with the principle to incorporate the underprivileged into its political/philosophical framework on the basis of liberty and equal rights. However, as we entered the Anthropocene, whether animals have the rights to benefit from this political system is crucial for us to resolve the predicaments of this era. With the above ideas in mind, this paper first discusses the new framework of liberalism proposed by academics to include animals. Animals need to be considered as subjective agencies instead of mere moral objects under human protection. The questions of boundaries, rationality, and representation of animals are also in urgent need of practical resolution. In order to make animal rights possible in the new framework of liberalism, this paper further argues that ethology should be introduced to perfect Kimberly Smith's framework. Nevertheless, issues concerning limited resources, methodological differences, and the values of agency have to be overcome in order to make such proposal feasible.

並列關鍵字

liberalism ； ethology ； moral agent ； moral patient ； governance

參考文獻

郭承天（Kuo, Cheng-tian）。〈宗教容忍：政治哲學與神學的對話〉“Zongjiao rongren: Zhengzhi zhexue yu shenxue de duhua” [Religious Tolerance: A Dialogue between Political Philosophy and Theology]。《人文及社會科學集刊》Renwen ji shehui kexue jikan [Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy] 17.1 (2005): 125-57。

Broom, Donald M. “Animal Welfare: Concepts and Measurement.” Journal of Animal Science 69 (1991): 4167-75.

Fentress, John. “Observations on the Behavioral Development of a Hand-reared Male Timber Wolf.” American Zoologist 7.2 (1967): 339-51.

Garner, Robert. “Political Ideologies and the Moral Status of Animals.” Journal of Political Ideologies 8.2 (2003): 233-46.

Garner, Robert. “Political Science and Animal Studies.” Society & Animals 10.4 (2002): 395-401.