自由與共和：盧梭與康德政治理論之比較

盧梭與康德的政治理論是以自由概念與共和概念為核心所構成的理論，若以共和主義視角分析之，可以稱為盧梭式民主共和理論與康德式憲政共和理論。在整個共和主義的發展序列中，兩者的共和理論皆被視為古典共和主義轉向現代共和主義過程中的重要典範。本文旨在從共和主義視角分析盧梭與康德的政治理論，梳理民主共和理論與憲政共和理論的內在理路，進而做出比較。整個論證工作分為三個部分：首先，本文將以一組由共和範式與政治創建所構成的分析架構，分析盧梭與康德是如何以含括自由概念與共和概念在內的一系列共和主義式詞匯構成兩組不同的共和範式。其次，分析兩人的政治創建論述，說明兩組共和範式是如何在有限的時空中創造共和政體並維持其自身存在。最後，對兩組共和範式內含的諸概念與概念之間的連結關係進行比較，進而再對兩者的政治創建論述進行比較。通過對盧梭與康德的共和範式與政治創建的比較工作，我們將會發現，盧梭與康德的共和理論都是以自由為目的，並在這樣的目的上推導出共和制。然而，他們的自由概念都同時涉及內在自由（自主自由/自律自由）與外在自由（無支配自由）兩個面向，關鍵是，兩者都是從內在自由的概念出發而推導出共和制設計：盧梭是以經驗性自主自由推導出基進民主原則與民主共和制，康德則是以超驗性自律自由推導出共和主義政治原則與憲政民主制。這樣的結果標誌著，在理解盧梭與康德的共和理論時，必須從內在的積極自由出發而不是外在的無支配自由。

關鍵字

自主自由/自律自由；無支配自由；民主共和；憲政共和；共和範式

並列摘要

The political theory of Rousseau and Kant's is based on the tow core concepts of freedom and republic. In the context of republicanism, these two republican theories are conflicting paradigms of Republicanism in the classical tradition turns to modem mode results. The paper is aimed at analyzing and comparing the republican theory from the republican perspective. The work of Argument can be divided into three parts: First, this paper will use a set of analytical frameworks consisting of republican scheme and political innovation to analyze how Rousseau and Kant use republican conceptual vocabularies to form two different republican schemes. Secondly, we analyze these two discourses of political innovation to explain how do they－these two schemes－create republic and maintain their own existence in a limited space-time－temporal finitude. In conclusion, through the above comparison we are realizing the differences between Rousseau and Kant. Through the comparison between Rousseau and Kant's republican schemes and political innovation, we will find that Rousseau and Kant's republican theory is with freedom as the end, and at this end, the republic is derived. However, their concept of freedom involves both “inner freedom”－freedom as autonomy－and “outer freedom”－freedom as non-domination. The key point is that both derive the republic constitution from the concept of “inner freedom: Rousseau derives the principles of radical democracy and democratic republicanism from empirical self-legislation, but Kant derives republicanism [political principles] and constitutional republicanism from transcendental self-legislation. Such a result indicates that in understanding the republican theory of Rousseau and Kant, it is necessary to proceed from the “inner freedom” rather than the “outer freedom”.