透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.149.229.253
  • 期刊

仇恨言論不該受到管制嗎?反思德沃金的反管制論證

Must Hate Speech Not Be Regulated? Reflections on Dworkin's Anti-Regulation Arguments

摘要


仇恨言論是否該受管制、如何管制等等,向來是爭議不休的課題。在當代西方思想界,德沃金是反對政府管制仇恨言論最力的論者。他企圖從所謂的「平等尊重」原則,連同其對功效主義之批判,原則性地證立「仇恨言論不該受到管制」。本文以仇恨言論相關課題作為探討重心,針對德沃金的反管制論證及其理論基礎,進行分析與批評。本文通過分析指出,儘管德沃金為言論自由(乃至表達自由)提供了相當有力的辯護,但他仍未成功地證立「仇恨言論不該受到管制」作為一種普遍原則。德沃金的論證足以說明:倘若我們認為「平等尊重」是至關緊要的政治道德,則在絕大多數情況下,政府不應對仇恨言論進行管制。然而,若以納粹屠殺猶太人作為前車之鑑,我們勢必難以從原則上排除「某些極端的仇恨言論嚴重侵害了他人重要權益」之可能。當這類權利(言論自由)與權利(其他基本權利)的衝突發生時,我們仍須通過實質的價值權衡與經驗判斷,才能使反管制的主張足具說服力。

並列摘要


Must hate speech not be regulated? In defending free speech, Ronald Dworkin stresses that any censorship on grounds of content is inconsistent with the liberal commitment to individual moral autonomy. He contends that restricting speech out of external preferences about the morally correct way for others to live, would violate their right to equal respect. Through a critical examination of these arguments, the present article aims to cast doubt on Dworkin's forceful insistence that hate speech not be regulated. It is argued that the Dworkinian interpretation of equal respect, powerful though it is as a defense of free speech, could hardly be taken to override a priori all other important moral considerations. Historically speaking, and seen from a more empirically minded perspective, it is not inconceivable that certain extreme hate speech would seriously violate others' basic rights. Dworkin's argument from equal respect, however, could not in itself resolve that potential conflict of rights. To the extent that this defect could not be rectified on Dworkin's account, his principled insistence that hate speech not be regulated remains questionable.

參考文獻


謝世民(2006)。猥褻言論、從娼賣淫與自由主義。政治與社會哲學評論。16,1-41。
Alexander, L. (ed.)(2000).Freedom of Speech Volume I: Foundations.Brookfield, Vt.:Ashgate/Dartmouth.
Alexander, L. (ed.)(2000).Freedom of Speech Volume Ⅱ: Doctrine.Brookfield, Vt.:Ashgate/Dartmouth.
Barendt, E.(1985).Freedom of Speech.Oxford:Clarendon Press.
EU Agrees New Racial Hatred Law

被引用紀錄


陳閔翔(2014)。作為平等的正義:德沃金平等自由主義的理路與辯護政治與社會哲學評論(51),93-138。https://doi.org/10.6523/168451532014120051003
蔡柏宏(2020)。「反政治正確」的「地獄哏」風格言論論述分析──以PTT八卦板為例〔碩士論文,國立臺灣師範大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6345/NTNU202000147
林煜騰(2014)。論公民與政治權利國際公約下仇恨性言論之管制 -以跨國網路為核心〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2014.02067
翁乙仙(2012)。從憲法言論自由之保障論仇恨性言論之管制〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2012.00731
張玉薇(2011)。競選過程中的言論自由—我國負面競選之規制與改進對策〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2011.00394

延伸閱讀