柏拉图与大战略的历史源起

大战略是人类社会政治斗争的高级形式，无论在中国还是在西方，都可从历史深处发现某些大战略思想的源头。柏拉图是西方大战略思想史的一个重要起点，他不仅是历史上最伟大的哲学家、大战略家，也是当时地中海世界人文主义者集团的政治领袖。他用自己的知识论创立了人文主义大战略的纲要，并通过实践哲学加以检验，以证明其正确性和真理性。柏拉图最早揭示出人类的历史是理性发展的历史，理性是人和社会生存、进步乃至产生文化、文明和科学的源泉。但同时，人类的历史也是反理性的历史，理性与反理性的斗争是世界历史的主线。柏拉图所创建的“雅典学园”是青年政治领袖的培训基地，培养出了许多优秀的人文主义政治家。柏拉图去世后，马其顿国王亚历山大在“雅典学园”的指导下，按柏拉图“共和国”思想描绘的宏图远征波斯，写下了世界文明史上最光辉的一页。从战略学意义上说，柏拉图的大战略是对古代人文主义集团数百年的知识积累和结晶，是针对古代地中海世界统治集团的策略而制定的反制战略。亚历山大远征波斯，则是充分借助了统治集团的大战略而实施了人文主义大战略，从而取得了无与伦比的伟大成就。任何一项大战略，总会伴随着一项反制战略。在当今这个“大战略时代”，比以往任何时期都更需要深入研究、理解和认识大战略。     

Extravagance and mediocrity of virtue: Their divergence and the possibility of demagoguery

In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle refers to Socrates five times: four references are to the contentious Socratic doctrine that “virtue is knowledge” the fifth is in the discussion of irony, “such as that of which Socrates was accused.” These issues are not conjoined accidentally. “Manifest appearances” attest that we can do worse than we know or know better than we do. Yet, the “problem of incontinence'’ is only half of the problem of the divergence of character and intellect, the mediocre and the extravagant in virtue. The other half of the problem is the capacity of some to do or act better than they know, vice's ability to imitate virtue, the disloyal talent's employment of demagoguery, the clever vice of irony.     

Does Clausewitz Apply to Criminal-States and Gangs?

Criminal-States and Criminal-Soldiers present unique problems for contemporary international political theory. This essay examines the applicability of the theory of war developed by Carl von Clausewitz to Criminal-States and Criminal-Soldiers. As modified by Aristotle's idea of justice as the basis for the political community, this essay proposes that Clausewitz's famous connection between politics and war holds where such states and soldiers evince political behavior. Some contrasting implications for states and state leaders are examined when such entities evince — and do not evince — political behavior.     

Particular Rights and Absolute Wrongs: Giorgio Agamben on Life and Politics

Over the past decade, as human rights discourses have increasingly served to legitimize state militarism, a growing number of thinkers have sought to engage critically with the human rights project and its anthropological foundations. Amongst these thinkers, Giorgio Agamben’s account of rights is possibly the most damning: human rights declarations, he argues, are biopolitical mechanisms that serve to inscribe life within the order of the nation state, and provide an earthly foundation for a sovereign power that is taking on a form redolent of the concentration camp. In this paper, I will examine Agamben’s account of human rights declarations, which he sees as central to the modern collapse of the distinction between life and politics that had typified classical politics. I will then turn to the critique of Agamben offered by Jacques Ranciere, who suggests that Agamben’s rejection of rights discourses is consequent to his adoption of Hannah Arendt’s belief that, in order to establish a realm of freedom, the political realm must be premised on the expulsion of natural life. In contrast to Ranciere, I will argue that far from sharing the position of those thinkers, like Arendt, who seek to respond to the modern erosion of the borders between politics and life by resurrecting earlier forms of separation, Agamben sees the collapse of this border as the condition of possibility of a new, non-juridical politics.

From Aristotle to Sadat: A Short Strategic Persuasion Framework for Negotiators

Persuasion is undoubtedly a critical negotiation skill. But while the literature has examined its role in negotiation, few, if any, scholars or practitioners have offered a clear strategic framework for putting persuasion into negotiation practice. The ethos, pathos, and logos modes of persuasion elucidated by Aristotle in the fourth century B.C.E. provide a clear, understandable, and easy‐to‐apply framework that students and trainees can use to prepare for negotiation, to deploy during the negotiation process, and to conduct debriefings following a negotiation. In this article, I describe how to apply this Aristotelian framework and explain an additional dimension of persuasion in negotiation that I believe is also critical: timing. Through the real‐world example of Anwar Sadat and his trip to Jerusalem, I demonstrate how this framework has worked in practice.     

法治之不及:亚里士多德法治思想再反思——兼评我国20世纪80年代以来法治与人治的讨论

法治理论的奠基者亚里士多德在其《政治学》中曾论及法治之不及问题。国内20世纪80年代以来法治与人治的讨论由于受特殊的历史和心理原因影响,视角主要集中在法治的合理性上,而忽视了法治状态下人治问题的客观存在,进而忽视了法治建设过程中对于执法者自由裁量权的道德约束。     

从柏拉图、亚里士多德到中国的法治社会

亚里士多德是西方思想史上著名的哲学家,法思想家,对整个西方法哲学具有重要影响.他师承柏拉图,并在柏拉图理念论的基础上树立了现实主义法哲学.从柏拉图到亚里士多德,古希腊哲学家提出了对整个西方哲学、伦理学、法学具有深远影响的思想理论,在今天全球化浪潮下亦呈现了其国际化的魅力.梳理与探究其思想形成的因缘,可以为构建中国法治社会提供有益的借鉴.     

Thinking the law with and against Luhmann,Legendre, Agamben

After the failure of all enterprises in legal ontology, and after the success of all enterprises in legal system internal theodicy, the field of legal theory is now open to receive a range of more complex, less universalist, less politicised, but also more personally shaped, more fragile suggestions. My article focusses on three such ways of dealing with the law question: the work of Pierre Legendre, a French psychoanalyst and specialist of the history of administrative law and Christian religion, the work of Niklas Luhmann, the recently deceased founder of a new German schoolof sociological systems theory, and that of Giorgio Agamben, an Italian philosopher whose re-opening of the discussion on the Benjaminian notion of bare life and its relationship to law has provoked worldwide attention. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

合同效力基础的伦理解释——以托马斯·阿奎那的道德法哲学为核心

托马斯·阿奎那认为，允诺就是允诺人为自己设定的法律，守约是一个人在自然法下的道德义务。道德行为的目的决定行为的实质或定义，并进而决定此行为的义务范围。而道德行为的最终目的是当事人试图践行的两种德性：慷慨的德性或交换正义的德性。托马斯·阿奎那实现了对亚里士多德哲学的承继和超越，二者共同为民法法系“原因理论”提供哲理基础，并弥补了近现代及当代合同法理论在对合同效力解释力上的不足。     

法庭调解语言中的修辞技艺探析——以亚里士多德的古典修辞学思想为线索

亚里士多德的古典修辞学理论认为,修辞是一种在每一事例上发现可行的说服方式的能力,其功能不在于说服,而在于发现存在于每一事例中的说服方式。他认为凭借修辞方法和说话人的努力可以达成的说服论证包括三种:运用说话人的品格(ethos)、激发听众的某种情感(pathos)和运用逻辑论证(logos)。亚里士多德这些技术性的说服修辞技巧以及他关于法庭(司法)演说、议事(或政治)演说和展示性(夸耀性)演说的分类,均可创造性地应用于法庭调解实践当中,具有重要的方法论意义。