Confucian bioethics and cross-cultural considerations in health care decision-making

This article discusses the similarities and differences between Beauchamp and Childress's principlism and Confucian bioethics in terms of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice. The author presents sensitive approaches for culturally diverse groups in health care areas and cautions against dichotomy in cross-cultural studies, which ignores the dynamic nature and intravariations of cultures. As a way of health care providers to become engaged in cultural diversity in nursing practice and research, the author suggests that they do not only have a general knowledge about the theoretical differences among groups through "normative analysis" but also learn to appreciate each individual's particular beliefs and values through narratives of morality. Health care providers as well as legal professionals need to cultivate "cultural humility," which is the willingness to explore the similarities and differences between their own and each client's priorities and values and to develop courses of action with patients.     

Resistance to the mainlandization of criminal justice practices: a barrier to the development of restorative justice in Hong Kong

This article examines the political and legal barriers to introducing restorative justice (RJ) in Hong Kong. It argues that the processes involved in RJ may be in conflict with the rule of law, which is regarded by the citizens of Hong Kong as sacrosanct in their resistance to the "mainlandization" of criminal justice practices after China resumed sovereignty of Hong Kong. It is argued that, because it could admit such potentially harmful Chinese criminal justice concepts as "rule by the people," "absence of the presumption of innocence," "leniency for self-confession and severity for resistance," and "toeing the party line," RJ would be devoid of any restorative substance and could breach the principles of due process.     

Accounting for culture in a globalized bioethics.

How might a global bioethics account for profound cultural difference in a world marked by porous borders? The authors endorse a critical, self-reflexive bioethics, suggesting that bioethics needs to change its fundamental orientation if it is going to remain relevant and intellectually vibrant throughout the twenty-first century. Bioethics must attend to issue of social justice and public health, while seriously considering the implications of social context for medical morality. Negotiating moral consensus across cultural boundaries will be difficult, but is is more likely to succeed if we critically engage with the cultural assumptions underlying bioethics itself.     

"Hindu" bioethics?

The author offers a commentary on the question, "Are there Hindu bioethics?" After deconstructing the term "Hindu," the author shows that there are indeed no Hindu bioethics. He shows that from a classical and Brahminical perspective, medicine is an inappropriate and impure profession.     

重构秩序：《理想国》的政治正义问题研究

《理想国》的正义论是一种分配正义原则,它依据公民的德性获得程度给予其对于正义的知道限度。不同等级的公民依据其德性行使其所应担当的社会责任,即为正义。这种正义论强调正义本身的身份角色,带有一种回归古希腊英雄社会的色彩,即德性是维持一个充当某种角色人的公民品质,并表现在角色所要求的行为之中。《理想国》正义论的贡献在于终结自然正义建构社会正义,至此正义原则成为城邦统治秩序的象征。秩序的原则就是正义的原则,这是《理想国》奠定的人文主义基石。     

对“客观真实观”的几点批判

"客观真实说"尽管确实有一定的合理性,但它仅仅将刑事审判看做一种认识活动,抹杀了诉讼中的认识活动与哲学家、历史学家、自然科学家视野下的认识活动之间的界限,并且将这种以"重构已然事件"为目标的认识活动绝对化,不仅不符合认识的发展规律,也排除了人的主观性以及其他诉讼价值存在的可能性.因而,"客观真实说"的缺陷是极其明显的.相比而言,"法律真实说"能够较为恰当地表述刑事审判所认定事实的准确性程度,符合刑事审判的性质,能合理地解决实体公正价值与程序公正价值之间的冲突.尤其是,"法律真实说"具有可操作性,符合认识发展的规律.     

去除时效制度的反道德性——时效制度存在理由论

"权利消减"的时效构成背离了人类的一般道德情操和自然正义观念,而"公益"、"社会秩序"、"信赖保护"、"社会效率"、"不保护权利上的休眠者"等都不能使该构成正当化。将时效定性为"权利推定"的制度,克服真正权利人或已免责义务人的举证困难,将从根本上去除时效制度的反道德性,使其成为"人类权利的保护神"。     

由承托双方的正义到公共的正义——由船舶适航性的演进看海商法的发展趋势

船舶适航性问题由来已久,其历史实质也代表着整个海商法的发展史,回顾船舶适航性的古老历史与新近发展进程,船舶适航性演进的内在路径是由追求承托双方之间的正义逐渐延伸到更广泛的公共正义,而这一规律同样也是海商法的发展方向。     

Physician Participation in Executions: Care Giver or Executioner?

The "medicalization" of the death penalty has ignited a debate, by those within the medical profession and by others outside it, about the appropriateness of physicians participating in state-sponsored executions. Physicians participating as "agents" of the State in executions argue that their presence ensures a more humane execution. Opponents argue physician participation violates the Hippocratic Oath which states clearly that physicians should never do harm to anyone. How any physician, who is dedicated to "preserving life when there is hope," can argue that taking the life of a healthy person because the state commands it is in the patient's best interest, and does not conflict with the goals of medicine is beyond comprehension. Physician participation in executions is unethical because it violates the four basic principles that govern medical ethics: respect for persons, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice.     

生命伦理学与21世纪的法律——西方生命伦理立法概览

生命伦理学与法学交叉领域研究近几十年来受到西方国家的重视，甚至被当作21世纪法律的核心。各国围绕生命的不同阶段和状态展开的一系列立法举措与法学研究使公民在生死、器官移植、基因信息与检测等方面的权利得到了保障。介绍与分析具有代表性的生命伦理立法例，说明涉及生命伦理的法律问题应当作为一个体系加强研究，借此为我国的生命伦理立法与法学研究提供有益的借鉴与启示。     

分配正义的双重路径及其法律调整

财富分配不公是我国现阶段亟待解决的重大社会难题。针对该问题,有学者仅从财富分配正义的单一价值目标展开有关探讨,而忽略或较少涉及到风险分配不公的问题。由于社会分配的对象既包括"看得见摸得着"的财富,也包括"看不见摸不着"的风险,因此,社会分配正义价值目标的实现亦应相应地包含财富分配正义和风险分配正义的双重路径。基于此论点,本文探讨了财富分配正义和风险分配正义各自不同的运行机理和两者之间的互动逻辑关系,并从法律调整的层面上提出和论证了财富分配正义中的"机会正义"和"结果正义"问题以及风险分配正义中的"归责前置机制"和"责任承担机制"问题。     

Cops and Robbers: Selective Literalism in American Criminal Law

Police often ask people to consent to a search of their person or possessions. Many people agree to allow such searches because they interpret the officers' ostensible "requests" as indirect commands. Yet courts routinely interpret police utterances in this situation as requests. A similar issue arises in the context of custodial interrogation. People being interrogated are inclined to invoke their right to counsel in relatively indirect or tentative terms. Yet courts often conclude that the suspect did not really "request" the presence of counsel. We refer to this inconsistency as "selective literalism," by which we mean that courts selectively consider pragmatic circumstances in interpreting the speech of suspects. Using analytical tools from linguistic theory, this article explores how courts employ selective literalism. It further examines some of the consequences of this inconsistent use of interpretive devices, both practically and jurisprudentially.     

中国的国家定位与应对WTO的基本战略——国际关系理论与国际法学科交叉之分析

从“负责任的发展中大国”这一基本定位出发,以国际关系理论中“权力”、“利益”、“正义”、“观念”等要素分析中国应对WTO的战略,得出的基本结论是:首先,中国应积极参与WTO的“造法”活动,力争在其间发挥倡导者和组织者的作用;其次,对待WTO法律体制,中国应务实地处理“绝对收益”与“相对收益”之间的关系;再次,对于WTO中国际“分配正义”的诉求,中国应注意缓解“应然”目标与“实然”状态间的张力;最后,中国应利用自己独特的身份,重视在WTO中充当南北国家之间“桥梁”的角色。     

传统荣辱观及其当代价值

传统荣辱观对社会主义荣辱观的建树有着积极的借鉴作用。儒学荣辱观把“耻”即“羞恶之心”提到一个关系国家存亡的绝对不可轻视的高度。儒学荣辱观以“诚信”为荣,“虚伪”为耻;以“先义而后利”为“荣;”以“先利而后义”为耻。重温传统荣辱观,明义利之辨,对于端正我们的价值取向,有着十分积极的借鉴意义。     

恢复性司法视野下赔偿与量刑关系的重构

"赔偿从轻"是普遍的司法实践,但其因仅仅关注经济赔偿、脱离刑事和解的大框架而被诟病为"花钱买刑"。以恢复性司法为视角,赔偿与量刑的关系需要重构。赔偿从轻原则应当尽量创造犯罪人与被害人面对面接触的机会、应当以犯罪人充分认识到自己行为的后果为前提、应当以修复犯罪人、被害人与社区之间破损的关系为内涵,司法机关同时应关注对被害人心理健康的修复。     

对目的理性支配下的承运人责任基础立法的批判

国际海上货物运输承运人责任基础规则并非完全来自于实然,来自于基于效益的目的理性,若根本不以正义为目的,未经法律价值评价,纯粹基于效用与发展国际航运经济的目的理性,不可能得到一个国际航运秩序的"应然"法律规范,亦即表达一项"应然"的航运法律概念。而纯粹脱离国际航运实践效用目的,仅依凭法律价值的"应然"本身,亦不可能创造出能够有效调整国际航运实践的法律秩序。只有在价值与航运事实目的,应然与实然,彼此相互对应,且把基于效用的目的理性的构成同确保基于正义的价值理性的实现两方面协调起来,才能产生真正实际有效的和相对符合正义的国际海上货物承运人责任基础法律。     

论我国台湾地区“司法院”大法官解释两岸关系的方法

我国台湾地区"司法院"大法官凭借所谓"释宪"机制,在两岸关系发展中扮演着重要角色。其针对两岸关系,已作成"法统"型、权利型、制度型三类共16个解释。大法官在解释两岸关系时,综合运用了文义、论理、历史、体系等传统解释方法,以及"政治问题不审查"、"结果取向解释"以及"宪法解释宪法"等新兴解释方法。经过数十年的发展,大法官在选择解释两岸关系的方法时,表现出所谓"去政治化"倾向。而"台独"分裂势力也正是利用大法官解释两岸关系时的"去政治化"倾向,力图通过维持形式上"中立"的法学方法,为其"台独"目的提供"正当化"外衣。     

超越“传统与现代”：法律多线现代化

相关研究或明或暗地将“传统与现代”作为民间法与国家法的重要区别。然而,民间法与国家法都是各自以一种进化的方式发展起来的,都有自己的历史和现实,并都在内外因素作用下不断变迁以适应现代社会,都有自己的经验、理性和正义观,都满足一定的社会需要,都有传统性和自己的现代性,都有自身的现代化进程。而且,国家法与民间法从来都是相互影响并由此在一定程度上相互转化和承认,“你中有我,”“我中有你,”交错混杂。将国家法和民间法作现代与传统的区分缺乏事实和理论依据。在法律多元的社会中,法律现代化是民间法与国家法各自在内外因素作用下的多线现代化。我们应当引导民间法的现代化,确保民间法现代化与国家法现代化的协调,确保正义的弘扬和社会的和谐。     

冲突法之悖论:价值取向与技术系统的张力

在各国冲突法中,普遍存在着两大悖论:从其体现的正义度高低来看,多边主义优于单边主义;而在多边主义中,“实质正义”又优位于“冲突正义”。然而,在实践中,多边主义远未将单边主义逐出冲突法领域;“实质正义”也未取代“冲突正义”成为冲突法的主导价值取向。这两大悖论形成的原因,均可从冲突法之价值取向和技术系统的张力中得到解释。显然,对这两大悖论的处理,关乎我国冲突法之基本立法政策如何确定的问题。就此,虽无整体上的最佳消解办法,但依法律由价值取向和技术系统构成之法理分析,仍可找到次优的安排。     

刑事被害人国家补偿制度价值取向研究

正当性是制度赖以发挥积极社会效用的基础,科学确定价值取向是制度赢得正当性评价的前提。确定价值取向,需要综合衡量制度所涉各方主体的利益需求。被害人补偿制度的价值取向具有独特的内涵,它不仅需要合乎刑事司法的价值目标,而且也需要保持与环境的协调,实现内部利益关系的和谐。我国被害人补偿制度应当充分体现"调谐国家与国民关系"、"均衡刑事相对人人权保障"和"促进社会主义和谐社会建设"等价值需求。