法律是第二种最佳的选择——感悟柏拉图

柏拉图的国家起源论是一种带有心理色彩的互助论,即我们每个人都有自己的需要,而这种需要又不能做到不求他人而自足。柏拉图把正义看作是国家的出发点与归宿,是国家的最高原则并且认为正义的统治是由哲学王掌握的贤人政治,而正义又是道德的基本要素,当柏拉图的哲学王的政治理想与现实严重冲突时,他转而寻求第二种最佳的选择——法律。他仍然使法律与道德紧密相连,并赋予法律至高无上的权威。     

柏拉图与亚里士多德的政治思想比较

思想史上长期把柏拉图看成乌托邦的鼻祖,而历史上学者把柏拉图视为乌托邦主义者,并纷纷效仿。而亚里士多德的政治学说是以雅典为代表的希腊城邦政治产物,同时也是对其老师柏拉图《理想国》的理想主义政治反思的成果。本文通过对柏拉图《理想国》和亚里士多德的《政治学》的认识和学习,对其政治思想异同进行比较分析。     

二十世纪西方法哲学基本问题

西方法哲学是西方社会政治意识形态的一部分。正如要研究一个社会的法律必须首先了解该社会的政治与经济结构、社会文化与历史发展一样，研究西方法哲学也必须将法哲学置于社会意识形态的大背景之下。西方社会的政治意识形态纷纭复杂，但其中的主要内容均可放在一个大概念之中，这一概念便是自由主义。自由主义是一种政治哲学，是西方社会历史、文化、传统与资本主义发展相结合的产物。作为一种价值观，自由主义“把个人看作是基本的。人比人类社会及人类社会的制度与结构更真实，更重要。它将高尚的道德价值与个人联系在一起而不是将其与社会或任何集团联系在一起。     

浅析古希腊哲学的历史分期和主要特点

本文着重探讨古希腊哲学的历史分期和主要特点问题,按照时间先后顺序把希腊哲学分为三个阶段,分别为早期希腊哲学(前苏格拉底哲学)、中期希腊哲学(苏格拉底——柏拉图——亚里士多德哲学)、晚期希腊哲学(亚里士多德之后诸派哲学),这样的历史分期更加有利于我们细腻的了解各个阶段古希腊哲学的主要内容和重点关注对象,并对古希腊哲学的主要特点研究奠定下了夯实的基础。     

大胆的设想，无瑕的追求——浅析《理想国》

柏拉图是古希腊著名的哲学家、思想家和教育家。他一生著有大量著作并流传至今。《理想国》是柏杠图留给我们众多的礼物中最主要的代表作之一，是哲学史上的不朽之作。《理想国》又译作《国家篇》、《共和国》等，与柏拉图大多数著作一样以苏格拉底为主角用对话体写成。这部“哲学大全”不仅是柏拉图对自己前此哲学思想的概括和总结，而且是当时各门学科的综合，它探讨了哲学、政治、伦理道德、教育、文艺等等各方面的问题，以理念论为基础，建立了一个系统的理想国家方案。《理想国》是西方政治思想传统的最具代表性的作品，通过苏格拉底与他人的对话。给后人展现了一个完美优越的城邦。本文试从多个角度，全面剖析这部柏拉图的代表作品。充分展示这位古希腊先哲对理想国家的大胆设计和无暇追求。     

西方人权理论发展之历程

<正> 1 "人权"是基于"人"的权利,它所强调的是人本身的价值和尊严.从这个意义上考察,古希腊罗马就有了人权理论的萌芽. 按照一般的说法,古希腊哲学从苏格拉底开始,就把重心从对大自然奥秘的探求转移到对人自身的研究,所以,在他们那里便有了对人性的一般论述.亚里士多德说,人是理性的动物.人的理性指引着人们应该干什么、不应该干什么.这种理性是一种法,即自然法.城邦的实在法必须符合这种理性的自然法,否则便不是好的法律.然而,这种理论过于淡薄,而且柏拉图的等级制和亚里士多德"人是城邦的动物"的论断是很难与严格意义     

情景预防的概念分析及其理论基础

前言 从犯罪产生之日起，预防犯罪的思想也随之萌发。从古代中国的“以神助政”、“以礼防民”、“德主刑辅”到古代西方柏拉图的“人之品性”，亚里士多德的“均产法”，无不体现着这样的一种观念：“预防犯罪比惩罚犯罪更高明，这乃是一切优秀立法的主要目的”。 “预防犯罪是指从总体上调动一切积极因素和可能力量，最大限度地消除产生犯罪的主客观因素，阻止……     

试论善的理念是政治社会的合法性基础

拥有幸福生活始终是人类孜孜以求的一个社会理想。本文试图从古典的哲学思想出发寻找政治社会存在的道德基础。以道德为基础的政治社会体现了人的政治生存向度,需要人们把它作为各种规范的核心观念才能有约束力,才能使社会关系和谐有序地发展,从而实现“自然主义”和“人道主义”的统一。     

论西方史上法律与道德关系理论的演变

法律与道德的关系问题是一个古老的法哲学命题,从古希腊的苏格拉底、柏拉图和亚里士多德开始就一直被讨论。在漫长的西方法学发展史上,形成了自然法学派、分析法学派以及社会法学派,其各自对法律以及法律与道德的关系都有各自不同的见解。本文立足法律与道德的基本命题,以西方法制史上三个不同法学派的观点为依据展开研究、进行批判,以明晰法律与道德两者之间的关系及演变。     

自由、平等与进步的敌人——柏拉图《理想国》政治伦理思想浅议

柏拉图在《理想国》中以先验的"理念"为哲学基础,建构了自己心目中理想的政治伦理模式。这种模式的道德本体论倾向使其为了城邦的稳定而压制个性、创设出一系列事实上不平等但符合"正义"要求的关系并期望能将城邦在"小国寡民"的状态下运行,从而使其自身成为了社会自由、平等与进步的阻碍。     

Plato and the origin of mental health

This essay examines the history of the concept of mental health. Its origin can be traced to Plato, who argued that immorality is to the soul what disease is to the body. The purpose of this argument was to answer those who thought that morality is a set of social conventions, and in that sense, is contrary to nature. Plato responded by turning to those who made a systematic study of nature – the medical writers of his day – and claiming that if proper balance is needed to maintain a healthy body, the same is true of the soul. Thus the natural state of the soul is one in which the various parts agree on which should rule. This does not mean that Plato sought to excuse immoral behavior by treating it as a medical condition, only that he regarded immoral behavior as contrary to nature and thus treatable. Although later attempts to define mental health are not as rigid as Plato's, it is remarkable how many of his insights are still applicable, in particular the claim that morality and mental health, though not identical, are nonetheless linked. A case in point is the experience of wanting something but not liking the fact that you want it. Plato regarded internal conflict of this sort as a paradigm case of psychic dysfunction. I argue that we can regard it as either a moral failing or a mental one.     

Epinomia: Plato and the First Legal Theory

Abstract. In comparison to Aristotle, Plato's general understanding of law receives little attention in legal theory, due in part to ongoing perceptions of him as a mystic or a totalitarian. However, some of the critical or communitarian themes that have guided theorists since Aristotle find strong expression in Plato's work. More than any thinker until the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, Plato rejects the rank individualism and self‐interest which, in his view, emerge from democratic legal culture. He rejects schisms between legal norms and community values, institutional separation of law from morals, intricate regimes of legislation and adjudication, and a culture of rampant litigation. He rejects the alienation of individuals, from each other and from their communities, that is so easily bred within highly complex political and legal systems. An understanding of his approach to some of the classic questions of legal theory provides insight not only into some central ideas of his own thought, but also into the roots of critical and communitarian critiques of law.     

Crime, Freedom and Civic Bonds: Arthur Ripstein’s Force and Freedom: Kant’s Legal and Political Philosophy

There is no question Arthur Ripstein’s Force and Freedom is an engaging and powerful book which will inform legal philosophy, particularly Kantian theories, for years to come. The text explores with care Kant’s legal and political philosophy, distinguishing it from his better known moral theory. Nor is Ripstein’s book simply a recounting of Kant’s legal and political theory. Ripstein develops Kant’s views in his own unique vision illustrating fresh ways of viewing the entire Kantian project. But the same strength and coherence which ties the book to Kant’s important values of independence blinds the work to our shared moral ties grounded in other political values. Ripstein’s thoughts on punishment are novel in that he embeds criminal law, both in its retributivist and consequentialist facets, into Kant’s overarching political philosophy to show how criminal law can be seen as one aspect of the supremacy of public law. But a criminal law solely focused on the preservation of freedom takes little notice of the ways criminal law need expand its view to account for how a polity can restore the victim of a crime back to civic equality, reincorporate offenders after they have been punished and cannot leave past offenders isolated and likely to reoffend, resulting in the rotating door prison system and communities of innocents who remain preyed upon by career criminals. Lastly, a political theory that does not prize our civic bonds will ignore the startling balkanization of our criminal punishment practices, where policing, arresting and imprisonment become tools of racial and social oppression. In illustrating the benefits in viewing criminal law as a coherent part of Kant’s political theory of freedom, Ripstein also highlights what is absent. It then becomes clear that though Kant presents one important facet of punishment, only a republican political theory can meet the most pressing moral demands of punishment by reminding us that criminal law must be used to preserve and strengthen civic society.     

原初状态的由来及其内在困境——浅论《正义论》的逻辑基点

罗尔斯以其《正义论》而奠定了他在当代政治哲学界的地位。据说,他扭转了政治哲学的方向,从新回到了近代的契约论传统,并使之上升到更高的抽象水平而提出了他的“作为公平的正义”的理论。他整个理论的逻辑起点是“原初状态”,那么通过分析“原初状态”构建及其内在的困境我们可以透视其整个理论的说服力。     

哲学问题的审美解答——论庄子把握哲学问题的特殊方式

庄子思想涉及许多普遍永恒的哲学问题,但它却是以一种审美的方式来解决这些问题的.物我两忘、超越主客体的观照视角,非功利、非实用的价值取向,游玩、游戏的趣味和态度,都体现出庄子以审美的方式来化解哲学难题的特殊方式.庄子学说最终要引导人们进入"至美至乐"的境界,这使得其哲学具有不同于以追求真理为目标的西方哲学和以追求善为目标的儒家哲学的特点.     

美国多元主义政体成因探析

美国的政治过程是由一批权力中心的运作来体现的美国是典型的多元主义政体国家，这一强调个人和公民社会权利的政治体制表现为权力中心的多元化。多元主义政体在美国的形成不是偶然的，而是由美国独特的历史背景、自由主义的政治哲学、人们对纯粹民主政治可能导致弊端的担心以及美国利益多元化等多方面因素决定的。了解美国政治本质特征及其成因，有助于我们认识美国政治和美国政府的决策过程。     

The philosopher’s courtly love? Leo strauss, eros, and the law

This essay poses a critical response to Strauss’ political philosophy that takes as its primary object Strauss’ philosophy of Law. It does this by drawing on recent theoretical work in psychoanalytic theory, conceived after Jacques Lacan as another, avowedly non-historicist theory of Law and its relation to eros. The paper has four parts. Part I, ‘The Philosopher’s Desire: Making an Exception, or “The Thing Is...’’’, recounts Strauss’ central account of the complex relationship between philosophy and ‘the city’. Strauss’ Platonic conception of philosophy as the highest species of eros is stressed, which is that aspect of his work which brings it into striking proximity with the Lacanian-psychoanalytic account of the dialectic of desire and the Law. Part II, ‘Of Prophecy and Law’, examines Strauss’ analysis of Law as first presented in his 1935 book, Philosophy and Law, and central to his later ‘rebirth of classical political philosophy’. Part III, ‘Primordial Repression and Primitive Platonism’, is the central part of the paper. Lacan’s psychoanalytic understanding of Law is brought critically to bear upon Strauss’ philosophy of Law. The stake of the position is ultimately how, for Lacanian psychoanalysis, the Law is transcendental to subjectivity, and has a founding symbolic force, which mitigates against speaking of it solely or primarily in terms of more or less inequitable ‘rules of thumb’, as Plato did. Part IV, ‘Is the Law the Thing?’ then asks the question of what eros might underlie Strauss’ paradoxical defense of esoteric writing in the age of ‘permissive’ modern liberalism – that is, outside of the ‘closed’ social conditions which he, above all, alerts us to as the decisive justification for this ancient practice.     

数学与西方法律的形式化：以自然法为视角

柏拉图理念论的形成数学起了关键的作用。理念论把世界分为理念世界和可感世界,从而形成哲学两重世界。柏拉图的哲学两重世界对西方哲学的影响非常大,西方许多哲学大家都受过柏拉图理念论的影响。哲学两重世界的理论影响了自然法,使自然法成为了形式法,对实定法具有约束作用,这对西方法律形式合理性的形成具有重要影响。     

The Self-Referential European Polity, its Legal Context and Systemic Differentiation: Theoretical Reflections on the Emergence of the EU's Political and Legal Autopoiesis

Abstract:  This article starts by summarising major theoretical debates regarding European polity and governance. It highlights the role of statehood in those debates and suggests moving beyond the constraints of institutionalist and constructivist perspectives by adopting specific notions from the theory of autopoietic social systems. The following part describes the EU political system as self-referential, functionally differentiated from the system of European law, and internally differentiated between European institutions and Member State governments. Although the Union transgresses its nation-state segmentation, the notions of statehood and democratic legitimacy continue to inform legal and political semantics of the EU and specific responses to the Union's systemic tensions, such as the policy of differentiated integration legislated by the flexibility clauses. The democratic deficit of instrumental legitimation justified by outcomes, the most recent example of which is the Lisbon Treaty, subsequently reveals the level of EU functional differentiation and the impossibility of fostering the ultimate construction of a normatively integrated and culturally united European polity. It shows a much more profound social dynamics of differentiation at the level of emerging European society—dynamics which do not adopt the concept of the European polity as an encompassing metaphor of this society, but makes it part of self-referential and self-limiting semantics of the functionally differentiated European political system.