论公共领域的结构性特征及其政治哲学意义

从描述性意蕴来看,公共领域是一个由公共空间、公共传媒、社团组织和社会运动四种现实形态构成的复合性存在,它是在与家庭共同体、经济共同体、国家共同体既相对立又相关联中获得其规定性的。因此,具有多重政治哲学意义。     

对公共政策制定的政治哲学思考

公共政策制定是社会政治生活中公共决策系统的经常性活动。在现代社会,由于公共政策的巨大作用和影响,公共政策制定问题引起了广泛的关注。从政治哲学的角度审视,以公意为价值取向、以政治权力为基本依托,以政治秩序为最终归宿,才能建立起人民期待的合理、公正、有效的公共政策,从而进一步推进决策的科学化、民主化。     

Mobilization in the European Public Sphere: The Struggle Over Genetically Modified Organisms

The objective of this study is to investigate the extent to which supporters and opponents at the European Union (EU) level strive to mobilize the public with regard the issue of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). To this end, it addresses two research questions: First, to which concepts do GMO opponents and supporters refer when seeking to mobilize the public? Second, do GMO opponents and supporters differ in the coherence of the concepts they use to attain public mobilization? The empirical findings show that the pro‐GMO coalition is composed of biotechnology companies as well as representatives of Argentina, Canada, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the World Trade Organization. The anti‐GMO coalition consists of environmental nongovernmental organizations and representatives from most of the EU member states. Altogether, the anti‐GMO coalition has been more coherent in the concepts they invoke in the last few years.     

Political Ambivalence as Praxis: The Limits of Consensus in Habermas's Theory of the Public Sphere

This paper argues that ambivalence can serve as a proxy for consensus-based debates in public discourse as it allows for individuals to maintain flexible and analytic perspectives on matters that otherwise appear contradictory. In particular, an affirmative understanding of ambivalence will be presented to supplement the highly influential Habermasian approach by drawing from sociological theories of ambivalence found in the work of Simmel, Bauman and Ko?akowski. While the theme of ambivalence is not completely absent from Habermas’s work on the public sphere, it is typically described as a structural consequence of contradiction rather than a form of action that is capable of working with and around inconsistencies in ethics, knowledge and social values. This allows for participation to be sustained through contradiction, rather than being withdrawn in frustration, while also encouraging open-minded judgements capable of avoiding forms of fanaticism.     

Thinking for Thousands: Emerson's Theory of Political Representation in the Public Sphere

This article develops Emerson's theory of representative democracy as it applies to a deliberative public sphere. By highlighting the democratic content of Emerson's thought, this article challenges tradition readings of Emerson that claim his thought to be elitist or antipolitical. According to Emerson, the public sphere is structured by representative individuals who are analogous to those representatives found in electoral institutions. These representatives make public the beliefs and values present in their "constituencies." They deliberate in the name of their constituencies, saying what their constituencies could and would say, were they to also directly engage in such deliberations. Representative individuals are tied to their constituencies through bonds of "sympathy and likeness." The moral consequences of a representative public sphere include the development of a sense of deliberative justice on the part of the citizenry and the reduction of the possibility of domination and oppression by ideologically oriented elites.     

新媒体语境下思想政治教育话语体系的功能与特征

新媒体语境赋予思想政治教育话语体系崭新的功能,也使其呈现全新的特征。新媒体语境下思想政治教育话语体系的功能主要有:信息承载与传递功能、主体对话与沟通功能、思想整合与引领功能、行为激励与规范功能、价值辩护与批判功能。新媒体语境下思想政治教育话语体系的特征表现为:理论性与实践性的统一、一元性与多层次性的统一、主导性与交互性的统一、个体性与族群性的统一。     

Political Science and Public Administration: The Saga of a Difficult Relationship

This paper is based on 'The perennial ugly duckling — public sector education in tertiary institutions before and after Coombs', an invited contribution on management education delivered at the Sydney Academics Symposium on the Coombs Commission in Retrospect, IPAA National Conference, 28 November 2001.     

法治话语、法律议论的公众型构过程与背景——以社会诉讼为载体

将民主讨论的过程及其效果置于特定语境之中,并引入到“社会诉讼”的分析手段中解读,可以发现法律议论的型构过程是复线并动态互构的,理想逻辑与社会伦理的讨论场景下的博弈效果呈现非均质的状态,并以对话方式走向沟通与共识。     

Political Parties, Political Integrity and Public Policy: a 'Transactions Costs' Approach

Increasing concern about political 'sleaze' prompted the establishment, in 1995, of the Standing Committee of Standards in Public Life and the announcement, in 1999, of proposals to reform political party finance in the UK. A 'public choice' analysis predicts 'opportunism' by representatives at the expense of 'rationally ignorant' voters. It commends constitutional constraints to restrict the range of policy options open to representatives. By contrast, a 'transactions costs' approach suggests that electoral competition can offer protection when voters rely on 'party signal' as a low cost information source. If voters reduce transactions costs by relying on party signal, politicians have an incentive to maintain party reputation. Representatives are more willing than might otherwise be anticipated to accept the need for regulation if this serves to protect reputation.     

科学技术、公共领域与和谐社会

就科学技术发展来说,“和谐社会”这一概念不仅直接强化了科技对经济社会发展的积极推动作用,而且在其涉及新型工业化道路、环境保护、安全生产、网络伦理等问题方面又显现出了对科技发展的公共价值的相应反思。这意味着可以通过公共领域来把握科技与社会的协调关系问题。科技进步无疑推动了公共领域的兴起和发展,但科技发展及其生态和社会效应本身也可以作为公共问题在公共领域层面获得政治伦理考量。也就是说,在公共领域中通过建构科技公共交往机制,确保公众最大程度地参与科技发展的公共决策,进而推动权力、资本和知识精英围绕着科技与人、自然和社会之间的持续协调发展问题,提出适合公共利益的解决方案,从而促进和谐社会的逐步生成。     

Deliberation and Forgiveness in the Public Sphere

A common objection to the argument for deliberative democracy is that it cannot provide mechanisms for achieving its ideal of all-inclusiveness. This does, however, not in itself refute the deliberative ideal. In a reading of Hannah Arendt and Jacques Derrida’s writings on forgiveness, we argue that forgiving involves a renegotiation of our enemies and of ourselves. Hereby a renegotiation of the seemingly unbridgeable understandings of who our enemies are can be achieved. Forgiving involves a realisation that we have something in common with our foes. This opens the question: Why did our paths separate? We become puzzled and start to search for reasons. This does not mean that we have to accept ways of life that we detest. But it does mean that we need to be able to articulate counter arguments. Hereby limitations of prevailing understandings of who to include in deliberative processes can be overcome.