:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:「民之父母」,「其無後乎」?--論先秦儒家古典憲政思想的進度與限度
書刊名:法制史研究
作者:李念祖 引用關係
作者(外文):Li, Nien-tsu
出版日期:2012
卷期:21
頁次:頁1-39
主題關鍵詞:民之父母奴隸人國之禮平等正義The parent kingSlaveryLi between the state and its individual subjectsEquality, right
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:1758
  • 點閱點閱:59
民之父母觀念所形成的種種思想變化皆聯立指向樹立約束君王的義務規範,無形中形成了規範君王權力的較高法,也與當代憲法為較高法的憲政思想可以相通。然則無體的人國之禮在漢代走入了歧途,成為專制政體的裝飾。以後到了外患難已,存亡絕續的關頭,儒家的知識分子似乎總會在不同的時代中回眸先秦,特別是孟子的思想,以溯問君制之原理與弊端。從宋末明末到清末,終於與業已發軔於西方的憲政思想相遇。 民之父母不能率獸食人的君民關係規範,與當代的平等自由主義憲政思想,畢竟還有差距。民之父母的提出,雖然提昇了人民應受看重的地位,但是尚未完全確定人民才是目的的政治認識,其所擁護的君主政治即與確認人民才是目的的民主政治有間。此為其差距之一。民之父母強調愛護人民,並不強調愛護人民必須施以平等的對待,凡是圓顱方趾之民都該平等關懷的重要性。此為其差距之二。民之父母強調社群關係,但未注意到個別意義而非集體意義的個人應該具備的主體地位。此為其差距之三。民之父母注意到民意政治的價值,卻未能抽離天命以尋找民意政治的道德正當性,也就尚未近入訴諸公民自治、公民參與的個別自主同意做為政治正當性依據的境界。此為其差距之四。民之父母建立了君王義務思想,但未產生與政府義務成為對向的個人權利意識,也就是充其量只知政府與人民各有義務,而不理解人民權利就是正義之所在的真諦。此為其差距之五。「民之父母」透過「無體之禮」的說法,雖然隱約產生了相當於以禮約束君王行事的規範意識,但與通過成文的憲法典來約束政府的立憲思想,究竟不能畫上等號,此為差距之六。凡此均可視為先秦憲政思想的限度所在。 差距的存在非謂差距的不可跨越;兩千年前的孟子已經走得接近,後人駐足回眸之餘,也不妨再向未來注目。「民之父母」早已建立了政府必須愛護、保護人民才能具有政治正當性的基本社會意識,於此基礎上,如能重新調整投射──「人民就是目的」、「人性並無階級」、「個別受到尊重」、「正當性在民主」、「權利就是正義」、「實證的較高法」等六種思維目光;那麼,或許可以這樣問:民之父母,豈無後乎?
From the Qin Dynasty to the Han Dynasty, an unwritten, or uncodified, li slowly emerged, and can be taken as a set of higher laws that seemingly restrained rulers from using martial force to subjugate the people and required rulers to deploy their resources for the welfare of their people. However, during the Han Dynasty, the uncodified li, which governed the relationship between the state and its subjects, was invoked only nominally to justify the sovereignty of the emperor. In dire times, whenever China was invaded and in the grip of foreign rule, Confucianists would look to the teachings of the pre-Qin era, especially those of Mencius, to parse the fatal flaws of the monarchy system. This type of reflection and analysis was observed as the curtain fell on the Song Dynasty, Ming Dynasty, and Ch’ing Dynasty, during the last of which the Chinese parent-king institution came face to face with Western constitutionalism. Certainly, there are still some differences between contemporary egalitarian, liberal constitutionalism and the paradigm that forbade a parent king to command man-eating beasts. The first is that monarchy is not democracy, which serves the people; the latter parent kings had elevated the status of their subjects but cannot be credited with creating the political ideology that it is the people that the government should serve. The second difference is that in a democracy every individual is treated equally; though the parent kings took pains to look after the welfare of their subjects, they did not do so thoroughly while considering the principles of equality. The third difference is that the parent king institution stressed community, a collective entity, and did not recognize the entity that is an individual. The fourth difference is that the parent kings understood the importance of popular support but continued to draw their legitimacy from the heavenly mandate instead of the moral righteousness inherent in having popular support; that is, the parent king’s state was not governed by the people or of the people. The fifth difference is that the parent kings recognized their obligations to their subjects but not the individuals’ rights, which otherwise coexist with a democratic government’s obligations; at most, the parent-king institution recognized that the ruler and the subjects both have obligations, but it fell short of realizing that the people’s rights are what ensures justice for all. The sixth and final difference is that while the uncodified li represented a set of rules that guided the emperor’s conduct, it does not compare to a codified constitution that keeps the government powers in check. These differences may be taken as the limits of the primitive form of constitutionalism in the pre-Qin era.
期刊論文
1.李念祖(197701)。新興人權入憲的取捨。憲政時代,32(3),201-204。  延伸查詢new window
2.李念祖(20080900)。逆水行舟的憲政--臺灣解嚴二十年回顧憲法來時路。思與言,46(3),1-92。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.但昭偉、蔡逸佩(20111200)。中國傳統思想、西方教育哲學與臺灣人權教育的經驗。臺灣人權學刊,1(1),107-122。new window  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.王保平(2009)。漢陽陵的考古鑽探與發掘。微笑彩俑--漢景帝的地下王國。台北:史博館。  延伸查詢new window
2.林咏榮(1971)。中國法制史。林咏榮。  延伸查詢new window
3.章太炎(1984)。立素王之法。春秋左傳讀、春秋左傳讀敘錄、駁箴膏肓評。台北:學海。  延伸查詢new window
4.方旭東(2004)。上博楚簡《民之父母》篇論析。上博館藏戰國楚竹書研究(續編)。上海:上海書店出版社。  延伸查詢new window
5.黃源盛(2009)。春秋折獄的方法論與法理觀。漢唐法制與儒家傳統。台北:元照。  延伸查詢new window
6.李零(2002)。上博楚簡校讀記(之二):《緇衣》。博楚簡三篇校讀記。台北:萬卷樓。  延伸查詢new window
7.季旭升、陳霖慶(2004)。上海博物館藏戰國楚竹書(一)讀本。台北:萬卷樓。  延伸查詢new window
8.馮勝君(2007)。郭店與上博簡對比研究。北京:線裝。  延伸查詢new window
9.虞萬里(2002)。上博簡、郭店簡《緇衣》與傳本合校拾遺。上博館藏戰國楚竹書研究。上海:上海書店。  延伸查詢new window
10.郭沫若(2004)。荀子的批判。中國古代社會研究。石家庄:河北教育。  延伸查詢new window
11.鄧牧(1984)。伯牙琴。台北:新文豐。  延伸查詢new window
12.(1936)。叢書集選。台北:商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
13.詹雲海(2003)。全祖望《鮚埼亭集》校注-《鮚埼亭集》內編。台北:國立編譯館。  延伸查詢new window
14.A. Amar(2005)。America'S Constitution-A Biography。N.Y.:Randon House。  new window
15.Gutmann, Amy、Thompson, Dennis、謝崇學、鄭惠文(2006)。商議民主。台北:智勝。  延伸查詢new window
16.孫文(1965)。三民主義。台北:三民。  延伸查詢new window
17.Wilcox, Delox F.、廖仲愷(1957)。全民政治。台北:帕米爾書店。  延伸查詢new window
18.林文雄(1996)。為權利而抗爭。台北:協志工業叢書。  延伸查詢new window
19.嚴復(2001)。與梁啟超書(1902)。前輩談人權-中國人權文獻選輯,人權的肇始。台北:輔仁大學。  延伸查詢new window
20.林語堂(2009)。林語堂中英對照溪湖七月半。台北:正中。  延伸查詢new window
21.薩孟武(1973)。政治學。台北:薩孟武。  延伸查詢new window
22.中國法制學會(1993)。中國法制現代化之回顧與前瞻。台北:台大法學院。  延伸查詢new window
23.張澍(2009)。新校諸葛亮全集。台北:世界。  延伸查詢new window
24.梁啟超(2011)。南海康先生傳。我史。北京:中國人民大學。  延伸查詢new window
25.黃宗羲、吳光(1995)。黃梨洲詩文補遺。臺北:聯經。  延伸查詢new window
26.彭林(2002)。再論郭店簡《六德》「為父絕君」及相關問題。古墓新知。台北:台灣古籍。  延伸查詢new window
27.黃宗羲、李廣柏(1995)。新譯明夷待訪錄。臺北:三民書局。  延伸查詢new window
28.Faulks, Keith(2000)。Citizienship。London:New York:Routledge。  new window
29.Kymlicka, Will(2002)。Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Introduction。Oxford:Oxford University Press。  new window
30.趙明(2004)。先秦儒家政治哲學引論。北京:北京大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
31.徐道鄰(1953)。中國法制史論略。臺北:正中書局。new window  延伸查詢new window
32.陶淵明、陶澍(1999)。陶靖節集注。臺北:世界書局。  延伸查詢new window
33.吳庚(1993)。行政法之理論與實用。臺北市:吳庚。new window  延伸查詢new window
34.馬承源(2001)。上海博物館藏戰國楚竹書。上海:上海古籍出版社。  延伸查詢new window
35.沈家本(1976)。寄簃文存。臺灣商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
36.周冶平(1970)。刑法各論。周冶平。  延伸查詢new window
37.De Bary, William Theodore、陳立勝(2003)。亞洲價值與人權:從儒學社群主義立論。正中書局。  延伸查詢new window
38.荊門市博物館(2005)。郭店楚墓竹簡。北京:文物出版社。  延伸查詢new window
39.金安平、黃煜文(2008)。孔子:喧囂時代的孤獨哲人。台北:時報文化。  延伸查詢new window
40.王士禎(1984)。池北偶談。臺北:漢京文化事業有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
41.涂宗流、劉祖信(2001)。郭店楚簡先秦儒家佚書校釋。台北:萬卷樓圖書有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
42.楊鴻烈(1964)。中國法律思想史。台北:臺灣商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
43.朱義祿(2001)。黃宗羲與中國文化。貴陽:貴州人民出版社。  延伸查詢new window
44.蔡英文(19860000)。韓非的法治思想及其歷史意義。臺北:文史哲出版社。new window  延伸查詢new window
45.馬承源(2004)。上海博物館藏戰國楚竹書。上海:上海古籍出版社。  延伸查詢new window
46.Dworkin, Ronald(2006)。Is Democracy Possible Here?--Principles for a New Political Debate。Princeton University Press。  new window
47.梁韋弦(1993)。孟子研究。台北:文津出版社。  延伸查詢new window
48.謝君直(2008)。郭店楚簡儒家哲學研究。臺北:萬卷樓圖書股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
49.王澤鑑(2000)。民法總則。王澤鑑。  延伸查詢new window
50.黃源盛(2010)。晚清民國刑法史料輯注。元照出版社。  延伸查詢new window
51.裘錫圭(2004)。中國出土古文獻十論。上海:復旦大學。  延伸查詢new window
52.Faulks, Keith、黃俊龍(2003)。公民身分。臺北:巨流圖書股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
53.朱廷獻(1987)。尚書研究。臺灣商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
54.黃進興(19940000)。優入聖域:權力、信仰與正當性。臺北:允晨文化。new window  延伸查詢new window
55.Rawls, John(1999)。A Theory of Justice。Harvard University Press。  new window
56.余英時(2011)。文化評論與中國情懷。允晨。  延伸查詢new window
57.馬漢寶(2004)。國際私法--總論各論。臺北:馬漢寶。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.梁啟超(2001)。論權利思想。前輩談人權--中國人權文獻選輯(第1冊):人權的肇始。臺北:輔仁大學。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE