臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：兒童宗教選擇權利中家父長作風正當性之研究
作者：黃聿芝
作者(外文)：Huang, YuChih
校院名稱：高雄師範大學
系所名稱：教育學系
指導教授：莊勝義
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2013
主題關鍵詞：自主權；兒童權利；宗教選擇；家父長作風
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:0
  • 點閱點閱:18
本論文以「兒童宗教選擇權利中家父長作風正當性之研究」為題，以基礎探究（foundational research）方式梳理出「兒童宗教選擇權利」的實質內涵。首先理解「兒童權利」之內涵，並以Wisconsin v. Yoder案例、Mozert v. Hawkins案例與台灣錫安山社群的訴求做為闡述例子，以此三例連結「兒童宗教選擇權利」與「家父長作風」二項主題，深入暸解家父長作風中存在的「年齡門檻」與「能力門檻」之主張與爭議，並由此探究兒童擁有權利的「資格」條件。接著，依據文獻理論發展出評判家父長作風正當性程度的準則，藉以探討行使家父長作風對於兒童宗教選擇權利可能產生的衝擊與其正當性。最後，以上述分析為根基，提出應將「兒童宗教選擇權利」視為父母的消極義務與學校的積極義務。
閱讀「權利」相關文獻，理解權利的積極意義是「能夠自主做決定」，消極意義是「能夠不被他人妨礙」，擁有權利者得以要求相對義務者負起「作為或不作為」的義務。兒童的權利是「未來的」或「世代的」權利，在兒童達到某種「年齡」或「成熟能力」之前，是否該給予兒童權利、該給予兒童何種權利則充滿討論空間，於是，家長基於「親權」替兒童遂行其權利的「家父長作風」成為爭議的課題：贊同家父長作風者主張兒童尚未達到足以成熟的年齡，理性能力尚未發展完全，為了保障兒童的「最佳利益」而限制兒童的自由是可被接受的；解放論者則質疑「年齡」的武斷性與「能力門檻」的雙重標準，認為兒童並非完全無能力為自己做選擇，若我們直接以成人的思維預設兒童「無能力」為自己的行為負責，以此剝奪兒童的權利，兒童即喪失了自主負責的機會。
依循上述論點，本論文歸納出以下結論：其一，「能力」是行使「權利」的基礎，將權利貿然賦予理性思考能力尚未成熟的兒童僅是讓兒童陷入險境的不負責做法。其二，父母須善盡「信託責任」與「不干預義務」，允許兒童在「不造成無可挽回傷害」的範疇內行使最大的「自我決定權」，為自己選擇未來的精神生活。其三，「兒童權利」展現出尊重與承認「兒童自主權」，重視並尊重兒童的志向，讓兒童有權利去執行計畫，學習獨立。其四，將兒童的宗教選擇權利視為父母的「消極義務」與學校的「積極義務」是較適切且可行的做法。我們毋須強制父母一定得主動提供與家庭宗教信仰相異的宗教資訊給子女，只須要求父母不禁止兒童接觸各類宗教事務即可；學校應提供兒童接觸各類宗教事務的機會，讓兒童能夠擁有與家庭宗教信仰相異的多元視野，培養兒童對於各種價值信仰的省思能力與判斷能力。最後，本論文建議正視兒童的宗教選擇權利，如此，兒童的法定資格即能約束父母與學校負起相對的義務。
This study is focused on the legitimacy of paternalism relating to children’s religious rights. In order to do so, the concepts of rights and paternalism are analyzed and interpreted on the basis of rights theories deriving from Wesley N. Hohfeld, Isaiah Berlin, H. L. A. Hart, Hillel Steiner, Colin A. Wringe, Joel Feinberg and Ronald Dworkin. In doing so the skill of “foundational research” is employed to brief the topics firstly, then to describe in detail the cases in connection with concepts relevant to the topics, and finally to explain clearly the conclusions. As regards the cases, with the intention of relating to religious issues, Wisconsin v. Yoder, Mozert v. Hawkins, and Zion in Taiwan are adopted.
Paternalism is normally understood as the interference in the liberty of action of a person on the grounds of benefiting that person. It is justifiable from direct consideration of children’s own welfare. As regards children’s religious rights, if exercising the rights to choose different religion will make a seriously and irrevocable harm to these children, then providing protection for them to secure their immediate advantages becomes necessary. Otherwise, in order to maximize children’s rights of autonomy, the obligation of non-interference against their choices of faith turn to be the trump. The right of autonomy is, however, more than merely non-interference. It is the right to the protection and promotion of one’s ability to lead to a self-governed life. This conception of rights is a life’s being led, which connotes both the ability to take responsibility and to have a sense of it.
Based on the above analyses and arguments, the main conclusions are as follows: first, children’s rights must be capacity-based, poor capacity will cause disastrous errors. Second, in order to teach children to make choices by themselves, parents must be confined to the boundary of fiduciary obligation to fulfill their obligation of non-interference. Third, the respect for children’s religious choices and their right of autonomy would promote the ranges of choice for them to grasp greater control of lives. Finally, children’s religious rights should be regarded as parents’ negative obligation and school’s positive obligation. The former means someone has a freedom to do what s/he wants without interference by other persons; the latter means an individual’s wish to be her/his own master that s/he can make decisions by her/himself. The suggestion of this study is proposed that children’s religious rights have to be taken seriously with the justifiable paternalism held in families or schools to protect their right of autonomy and to enhance their values of lives.
一、中文部分
方永泉（2007）。＜Peter Gardner論宗教的教導與宗教自主的自由主義理想＞述評。載於林逢祺、洪仁進主編：課程與教學哲學：教育哲學述評（四）。台北市：師大書苑，103-121。new window
中國時報（1997）。神本教育v.s.現行體制。檢索日期：2011.09.18。取自http://home.zion.org.tw/zion/chinese/eh/eh_02_press.html.
王俊斌（2007）。個體自由、群體權利與全球公民—論人權理念的發展與教育實踐。師大學報：教育類，52(1)，25-44。new window
王煥琛（1997）。「宗教教育」問題之探討。台灣教育，557，2-11。
自由時報（1997）。錫安山：我們對現行教育體制失望。檢索日期：2011.09.18。取自http://home.zion.org.tw/zion/chinese/eh/eh_02_press.html.
自立晚報（1997）。新約教徒子女全省同步離開學校。檢索日期：2011.09.18。取自http://home.zion.org.tw/zion/chinese/eh/eh_02_press.html.
但昭偉（1993）。父權主義、兒童義務與強迫教育。初等教育學刊，2，217-237。new window
但昭偉（2002）。教育當中的權利議題。載於黃藿、但昭偉編著：教育哲學。台北：空大，319-353。
李平漚譯，盧梭原著（1989）。愛彌兒。台北市：五南。
李康、李猛譯（2007）。安東尼•紀登斯（Anthony Giddens）著。社會的構成—結構化理論大綱（The constitution of society: outline of the theory of structuration）。台北：左岸文化。
林火旺（2006）。道德—幸福的必要條件。台北市：寶瓶文化。
孫效智（1999）。當宗教與道德相遇。台北市：台灣書店。new window
張淑美主譯（2007）。John P. Miller著。生命教育—推動學校的靈性課程（Education and the soul-toward a spiritual cirriculum）。台北市：學富文化。
張福建（1995）。寬容的意義及其限度。載於張建福、蘇文流主編：民主理論：古典與現代。台北市：中研院社科所，249-275。
莊勝義（2007）。＜宗教的教養與宗教自主性的自由派理想＞述評。載於林逢祺、洪仁進主編：課程與教學哲學：教育哲學述評（四）。台北市：師大書苑，85-102。new window
許國賢（1995）。民主與個人自主性。載於張建福、蘇文流主編：民主理論：古典與現代。台北市：中研院社科所，277-299。
陳秀容（1995）。第三世界人權觀念的探討：1986年聯合國「發展權宣言」的初步分析。載於張建福、蘇文流主編：民主理論：古典與現代。台北市：中研院社科所，301-333。
陳其南（1998）。傳統制度與社會意識的結構：歷史與人類學的探索。台北市：允晨文化。new window
陳宜中（2007）。道德相對主義及「文化」之濫用：以華澤和葛雷的國際容忍論述為例。載於蔡英文、張福建主編：現代性的政治反思。台北市：中研院人文社會科學研究中心，359-397。new window
傅鏗、姚欣榮譯（1991）。約翰•格雷（John Gray）著。自由主義（Liberalism）。台北市：桂冠。
楊惠君譯（2009）。Richard Bellamy著。公民身份的價值：歸屬、權利和參與（Evaluating Union Citizenship: belonging, rights and participation within the EU）。載於張福建主編：公民與政治行動：實證與規範之間的對話。台北市：中研院人社中心，215-241。
鄔昆如（1999）。宗教與人生。台北市：五南。
蔡美兒著，錢基蓮譯（2011）。虎媽的戰歌。台北市：天下文化。
蔡英文譯（2002）。約翰•葛雷（John Gray）著。自由主義的兩種面貌（Two faces of liberalism）。台北市：巨流。new window
盧雪崑（2009）。康德的自由學說。台北市：里仁。
錫安山全球資訊網（2011, April 16）。錫安山。檢索日期：2011.09.18。取自http://home.zion.org.tw/zion/chinese/index.htm.
聯合兒童基金會（2002）。兒童權利公約的需求。檢索日期：2010.06.03。取自http://www.unicef.org.
聯合報（1997）。錫安山的神國教育。檢索日期：2011.09.18。取自http://home.zion.org.tw/zion/chinese/eh/eh_02_press.html.
蘇永明（2005）。從康德的「對他人的義務」來看人權的道德意涵。中等教育，56(1)，4-18。new window
蘇永明（2012）。人權概念與學生權的商榷。輯於徐光台等合著，教育學與比較教育研究：楊深坑國家講座教授六秩晉六祝壽論文集。台北市：高等教育，63-83。
顧肅（2006）。自由主義基本理念。台北：左岸。new window

二、英文部分
Archard, D. (1993). Children, rights and childhood. London: Routledge.
Berlin, S. I. (1967). Two concepts of liberty. In Quinton, A. (Ed.), Political philosophy (141-152). NY: Oxford University Press.
Berlin, S. I. (2002). Liberty: incorporating “four essays on liberty”.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Biesta, G. (2001). How can philosophy of education be critical? How critical can philosophy of education be? Deconstructive reflections on children’s rights. In Heyting, F., Lenzen, D. & White, J. (Eds.), Methods in philosophy of education (125-143). NY: Routledge.
Bloom, A. (1979). Emile or on education. English: Basic Books, Inc.
Bonnett, M. & Cuypers, S. (2003). Autonomy and authenticity in education. In
Blake, N., Smeyers, P., Smith, R. & Standish, P. (Eds.), Philosophy of
education (326-340). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Brighouse, H. & McAvoy, P. (2010). Do children have any rights? In Bailey, R. (Ed.), The philosophy of education: An introduction (74-85). NY: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Cherney, I.D., Greteman, A. J. & Travers, B.G. (2008). A cross-cultural view of adults’
perceptions of children’s rights. Social Justice Research, 21, 432-456.
Cohen, H. (1980). Equal rights for children. NJ: Littlefield, Adams & Co.
Dagger, R. (1997). Civic virtues. NY: Oxford University Press.
Draper, K. (2005). Rights and the doctrine of doing and allowing. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 33(3), 253-280. [Online]. Available: 2013.05.24.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.rpa.lib.nknu.edu.tw:81/doi/10.1111/j.1088-4963.2005.00033.x/abstract
Dworkin, G. (1972). Paternalism. [Online]. Available: 2012.04.09. http://philosophy.tamuce.edu/readings/ethics/dworkin-paternalism.
Dworkin, G. (1993). Autonomy. In Goodin, R. E. & Pettit, P. (Eds.), A companion to contemporary political philosophy (359-365). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Dworkin, R. (1977). Taking rights seriously. London: Duckworth.
Dworkin, R. (2009). Rights as trumps. In Waldron, J. (Ed.), Theories of rights (153-167). NY: Oxford University Press.
Dwyer, J. G. (2003). Children’s rights. In Curren, R. (Ed.), A companion to the philosophy of education (443-455). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Eisenberg, A. (1995). Reconstructing political pluralism. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Ellis, S. J. & Kitzinger, C. (2002). Denying equality: an analysis of arguments against lowering the age of consent for sex between men. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 12, 167-180.
Ennew, J. (1995). Outside childhood: street children’s rights. In Franklin, B. (Ed.), The handbook of children’s rights (201-214). London: Routledge.
Farson, R. (1974). Birthrights. NY: Macmillan.
Feinberg, J. (1980). The child’s right to an open future. In Curren, R. (Ed.),
Philosophy of education: an anthology (112-123).Oxford: Blackwell Publishing
Ltd.
Feinberg, J. (1989). The moral limits of the criminal law volume 3: harm to self.
Oxford scholarship. [Online]. Available: 2010.12.
http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/oso/public/content/philosophy/978019505923 6/tochtml?q=The|Moral|Limits|Criminal|Law
Franklin, B. (1986). Children’s political rights. In Franklin, B. (Ed.), The rights of children (24-53). Oxford: Basil Blackwell Publisher.
Franklin, B. (1995). The case for children’s rights: a progress report. In Franklin, B. (Ed.), The handbook of children’s rights (3-22). London: Routledge.
Gardner, P. (1988). Religious upbringing and the liberal ideal of religious autonomy. In P. H. Hirst & P. White (Eds.), Philosophy of education: Major theme in the analytic tradition (Vol. IV, 97-118). London: Routledge.
Gereluk, D. (2010). Should parents have a say in their children’s schooling? In Bailey, R. (Ed.), The philosophy of education: An introduction (125-135). NY: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Glass, J. M. (2006). Paranoia and political philosophy. In Dryzek, J. S., Honig, B. &
Phillips, A. (Eds.). The Oxford handbook of political theory. NY: Oxford
University Press inc.
Gutmann, A. (1987). Democratic education. Princeton, N.J. : Princeton University Press. [Online]. Available: 2012.12. http://web.ebscohost.com.rpa.lib.nknu.edu.tw:81/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/nlebk_78393_AN?sid=7df6fc7e-07c3-4dc6-b088-81d2816c8b58@sessionmgr11&vid=1&format=EB
Harris, J. (1982). The political status of children. In Graham, K. (Ed.), Contemporary political philosophy: radical studies (35-55). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University.
Hart, H. L. A. (1967). Are there any natural rights? In Quinton, A. (Ed.), Political philosophy (53-66). NY: Oxford University Press.
Hohfeld, W. N. (1913). Some fundamental legal conceptions as applied in judicial reasoning. Yale Law Journal, 23(1), 16-59. [Online]. Available: 2011.06.21.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/785533
Holt, J. (1976). Escape from childhood. NY: Random House.
Horvath, M. A. H. & Giner-Sorolla, R. (2007). Below the age of consent: influences on morl and legal judgements of adult-adolescent sexual relationships. Journal of Applied Social Phychology, 37(12), 2980-3009.
Kymlicka, W. (1989). The value of cultural membership. Liberalism, community and culture. NY: Oxford University Press.
Lestor, J. (1995). A minister for children. In Franklin, B. (Ed.), The handbook of children’s rights (100-106). London: Routledge.
Locke, J. (1980). Second treatise of government. Ed. with an introduction by C. B. Macpherson. Indianapolis: Hackett. [Online]. Available: 2011.08.26.
http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/locke/locke2/locke2nd-a.html
Lyon, C. & Parton, N. (1995). Children’s rights and the Children Act 1989. In Franklin, B. (Ed.), The handbook of children’s rights (40-55). London: Routledge.
Lyons, D. (2009). Utility and rights. In Waldron, J. (Ed.), Theories of rights (110-136). NY: Oxford University Press.
Macedo, S. (1995). Liberal Civic Education and Religious Fundamentalism: The Case
of God v. John Rawls? Ethics, 105, 468-496.
McCoy, M. D. C. (2008). Autonomy, consent and medical paternalism: legal issues in
medical intervention. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine,
14 (6), 785-792.
McLaughlin, T. H. (1990). Peter Gardner on religious upbringing and the liberal ideal of religious autonomy. In P. H. Hirst & P. White (Eds.), Philosophy of education: Major theme in the analytic tradition (Vol. IV, 119-142). London: Routledge.
Miller, R. B. (2006). On medicine, culture and children’s basic interests: a reply to
three critics. Journal of Religious Ethics, 34 (1), 177-189.
Milne, A. J. (1986). Human rights and human: an essay in the philosophy of human
rights. State University of New York Press.
Mohrmann, M. E. (2006). Whose interests are they, anyway? Journal of Religious
Ethics, 34 (1), 141-150.
Nielsen, K. (1985). Egalitarian justice: equality as a goal and equality as a right. Equality and liberty (3-12). United States of America: Rowman & Allanheld.
Nilssen, E. & Lien, R. S. (1999). Individual rights and collective obligation.
Compulsory intervention towards substance abusers in Norwegian social law.
International Journal of Social Welfare, 8, 181-192.
Norman, P. Barry (1995). An introduction to modern political theory. London: Macmillan Press Ltd.
Pojman, L. P. (1992). Are human rights based on equal human worth? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 52(3), 605-622.
Purdy, L. (1992). In their best interest? The case against equal rights for children. NY: Cornell University.
Quinn, W. (1989). Actions, intentions and consequences: the doctrine of doing and allowing. Philosophical Review, 98, 287-312.
Raz, J. (2009). Right-based moralities. In Waldron, J. (Ed.), Theories of rights (182-200). NY: Oxford University Press.
Richmond, H. (1998). Paternalism and consent: some educational problems. Journal
of Philosophy of Education, 32 (2), 239-252.
Ripstein, A. (2006). Beyond the harm principle. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 34, 215-245. [Online]. Available: 2013.04.20.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.rpa.lib.nknu.edu.tw:81/doi/10.1111/j.1088-4963.2006.00066.x/pdf
Ruck, M. D., Psterson-Badali, M. & Day, D. M. (2002). Adolescents’ and mothers’
understanding of children’s rights in the home. Journal of Research on
Adolescence, 12(3), 373-398.
Scarre, G. (1980). Children and paternalism. Philosophy, 55, 117-124.
Schrag, F. (1975). The child’s status in the democratic state. Political Theory, 3(4), 441-457.
Schrag, F. (1977). The child in the moral order. Philosophy, 52 (200), 167-177.
Schrag, F. (1987). Review of Howard Cohen, equal rights for children. Law and Philosophy, 1, 159-162.
Sen, A. (1984). Resources, value and development. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Publisher.
Sen, A. (2009). The idea of justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Sher, G. (1987). Desert. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Shiffrin, S. V. (2000). Paternalism, unconscionability doctrine, amd accommodation. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 29, 205-250. [Online]. Available: 2013.04.20.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.rpa.lib.nknu.edu.tw:81/doi/10.1111/j.1088-4963.2000.00205.x/abstract
Smeyers, P. & Wringe, C. (2003). Adults and children. In Blake, N., Smeyers, P., Smith, R. & Standish, P. (Eds.), Philosophy of education (311-327). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Smith, A. B. (2007). Children and young people’s participation rights in education.
International Journal of Children’s Rights, 15, 147-164.
Snik, G. & van Haaften, W. (2001). Philosophy of education as foundational analysis and critique: conflicting liberal views on the right to an education for autonomy. In Heyting, F., Lenzen, D. & White, J. (Eds.), Methods in philosophy of education (73-87). NY: Routledge.
Spinner, J. (1994). The boundaries of citizenship. Baltimore: The Johns Hoplins Press.
Steiner, H. (1994). An essay on rights. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Waldron, J. (1993a). Liberal rights. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Waldron, J. (1993b). Rights. In Goodin, R. E. & Pettit, P. (Eds.), A companion to contemporary political philosophy (575-585).Oxford: Blackwell.
White, J. & White, P. (2001). An analytical perspective on education and children’s rights. In Heyting, F., Lenzen, D. & White, J. (Eds.), Methods in philosophy of education (13-29). NY: Routledge.
Winch, C. & Gingell, J. (2004). Philosophy and educational policy: A critical introduction. NY: RoutledgeFalmer.
Wringe, C. A. (1981). Children’s rights: A philosophical study. Lonton: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.
Wringe, C. A. (2001). An analytic approach in philosophy of education: the case of children’s rights. In Heyting, F., Lenzen, D. & White, J. (Eds.), Methods in philosophy of education (44-56). NY: Routledge.


 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：1147（臺灣：1118，外國：29） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1614293 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67425486
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上