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：論德沃金的民主理論：一個憲政自由主義的解讀
書刊名：臺灣政治學刊
作者：陳閔翔 引用關係
作者(外文)：Chen, Min-siang
出版日期：2009
卷期：13:2
頁次：頁171-223
主題關鍵詞：人性尊嚴；多數民主；政治社群；夥伴民主；憲政自由主義；Human dignity；Majoritarian democracy；Political community；Partnership democracy；Constitutional liberalism
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(3) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:1
  • 共同引用共同引用:383
  • 點閱點閱:146
本文旨在從憲政自由主義的角度，來闡釋德沃金的民主理論。照一般的理解，德沃金的政治哲學是以「平等」爲核心的理論，然而，平等自由主義如何落實在具體的民主生活中？在憲政架構下的民主實踐是可能的嗎？審視德沃金這幾年的著述，本文認爲，晚近德沃金藉由對憲法的道德解讀，所開展出的憲政自由主義，實已證成一套民主理論：亦即不是多數民主，而是憲政民主－他稱爲「夥伴民主」－才是值得追求的實質民主理念，因爲這種民主能實現德沃金心中所期盼的「人民主權」、「公民平等」與「民主對話」這三個政治理想。全文分爲三個部分來討論。第一，在理論基礎上，一方面勾勒德沃金的法學要旨，並說明平等、憲法與民主的關係與連結；另一方面指出人性尊嚴作爲政治論辯的共同基礎，如何首尾貫穿在德沃金的民主論據中，這是當前論者較少著墨的，卻是理解德沃金後期思想的重要線索。第二，在理論證立上，本文嘗試回答兩個重要的哲學問題：(1)司法審查是不民主嗎？(2)憲政主義與民主是衝突的嗎？以此指出德沃金民主理論的特徵與夥伴民主的內容。第三，在理論批判上，藉由哈伯瑪斯的審議民主來對照德沃金的論點：夥伴民主突顯了憲政結構的重要性，但也透露出陳義過高的理論困境。透過批判與對話，我們對德沃金的民主理論做了整體的評價與省思。
This article attempts to explore Ronald Dworkin's democracy from the perspective of constitutional liberalism. The core of Dworkin's political philosophy is "equality". However, is egalitarian liberalism possible in democratic life? Or what is democracy in a constitutional practice sense? In reviewing his works, I argue that Dworkin has not only developed constitutional liberalism but has also justified a theory of democracy based on a moral reading of the constitution, that is, not a majoritarian democracy but rather a constitutional democracy, or a "partnership democracy" in Dworkin's words. Such a democracy is really a genuine democracy because there are three political ideals: "popular sovereignty," "citizen equality," and "democratic discourse" in partnership democracy. There are three parts to my arguments. First, in the theoretical grounds for democracy, I discuss the essentials of Dworkin's jurisprudence and the relationships among equality, the constitution and democracy, and the two principles of human dignity as common ground in the political debate to reveal the arguments underlying Dworkin's democratic reasoning. For Dworkin, it is a very important clue that might otherwise be ignored. Secondly, in justifying the theory of democracy, this article answers two philosophical questions in order to analyze what does Dworkin mean of partnership democracy and its characteristics: (1) Is a judicial review undemocratic? (2) Is there any conflict between constitutionalism and democracy? Finally, based on Jürgen Habermas' deliberative democracy that criticizes Dworkin's thought, I think that partnership democracy signifies the importance of the constitutional regime but is too utopian. In challenging Dworkin's arguments, this article evaluates and critically reflects the whole of Dworkin's theory of democracy.
期刊論文
1.吳秀瑾(20090300)。德沃金機運平等觀：女性主義批評。政治與社會哲學評論，28，89-138。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.黃舒芃(20031200)。The Countermajoritarian Difficulty Revisited--An Examination of Bickel's Theory of Judicial Review from Dworkin's Perspective。歐美研究，33(4)，685-709。new window  new window
3.Bellamy, Richard、楊惠君、胡全威(20080300)。民主憲政。政治與社會哲學評論，24，1-22。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.王鵬翔(20080300)。法律、融貫性與權威。政治與社會哲學評論，24，23-68。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.曾國祥(20041200)。憲政主義與民主的衝突：美國政治思想的一個側面。政治與社會哲學評論，11，35-82。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.陳宜中(20071200)。仇恨言論不該受到管制嗎？反思德沃金的反管制論證。政治與社會哲學評論，23，47-87。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.Rosenfeld, Michel(2001)。The Rule of Law and the Legitimacy of Constitutional Democracy。Southern California Law Review，74(5)，1307-1351。  new window
8.顏厥安(20080900)。德沃金之詮釋主義及其徹底化。中研院法學期刊，3，163-200。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.謝世民(19990300)。論德我肯的資源平等觀。人文及社會科學集刊，11(1)，123-153。new window  延伸查詢new window
10.陳閔翔(20090600)。德沃金「人性尊嚴原則」之理論意涵與實踐應用。政治與社會哲學評論，29，195-249。new window  延伸查詢new window
11.Dworkin, Ronald.(1990)。“Equality, Democracy, and Constitution: We the People in Court.”。Alberta Law Review，28 (2)，324-346。  new window
12.Dworkin, Ronald.(1998)。“The Partnership Conception of Democracy.”。California Law Review，86 (3)，453-458。  new window
13.Fallon, Richard H. Jr.(2003)。“Marbury and the Constitutional Mind: A Bicentennial Essay On the Wages of Doctrinal Tension.”。California Law Review，91 (1)，1-55。  new window
14.Plaxton, Michael.(2008)。“Arguments of Virtue and Constitutional Criminal Procedure.”。University of Toronto Law Journal，58 (3)，355-376。  new window
15.Priel, Danny.(2007)。“Book Review: In Search of Argument.”。Texas Law Review，86 (1)，1411-1464。  new window
16.Schneider, Cornelia(2000)。The Constitutional Protection of Rights in Dworkin’s and Habermas’ Theories of Democracy。UCL Jurisprudence Review，2000，101-121。  new window
17.Williams, Andrew.(2002)。“Critical Study: Equality for the Ambitious.”。The Philosophical Quarterly，52 (208)，377-389。  new window
圖書
1.Sandel, Michael(2005)。Public Philosophy: Essays on Morality in Politics。Cambridge, MA：Harvard University Press。  new window
2.Dworkin, Ronald(1996)。Freedom's Law：The Moral Reading of the American Constitution。New York, NY：Oxford University Press。  new window
3.Madison, James、Hamilton, Alexander、Jay, John(1987)。The Federalist Papers。Penguin Books。  new window
4.Mulhall, Stephen、Swift, Adam(1996)。Liberals and Communitarians。Oxford：Blackwell Publishers。  new window
5.Cohen, Marshall(1984)。Ronald Dworkin and Contemporary Jurisprudence。London, England：Duckworth。  new window
6.Dworkin, Ronald(2000)。Sovereign Virtue: Theory and Practice of Equality。Cambridge, Massachusetts：Harvard University Press。  new window
7.Dworkin, Ronald(1985)。A Matter of Principle。Cambridge, MA：New York, NY：Harvard University Press：Oxford University Press。  new window
8.黃瑞祺(2007)。批判社會學。台北：三民。  延伸查詢new window
9.Schmitt, Carl、姚朝森(2005)。政治性的概念。臺北：聯經出版事業股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
10.Dworkin, Ronald(2006)。Is Democracy Possible Here?--Principles for a New Political Debate。Princeton University Press。  new window
11.江宜樺(19980000)。自由主義、民族主義與國家認同。臺北：揚智文化。new window  延伸查詢new window
12.Habermas, Jürgen、Rehg, William(1996)。Between Facts and Norms: Contribution to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy。Cambridge, MA：MIT Press。  new window
13.Rawls, John(1993)。Political Liberalism。Cambridge University Press。  new window
14.Dworkin, Ronald M.(1978)。Taking Rights Seriously。Cambridge, Mass.：Harvard University Press。  new window
15.Dworkin, Ronald(1986)。Law's Empire。Cambridge, MA：Belknap Press。  new window
16.Dworkin, Ronald M.(2006)。Justice in Robes。Belknap Press of Harvard University Press。  new window
17.Burley, Justine.(2004)。“Introduction.”。Dworkin and His Critics。Malden, MA。  new window
18.Guest, Stephen.(1997)。Ronald Dworkin-Jurists: Profiles in Legal Theory。Edinburgh, Scotland。  new window
19.Hershovitz, Scott, Stephen Breyer, Christopher L. Eisgruber, James E. Fleming, Rebecca L. Brown, S. L. Hurley, Dale Smith, Jeremy Waldron, Stephen Perry, John Gardner, Mark Greenberg, Mark Greenberg, and Ronald Dworkin.(2006)。Exploring Law’s Empire: The Jurisprudence of Ronald Dworkin。Oxford, England。  new window
20.Hunt, Alan.(1992)。Reading Dworkin Critically。New York, NY。  new window
21.Kelly, Paul.(1996)。“Ronald Dworkin: Taking Rights Seriously.”。The Political Classics: Green to Dworkin。New York, NY。  new window
22.Koh, Harold Hongju, and Ronald C. Slye.(1999)。“Deliberative Democracy and Human Rights: An Introduction.”。Deliberative Democracy and Human Rights。New Haven, CT。  new window
23.Kymlicka, Will.(2001)。Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Introduction。Oxford, England。  new window
24.Pasquino, Pasquale.(2001)。“One and Three: Separation of Powers and the Independence of the Judiciary in the Italian Constitution.”。Constitutional Culture and Democratic Rule。Cambridge, England。  new window
25.Ripstein, Arthur.(2007)。“Introduction: Anti-Archimedeanism.”。Ronald Dworkin。Cambridge, England。  new window
26.Shapiro, Scott J.(2007)。“The ‘Hart-Dworkin’ Debate: A Short Guide for the Perplexed.”。Ronald Dworkin。Cambridge, England。  new window
圖書論文
1.莊世同(2008)。合法性與整全性：對德沃金法治觀的審視與反思。2008法律思想與社會變遷。台北：中央研究院法律學研究所籌備處。  延伸查詢new window
2.Duncombe, Stephen(2002)。Introduction。Cultural Resistance Reader。London：Verso。  new window
3.石元康(19910000)。自由主義式的平等：德我肯論權利。正義及其相關問題。臺北：中央研究院中山人文社會科學所。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.黃瑞祺(1998)。理性討論與民主：哈伯馬斯之溝通理論的民主涵義。多元主義。臺北：中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所。  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

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：427（臺灣：420，外國：7） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1614293 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67417399
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