摘要:
在政治哲学领域,"自由"是一个重要同时也充满争议的概念。不同的政治哲学家讨论和区分了不同的自由观,并论证了其内在逻辑。贡斯当从社会历史状况出发,比较了古代人的自由和现代人的自由,指出现代社会的人应享有现代人的自由,无须留恋和提倡古代人的自由。伯林从自由一词所蕴含的内在逻辑出发分析了积极自由和消极自由,据此指出积极自由存在逻辑上的悖论并隐含着极权的危险,从而主张消极自由。许多自由主义者虽对伯林的论证存有异议,但从根本上信奉伯林的主张。但是,共和主义的一些思想家如昆廷·斯金纳不抛弃积极自由,在自由主义的逻辑框架之外发展出一套具有自恰性的积极自由观。然而这种具有怀古精神的自由观在现代社会所能取得的共识可能并不需要,研究者们发展出一个新的、能够抵御极权主义威胁的、能获得更多认同的和自恰的积极自由概念。
Abstract:
In the field of political philosophy, the concept of ‘freedom’ is important and controversial. Different political philosophers have discussed and distinguished different conception of freedom, and also demonstrated their inherent logic. Starting from the social and historical conditions, Benjamin Constant compared the liberty of ancients with that of moderns. He pointed out that modern people should enjoy the liberty of moderns with no need for missing the liberty of ancients. From the inherent logic of the word ‘freedom’, Isaiah Berlin analyzed positive and negative freedom. On this basis, he presented that positive freedom logically implied the paradox and had the danger of totalitarianism, and he advocated negative freedom. Although many liberals don't agree with Berlin's argument, they believe in Berlin's claims at the bottom. However, some Republican thinkers such as Quentin Skinner did not want to abandon positive freedom, so he developed a self-consistent conception of positive freedom. But this conception with retro spirit may get little consensus in modern society. Then it needs researchers to develop a new self-consistent concept of positive freedom that can withstand the threat of totalitarianism and get more recognition. It is possible.
下载:
