正义的战争与战争的正义——关于战争伦理的反思

War can be defined as organized political violence among two or more nations. In accordance with the purpose, processes and results of war, the ethics of war generally comprises three aspects: right ethics, action ethics and duty ethics. The most important issue in ethics of war is “justice”. “Justice” and “injustice” as a conceptual pair do not prescribe the objective character of war but rather convey a subjective attitude and ethical position that have the potential to compel a populace to either support or oppose a war. Translated by Zuo Gaoshan and Xi Yunpeng from Lunlixue Yanjiu 伦理学研究 (Studies in Ethtics), 2005, (6): 43–48     

无限的责任与艰难的正义 ——勒维纳斯的伦理政治

勒维纳斯以提倡“作为第一哲学的伦理学”和对他人的无限责任引领了当代法国哲学中伦理学的复兴.勒维纳斯在关于无限责任的概念基础上通过第三方的引入,建构起一种政治的可能性.这样的一种政治又因奠基在无限责任的基础上而使得正义的实现变得既必须又艰难.这种无限责任和艰难正义的结合产生了勒维纳斯独特的伦理政治.     

“伦理正义”的解释力 ——马克思正义观研究的思想背景和可能视角

"伦理正义"是马克思正义观研究的思想背景和可能视角。所谓"伦理正义",是肇始于古典政治哲学的一种正义理解。与"法权正义"基于个体权利追问平等优先还是自由优先的理论争执不同,"伦理正义"以个体德行与公共善的一致为前提,主张个体自由与共同体自由的实践统一。黑格尔对于市民社会和国家关系的思辨把握,揭示了"法权正义"的个体与共同体分裂的二元结构及其困境,探索了以"伦理正义"超越"法权正义"的国家哲学路径。马克思的政治经济学批判指认了"法权正义"与资本主义生产方式的耦合关系,阐释了从异化劳动向自由劳动复归的人类解放逻辑。政治经济学批判是对"法权正义"的根本批判,回答了在现代社会重构"伦理正义"何以可能的问题。     

环境伦理视阈中的分配正义原则

分配正义不仅存在于收入分配领域,还存在于自然资源在同代人或不同代人之间的分配过程之中。分配正义是人与自然、人与人之间和谐协调与可持续发展的伦理基础。与一般意义的分配正义主要是指对一定社会结构、社会关系和社会现象的一种伦理认定和道德评价相区别,环境伦理视阈中的分配正义主要体现自然资源在国家之间的公平分配、国内的公平分配、代际之间的公平分配、人类的需要与环境本身之间公平分配等层面,概括地讲,也就是代内正义、代际正义和种际正义。     

自由主义:伦理内涵的嬗变与困境

任何完整的政治理论都有其特定的价值结构,为其现实政治主张、制度结构、政策机制的提供伦理支持,并随着时代政治、经济、文化条件的发展而变换其内涵。西方自由主义政治理论的发展分为启蒙时期、功利主义、现代自由主义等重要阶段,自然权利、功利原则和社会公正分别是其不同时代的核心价值要求。阐释和分析自由主义的伦理内涵变换及其理论和现实困境,为了解当代西方自由主义的价值变换及政策走向提供了一个有益的理论视角。     

类伦理与环境代际正义的实现

在个体道德、群体道德与类道德三种道德样态中,类道德体现了人类实践行为的整体性,它蕴含着人与自然以及当代人与后代人的双重伦理规定,既表达了人对自然的关怀意识,又体现了当代人对后代人的责任品质,它以一种整体性的道德品格促进环境代际正义的实现。     

战争伦理:一种世界观念

战争伦理主要论及战争如何受到道德强制,或者说,它涉及道德的进步如何影响到战争。同时,与人类其他活动相比,战争行为更具国际性,因此,战争伦理作为抑制战争的一种道义力量,也更易成为一种世界观念。可以将战争伦理分为军事伦理、军备伦理、军人伦理三个层面,分别代表基于人、武器以及人与武器相结合而采取的行动———作战之上的伦理规范,它们都是随着时代的发展而发展的。     

实质正义与程序正义——伦理委员会SOP解读

伦理委员会是生命伦理体制化的一个重要体现,为保证其评审质量,必须有标准操作规程(SOP)。这既是程序正义,也是为了真正实现正义。程序正义绝不是可有可无的,也不是可遵循可不遵循的。     

实质正义与程序正义——伦理委员会SOP解读

伦理委员会是生命伦理体制化的一个重要体现,为保证其评审质量,必须有标准操作规程(SOP).这既是程序正义,也是为了真正实现正义.程序正义绝不是可有可无的,也不是可遵循可不遵循的.     

朝向正义与德性——反恐战略的最终选择

恐怖实际上是人类历史上一种被普遍使用并且适用的政治手段,但在美国基本掌握了恐怖主义话语权的背景下,反恐战争积聚着越来越大的仇恨。正义与德性成为反恐战略的最终选择是一个符合逻辑的命题,如果国际社会要想从根本上消灭恐怖主义,那就必须建立一种“道义相归服”的“人类关系趋同”走向,美国也应该从根本上摒弃道德优越感和全球使命感,并以包容的心态和宽容的精神对待异质明。     

TRANSCENDING JUSTICE: Pope John Paul II and Just War

Pope John Paul II's opposition to the Iraq War was not that it failed to meet the conditions of Just War Theory. Indeed, we cannot tell from what he publicly said whether he thought it met those conditions or not, for he would have opposed it in any case. His thinking was rather that even just and necessary wars always come, as it were, too late, and are never able to solve the problems that made wars just and necessary. He was not trying therefore to enter into the details of Just War Theory. He wanted to subsume the principles of war into the principles of peace and to do so, not by denying justice, but by transcending it with charity. This article shows how this thinking is to be understood and the many means the Pope devised for putting this thinking into practice.     

Two Theories of Just War

As it is traditionally conceived, Just War Theory is not well suited for dealing with nation vs non-nation wars. It thus makes sense to create a second Just War Theory to deal with these wars. This article explores the differences and similarities between the two theories.

正当与相称:公正之内涵界定

公正是当前伦理学研究的热点问题,又是个跨学科的难题解决这个难题的起点就是——公正是什么？本人认为公正是人们社会交往活动中利益的正当的相称关系（或行为）“正当”是其质的规定;“相称”是其量的规定,“正当与相称”体现了公正范畴之历史性和客观性的统一。     

Research in Applied Ethics: Problems and Perspectives

The last few decades have seen a dramatic increase in concern with matters of ethics in all areas of public life. This ‘applied turn’ in ethics raises important issues not only of focus, but also of methodology. Sometimes a moral end or moral feature is designed into an institution or technology; sometimes a morally desirable outcome is the fortuitous, but unintended, consequence of an institutional arrangement or technological invention. If designing-in ethics is the new methodological orientation for applied ethics, globalisation is providing many of the practical ethical problems upon which to deploy this methodology. This is a revised version of an article that was presented at the 2007 Applied Ethics Conference in Sapporo, Japan, hosted by the University of Hokkaido. Thanks to Jeroen van den Hoven for the key idea of ‘designing-in-ethics’.     

风险社会与责任伦理

“风险社会”已经成为当今社会的重要特征,而传统的功利论、义务论、德性论等伦理学在应对社会风险问题时却存在着诸多局限。“责任伦理”在时空视域、伦理对象、核心理念等方面突破了传统伦理学的局限。树立和加强责任伦理的建构,能够积极有效地应对社会风险问题。     

The Ethics of Economic Sanctions: Why Just War Theory is Not the Answer

Res Publica - On 24 December 2017, the UN Security Council imposed its toughest sanctions yet on North Korea. The measures, intended to thwart nuclear ambitions, are some of the most extensive...     

Rawls and Ricoeur: Converging Notions of Empowerment to Justice

Empowerment is a key word in Catherine Audard’s new book on Rawls and a central characteristic of Rawls’ approach to justice. A very different “hermeneutic” approach to justice is presented by Paul Ricoeur, the French philosopher and theologian who, against the background of his own work, examined Rawls’ views in several publications. This essay compares the two views and defends the proposition that empowerment is the common denominator. The author suggests that Rawls would not have objected to including some of Ricoeur’s ideas in the past-principle stage of his Theory.

Solidarity and Social Justice: Effect of Individual Differences in Justice Sensitivity on Solidarity Behaviour

We investigate the effect of individual differences in justice sensitivity (JS) on giving behaviour in a solidarity game, its potential moderators and the underlying psychological mechanisms. In a solidarity game, subjects are asked to make decisions about transferring money to other players in a case in which they win a random draw and the other players lose. The results of four studies showed the following: (1) JS explains a unique portion of variance in the solidarity behaviour, above and beyond other basic personality dimensions (e.g. HEXACO model); (2) its effect does not depend on contextual factors, such as the degree of moral entitlement not to share and the possibility to attribute the recipients' disadvantage to their own responsibility; and (3) individual differences in the emotions anticipated in response to different outcomes of a random draw and the cognitive interpretation of the allocation situation partially mediate the effect of JS on solidarity behaviour. We also provided the first evidence that JS predicts individual differences in the propensity to take away others' earnings (antisocial behaviour). The results are discussed with respect to the research on personality as a predictor of prosocial and antisocial behaviour. Copyright © 2015 European Association of Personality Psychology