1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. College of Liberal Arts
  4. Theses
  5. Item

學術產出-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

Citation Infomation

  • No doi shows Citation Infomation
題名 論代間正義：一個羅爾斯式的觀點
On Intergenerational Justice: A Rawlsian Perspective
作者 楊士奇
Yang, Shi-Chi
貢獻者 何信全
楊士奇
Yang, Shi-Chi
關鍵詞 代間正義
後代
未來世代
後代人格不同一問題
羅爾斯
社會契約論
原初位置
正義的儲蓄原則
相互性
INTERGENERATIONAL JUSTICE
POSTERITY
FUTURE PEOPLE
THE NON IDENTITY PROBLEM
JOHN RAWLS
SOCIAL CONTRACTARIANISM
ORIGINAL POSITION
JUST SAVINGS PRINCIPLE
RECIPROCITY
日期 2007
上傳時間 19-Sep-2009 12:48:00 (UTC+8)
摘要 本論文題旨為：「論代間正義：一個羅爾斯式的觀點」。代間正義是晚近三十年來新興且益愈受到重視的倫理學議題之一，其主要關切的核心問題，乃在於追問「當代之於後代所應擔負的責任」。本文透過當代政治哲學與倫理學家羅爾斯（John Rawls）有關社會正義理論的設計與主張，分兩部分處理此問題。


第一部份所處理的問題為由帕菲特（Derek Parfit）所深化之「後代人格不同一問題」（The Non-Identity Problem），旨在探究「代間正義是否可能」。帕菲特指出，前代不同的行為選擇，將造成不同後代的存在，而這使得現存既有之各種權利與責任相對應的理論，無法合理地適用於代間關係。帕菲特主張，可以採取「忽略特定人格的比較（品質）原則」以解決此後代人格不同一問題。然而，帕菲特此舉卻陷入「不特定人格的後代無法追究前代之行為責任」的理論困境。本文主張，透過羅爾斯原初位置（original position）的理論設計啟發，即便在代間存在著「前代不同的行為選擇，將造成不同後代的存在」的後代人格不同一疑慮，當代仍可採納原初位置的理論啟示，區分人的屬性（properties）與獨特性（particular）的差異，在後代存有人格不同一問題（獨特性）的情形下，針對「屬性」而確立追問當代之於後代所應擔負責任之正當性。
第二部分主要處理羅爾斯有關代間正義觀點的內部論證問題，並進一步藉此說明「代間正義如何可能」。羅爾斯以「正義的儲蓄原則」（just savings principle）說明代間的分配正義問題，並《正義論》（A Theory of Justice）中將它納入正義二原則之中，成為建構社會基本體制的基本原則之一。然而，羅爾斯早期解釋與證成儲蓄原則的相關理據如動機假定（motivation assumption）與家族模式等，卻可能與其他理論假定如締約者的理性等相衝突、衍生解釋融貫上的困難，而遭到眾多學者們的質疑。羅爾斯在一九九三年的《政治自由主義》（Political Liberalism）中對此做出回應，並將關切下一代的動機假定，修正為「要求前代也承諾遵守他們所遵守的儲蓄原則，無論向前或向後追溯多遠」。除此之外，羅爾斯於《正義論》以外的其他著作，在提及正義二原則時，皆不再表述「正義的儲蓄原則」。本文認為羅爾斯後期所提出的證立主張，不僅整合了代內分配正義（差異原則）與代間分配正義（儲蓄原則）的論證理據（小中取大規則的應用），更與其主張「社會作為一世代相繼之公平的合作體系」時所標舉之「相互性理念」（the idea of reciprocity）的核心概念相符應。本文認為，在論證理據得到順利整合的前提下，羅爾斯仍可在後期表述正義二原則時，將「正義的儲蓄原則」放回其中，並可據此呼應當代永續發展理念「既滿足當代人的需求，又不對後代人滿足其需求的能力造成危害」的核心主張。
The topic “Intergenerational Justice” is one of the newest but getting more important ethics problems to contemporaries. One of the key points of this issue is how to make sense of our obligations to the posterity (include future people) if possible. In this dissertation, I intend to clarify this problem by Rawls’s theory of justice into two parts.<br>The first part is “The Non-Identity Problem” held by Derek Parfit. This problem shows that “in the different outcomes, different people would be born”, and it seems inactive the traditional theories of rights. Parfit suggests that we can through it by the priinciple Q: “if in either of two outcomes the same number of people would ever live, it would be bad if those who live are worse off, or have a lower quality of life, than those who would have lived.” But this principle makes new difficulties about this problem. According Reiman, I argue that we can adjust this non-identity problem by the theory hypothesis “Original Position” of Rawls’s theory of justice, and that there are obligations from contemporaries to the future people.<br>The second part is about the arguments of Rawls’s theory of justice between generations. According to early Rawls in 1971, the theory of justice between generations represented by the “just savings principle” and was one part of the Two Principles of Justice in A Theory of Justice. But there are some argument troubles about the assumptions that makes the theory of justice between generations difficultly, especially on the “motivation assumption” and the family mode and so on. In 1993, Rawls changed his arguments about the theory of justice between generations, but he also take off the just savings principle from the Two Principles of Justice in other books or articles besides A Theory of Justice. I argue that latter arguments seem more reasonable to the theory of justice between generations, and they also makes the whole theory of social justice comprehensive. Then I argue that Rawls can still presents the just savings principle when he says about the Two Principles of Justice.
參考文獻 中文部分
1. 專書與譯作
王勤田：《生態文化》。台北：揚智，1997年。
江宜樺：《自由民主的理路》。台北：聯經，2001年。
何懷宏編：《生態倫理－精神資源與哲學基礎》。保定：河北大學出版社，2002年。
何懷宏：《公平的正義－解讀羅爾斯《正義論》》。濟南：山東大學出版社，2002年。
莊慶信：《中西環境哲學－一個整合的進路》。台北：五南，2002年。
葉俊榮：《全球環境議題－台灣觀點》。台北：巨流，1999年。
錢永祥：《縱欲與虛無之上》。台北：聯經，2001年。
John Rawls 著，李少軍等譯：《正義論》。台北：桂冠，2003年。
John Rawls 著，萬俊人譯：《政治自由主義》。南京：譯林，2000年。
John Rawls 著，姚大志譯：《作為公平的正義：正義新論》。台北：左岸，2002年。
John Rawls 著，李國維等譯：《萬民法》。台北：聯經，2005年。
Hawken, Paul., Lovins, Amory., Lovins, L. Hunter著，吳信如譯：《綠色資本主義：創造經濟雙贏的策略》。台北：天下，2002年。
Sen, Amartya著，劉楚俊譯：《經濟發展與自由》。台北：先覺，2001年。
Sen, Amartya著，劉楚俊譯：《倫理與經濟》。台北：聯經，2000年。
Wallerstein, Immanuel著，彭懷棟譯：《自由主義之後》。台北：聯經，2001年。
世界環境與發展委員會著，王之佳等譯：《我們共同的未來》。台北：台灣地球日，1992年。
Porter, Michael E. 著，蕭羨一譯：《企業與環境》。台北：天下遠見，2001年。
Hawken, Paul., Lovins, Amory and L. Hunter著，吳信如譯：《綠色資本主義》。台北：天下，2002年。
Sandler, Todd著，葉家興譯：《經濟學與社會的對話》。台北：先覺，2003年。
Carson, Rachel著，李文昭譯：《寂靜的春天》。台中：晨星，1996年。
2. 論文
何信全：〈儒家政治哲學的前景：從當代自由主義與社群主義論爭脈絡的考察〉，黃俊傑(編)，《傳統中華文化與現代價值的激盪與調融(一)》。台北：喜瑪拉雅研究發展基金，2002年，頁207-228。
───：〈多元社會交疊共識如何可能？─羅爾斯對社會整合之證成〉，《國立政治大學哲學學報》第五期，1999年，頁123-142。
施俊吉：〈論羅爾斯的差異原則〉，收錄於戴華、鄭曉時編：《正義及其相關問題》。台北：中央研究院，1991年，頁305-16。
張福建：〈羅爾斯的差異原則及其容許不平等的可能程度〉，收錄於戴華、鄭曉時編：《正義及其相關問題》。台北：中央研究院，1991年，頁281-304。
戴 華：〈個人與社會正義：探討羅爾斯正義理論中的「道德人」〉，收錄於戴華、鄭曉時編：《正義及其相關問題》。台北：中央研究院，1991年，頁257-80。
───：《羅爾斯論「對錯的優先性」》，《人文及社會科學集刊》第二卷第一期（78/11），頁57-83。
───：〈羅爾斯論康德「定言令式程序」〉，《政治與社會哲學評論》，巨流出版社，2004年，第9期 ，頁79-112。
───：〈「永續發展」的規範意涵〉，《台灣經濟預測與政策》，中央研究院經濟研究所出版，1993年，第24期，頁63-87。
───：〈洛克的人格同一理論〉，收錄於戴華、錢永祥主編，《國科會八十二～八十五年度哲學學門專題計畫研究成果發表會論文集》。台北：中研院人文社會科學研究所，1999年，頁109-34。
───：〈帕菲特論「人格不同一」情況下的生育選擇〉，發表於國科會人文學中心：「批判與反思」研讀會，第六場，2007年6月。
謝世民：〈合理契約論與分配正義〉，《歐美研究》季刊，第二十九卷，第四期，49-80，1999年。
───：〈後啟蒙的哲學計畫：羅爾斯的政治自由主義〉，《二十一世紀》第75期，2003年。
───：〈羅爾斯與社會正義的場域〉，《政治與社會哲學評論》，巨流出版社，2004年，第9期 ，頁1-38。
英文部分
1. Books:
Attfield, Robin. The Ethics of Environmental Concern. New York : Columbia University Press, 1983.
Baron, Arcia W., Pettit, Philip.,& Slote, Michael. Three Methods of Ethics: A Debate. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell, 1997.
Barry, Brian. Theories of Justice. University of California Press, 1989.
Beckerman, Wilfred & Pasek, Joamma. Justice, Posterity, and the Environment. N.Y.: Oxford University, Press, 2001.
Berry, Thomas, CP. The Dream of the Earth. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 1988.
Blocker, H. Gene (ed.). John Rawls’ Theory of Social Justice: An Introduction. Ohio University Press, 1980.
Care, Norman. On Sharing Fate. Temple University Press, 1987.
Cohen, G. A. Self-ownership, Freedom, and Equality. Cambridge: Cambridge university Press, 1995.
Cooper, David E. & Palmer, Joy A.(eds.). The Environment in Question: Ethics and Global Issues. New York: Routledge, 1992.
Daly, Herman E. & K. N. Townsend(eds.). Valuing the Earth: Economics, Ecology, Ethics. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1993.
Daniels, Norman (ed.). Reading Rawls. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1989.
Dobson, Andrew (ed.). Fairness and Futurity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.
───. Justice and the Environment. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
Dworkin, Ronald. Taking Rights Seriously. Cambridge, Mass. : Harvard University Press, 1978.
Elliot, Robert(ed). Environmental Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
Frankena, William. (1973). Ethics, 2nd. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice-Hall.
Gauthier, David. Morality by Agreement. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986.
Goodpaster, K. E. & Sayre, K. M. (ed.). Ethics and Problems of the 21st Century. Notre Dame, Ind. : University of Notre Dame Press, 1979.
Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
Hohfeld, Wesley. Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning. Union, N.J. : Lawbook Exchange, 2000.
Johnson, Lawrence E. Amorally Deep World: An Essay in Moral Considerability and Environmental Ethics. N. Y.: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
Kant, Immanuel. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, trans. and ed. by Gregor, Mary. N. Y.: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Locke, John. The Second Treatise of Government. Oxford: Blackwell, 1976.
McCormick, John. The Global Environmental Movement. John Wiley &Sons Press, 1995.
Mulgan, Tim. Future People: A Moderate Consequentialist Account of our Obligations to Future Generaitons. Clarendon Press, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
Narveson, Jan & Dimock, Susan Whitney. Liberalism : New Essays on Liberal Themes. Kluwer Academic Publishers: 2001.
Nozick, Robert. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. N. Y. : Basic Books, 1974.
Olen, Jeffrey & Barry, Vincent. Applying Ethics: A Text with Readings, 4th. Belmont, California: Wadworth, 1992.
Parfit, Derek. Reasons and Persons. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984.
Pogge, Thomas. Realizing Rawls. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989.
───.(ed.). Global Justice. Mass.: Blackwell Publishing, 2003.
Purvis, Martin & Grainger, Alan (ed.). Exploring Sustainable Development: Geographical Perspectives. London: Earthscan Publications, 2004.
Ramsay, Maureen. What`s Wrong with Liberalism? : A Radical critique of Liberal Political Philosophy. Leicester University Press: 1997.
Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1971；revised edition, 1999.
───. Political Liberalism. N. Y.: Columbia University Press, 2005.
───. The Law of Peoples. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1999.
───. Collected Papers. Freeman, Samuel (ed.). Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1999.
───. Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2001.
Richardson, Henry S. (ed.). Development and Main Outlines of Rawls’s Theory of Justice. Garland Publishing, Inc., 1999.
Roemer, J. E. Theories of Distributive Justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1996.
Sandel, Michael, Liberalism and the Limits of Justice. N. Y. : Cambridge University Press, 1998.
de-Shalit, Avner. Why Posterity Matters – Environmental Policies and Future Generations. N. Y.: Routledge, 1995.
Singer, Peter. A Companion to Ethics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1991.
Gray, John. Two Faces of Liberalism. Cambridge, U.K. : Polity Press 2000.
Sandel, Michael J. Liberalism and the Limits of Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Visser’t Hooft, Hendrik. Justice to Future Generations and the Environment. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999.
Watkins, Frederick. The Political Tradition of Liberalism. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1967.
The World Commission on Environment and Development. Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987.
Buchanan, Allen., Brock, Dan., Daniels, Norman. and Wikler, Daniel. From Chance to Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
2. Articles:
Adams, Robert. “Existence, Self-Interest, and the Problem of Evil,” Noûs 13 (1979): 53-65.
Arrow, Kenneth J. “Some Ordinalist-Utilitarian Notes on Rawls’s Theory of Justice,” Journal of Philosophy 70 (1973): 245-63.
Baier,Annette “The Rights of Past and Future Persons,” in Ernest Partridge(ed.), Responsibilities To Future Generations. N. Y.: Prometheus Books, 1981.
Barry, Brian. “Justice Between Generations,” in P.M.S Hacker & J. Raz (eds.), Law, Morality, and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977.
───. “Rawls on Average and Total Utility: A Comment”, in Philosophical Studies (Minneapolis), 31: 5 (1977: May), pp.317-325.
───. “Sustainability and Intergenerational Justice,” in Environmental Philosophy, Vol. 4, edited by J. Baird Callicott & Clare Palmer. N. Y.: Routledge, 2005, pp. 105-23.
Bayles, Michael. “Harm to the Unconceived,” Philosophy & Public Affairs 5 (1976): 292-304.
Beckerman, Wilfred. “The Impossibility of a Theory of Intergenerational Justice,” in Joerg Chet Trammel(ed.), Handbook of Intergeneratioanl Justice. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2006.
Boucher, David. & Kelly, Paul. “The Social Contract and Its Critics,” in David Boucher & Paul Kelly (eds.). The Social Contract from Hobbes to Rawls. London; New York : Routledge, 1994.
English, Jane. “Justice between Generations,” in John Rawls─Critical Assessments of Leading Political Philosopers, Volume II: Principles of Justice I. N.Y.: Routledge, 2003. (Source: Philosophical Studies 31:91-104)
Feinberg, Joel. “ The Rights of Animals and Unborn Generations,” in Ernest Partridge(ed.), Responsibilities to Future Generations. N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 1981.
George S. Kavka, “Rawls on Average and Total Utility,” Philosophical Studies (Minneapolis), 27:4 (175: Apr), pp.237-253;
George, Richard. “The Environment, Rights, and Future Generations,” in Ernest Partridge(ed.), Responsibilities To Future Generations. N. Y.: Prometheus Books, 1981.
Gosseries, Axel. “Intergenerational Justice,” in Hugh LaFollette(ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Practical Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
Harman, Elizabeth. “Can We Harm and Benefit in Creating?” in Philosophical Perspectives, 18, Ethics, 2004, pp.89-113.
Kavka, George. “The Paradox of Future Individuals,” Philosophy & Public affairs 11 (1982): 93-112.
Macklin, Ruth. “Can Future Generations Correctly Be Said to Have Rights?” in Ernest Partridge(ed.), Responsibilities To Future Generations. N. Y.: Prometheus Books, 1981.
Paden, Roger. “Reciprocity and Intergenerational Justice,” in Public Affairs Quarterly, Volume 10, No.3, July 1996.
───. “Rawls’s Savings Principle and the Sense of Justice,” in Social Theory and Practice; 23,1; Spring 1997.
Pletcher, Galen. “The Rights to Future Generations,” in Ernest Partridge(ed.), Responsibilities To Future Generations. N. Y.: Prometheus Books, 1981.
Pluhar, Evelyn B. “The Justification of An Environmental Ethics,” Environmental Ethics, 5 (1983), pp. 47-61.
Rachels, Stuart. “A Set of Solutions to Parfit’s Problem,” in Nous, 35:2(2001), pp.214-38.
Rawls, John. “Justice as Firness: Political not Metaphysical,” in Samuel Freeman (ed.), John Rawls: Collected Papers. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1999.
Regan, Tom. “The Nature and Possibility of An Environmental Ethics,” Environmental Ethics, 3 (1981), pp. 19-34.
Reiman, Jeffrey. “Being Fair to Future People: The Non-Identity Problem in the Original Position,” Philosophy & Public affairs 35, no.1
Scanlon, T. M. “Rawls’ Theory of Justice”, in Norman Daniels(ed.), Reading Rawls: Critical Studies on Rawls A Theory of Justice. New York: Basic Books, 1975, pp.169-205.
Scheffler, Samuel. “Rawls and Utilitarianism,” in Samuel Freeman(ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Rawls. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003, pp. 426-59.
Schwartz, Adina. “Moral Neutrality and Primary Goods,” Ethics 83 (1973): 294-307.
Sen, Amartya. “Welfare Inequalities and Rawlsian Axiomatics,” Theory and Decision 7 (1976): 243-62.
───. “Justice: Means versus Freedoms,” Philosophy and Public Affairs 19 (1990): 111-21.
Sikora, R. I. “Utilitarianism: the Classical Principle and the Average Principle,” in Canadian Journal of Pilosophy 5(1975), pp. 409-419.
Singer, Brent A. “An Extension of Rawls’ Theory of Justice to Environmental Ethics,” Environmental Ethics 10 (1988): 217-31.
Smolkin, Doran. “Toward A Rights-Based Solution to the non-Identity Problem,” in Journal of Social Philosophy, Vol.30, No.1, Spring 1999.
Surber, J. Paul. “Obligations to Future Generations: Explorations and Problemata,” in Journal of Value Inquiry, 11:2 (1977: Summer), pp.104-16.
Van Parijs, Philippe. “Social Justice and Individual Ethics,” Ratio Juris 8 (1995): 40-63.
───. “Difference Principles,” in The Cambridge Companion to Rawls, edited by Samuel Freeman, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003, pp.200-40.
Voice, Paul. “Rawls’s Difference Principle and a Problem of Sacrifice,” South African Journal of Philosophy 10(1991): 28-31.
Woodward, James. “The Non-Identity Problem,” in Ethics 96(1986), pp.809-11.
描述 博士
國立政治大學
哲學研究所
90154504
96
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0901545041
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 何信全zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 楊士奇zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Yang, Shi-Chien_US
dc.creator (作者) 楊士奇zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Yang, Shi-Chien_US
dc.date (日期) 2007en_US
dc.date.accessioned 19-Sep-2009 12:48:00 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 19-Sep-2009 12:48:00 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 19-Sep-2009 12:48:00 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0901545041en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/37240-
dc.description (描述) 博士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 哲學研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 90154504zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 96zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本論文題旨為：「論代間正義：一個羅爾斯式的觀點」。代間正義是晚近三十年來新興且益愈受到重視的倫理學議題之一，其主要關切的核心問題，乃在於追問「當代之於後代所應擔負的責任」。本文透過當代政治哲學與倫理學家羅爾斯（John Rawls）有關社會正義理論的設計與主張，分兩部分處理此問題。


第一部份所處理的問題為由帕菲特（Derek Parfit）所深化之「後代人格不同一問題」（The Non-Identity Problem），旨在探究「代間正義是否可能」。帕菲特指出，前代不同的行為選擇，將造成不同後代的存在，而這使得現存既有之各種權利與責任相對應的理論，無法合理地適用於代間關係。帕菲特主張，可以採取「忽略特定人格的比較（品質）原則」以解決此後代人格不同一問題。然而，帕菲特此舉卻陷入「不特定人格的後代無法追究前代之行為責任」的理論困境。本文主張，透過羅爾斯原初位置（original position）的理論設計啟發，即便在代間存在著「前代不同的行為選擇，將造成不同後代的存在」的後代人格不同一疑慮，當代仍可採納原初位置的理論啟示，區分人的屬性（properties）與獨特性（particular）的差異，在後代存有人格不同一問題（獨特性）的情形下，針對「屬性」而確立追問當代之於後代所應擔負責任之正當性。
第二部分主要處理羅爾斯有關代間正義觀點的內部論證問題，並進一步藉此說明「代間正義如何可能」。羅爾斯以「正義的儲蓄原則」（just savings principle）說明代間的分配正義問題，並《正義論》（A Theory of Justice）中將它納入正義二原則之中，成為建構社會基本體制的基本原則之一。然而，羅爾斯早期解釋與證成儲蓄原則的相關理據如動機假定（motivation assumption）與家族模式等，卻可能與其他理論假定如締約者的理性等相衝突、衍生解釋融貫上的困難，而遭到眾多學者們的質疑。羅爾斯在一九九三年的《政治自由主義》（Political Liberalism）中對此做出回應，並將關切下一代的動機假定，修正為「要求前代也承諾遵守他們所遵守的儲蓄原則，無論向前或向後追溯多遠」。除此之外，羅爾斯於《正義論》以外的其他著作，在提及正義二原則時，皆不再表述「正義的儲蓄原則」。本文認為羅爾斯後期所提出的證立主張，不僅整合了代內分配正義（差異原則）與代間分配正義（儲蓄原則）的論證理據（小中取大規則的應用），更與其主張「社會作為一世代相繼之公平的合作體系」時所標舉之「相互性理念」（the idea of reciprocity）的核心概念相符應。本文認為，在論證理據得到順利整合的前提下，羅爾斯仍可在後期表述正義二原則時，將「正義的儲蓄原則」放回其中，並可據此呼應當代永續發展理念「既滿足當代人的需求，又不對後代人滿足其需求的能力造成危害」的核心主張。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) The topic “Intergenerational Justice” is one of the newest but getting more important ethics problems to contemporaries. One of the key points of this issue is how to make sense of our obligations to the posterity (include future people) if possible. In this dissertation, I intend to clarify this problem by Rawls’s theory of justice into two parts.<br>The first part is “The Non-Identity Problem” held by Derek Parfit. This problem shows that “in the different outcomes, different people would be born”, and it seems inactive the traditional theories of rights. Parfit suggests that we can through it by the priinciple Q: “if in either of two outcomes the same number of people would ever live, it would be bad if those who live are worse off, or have a lower quality of life, than those who would have lived.” But this principle makes new difficulties about this problem. According Reiman, I argue that we can adjust this non-identity problem by the theory hypothesis “Original Position” of Rawls’s theory of justice, and that there are obligations from contemporaries to the future people.<br>The second part is about the arguments of Rawls’s theory of justice between generations. According to early Rawls in 1971, the theory of justice between generations represented by the “just savings principle” and was one part of the Two Principles of Justice in A Theory of Justice. But there are some argument troubles about the assumptions that makes the theory of justice between generations difficultly, especially on the “motivation assumption” and the family mode and so on. In 1993, Rawls changed his arguments about the theory of justice between generations, but he also take off the just savings principle from the Two Principles of Justice in other books or articles besides A Theory of Justice. I argue that latter arguments seem more reasonable to the theory of justice between generations, and they also makes the whole theory of social justice comprehensive. Then I argue that Rawls can still presents the just savings principle when he says about the Two Principles of Justice.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論………………………………………………..………001

第一節 問題脈絡………………………………………………………….001
第二節 研究取徑………………………………………………………….011

第一部 論後代人格不同一問題

第二章 認真對待後代………………………………………...……019

第一節 代間的權利與責任關係…………………………………………..019
第二節 後代人格不同一問題……………………………………………..026
第三節 帕菲特的解決之道………………………………………………..033

第三章 公平地對待後代…………………………………..…….….045

第一節 對帕菲特論點的幾項評估…………………………………….…..045
第二節 維護基本價值：重返權利的視域…………………………….…..053
第三節 羅爾斯「原初位置」的應用：瑞曼論人的屬性與獨特性….…..062






第二部 代間分配正義：聚焦於儲蓄原則的討論

第四章 羅爾斯的代間正義觀………………………………………073

第一節 社會契約理念與代間關係的特徵……………………………..… 073
第二節 羅爾斯論正義的儲蓄原則……………………………………….. 084
第三節 正義的儲蓄原則之初步證立…………………………………….. 092

第五章 論羅爾斯之社會作為一世代相繼之公平的合作體系…… 101

第一節 對儲蓄原則的批評與修正………………………………………....101
第二節 社會契約理念的核心：相互性理念………………………………110
第三節 儲蓄原則與世代相繼之正義的社會………………………………127

第六章 結論………………………………………………………….137

參考文獻……………………………………………………………….149		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 52023 bytes-
dc.format.extent 101050 bytes-
dc.format.extent 127153 bytes-
dc.format.extent 1758885 bytes-
dc.format.extent 201907 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0901545041en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 代間正義zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 後代zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 未來世代zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 後代人格不同一問題zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 羅爾斯zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 社會契約論zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 原初位置zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 正義的儲蓄原則zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 相互性zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) INTERGENERATIONAL JUSTICEen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) POSTERITYen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) FUTURE PEOPLEen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) THE NON IDENTITY PROBLEMen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) JOHN RAWLSen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) SOCIAL CONTRACTARIANISMen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) ORIGINAL POSITIONen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) JUST SAVINGS PRINCIPLEen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) RECIPROCITYen_US
dc.title (題名) 論代間正義：一個羅爾斯式的觀點zh_TW
dc.title (題名) On Intergenerational Justice: A Rawlsian Perspectiveen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中文部分zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 1. 專書與譯作zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 王勤田：《生態文化》。台北：揚智，1997年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 江宜樺：《自由民主的理路》。台北：聯經，2001年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 何懷宏編：《生態倫理－精神資源與哲學基礎》。保定：河北大學出版社，2002年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 何懷宏：《公平的正義－解讀羅爾斯《正義論》》。濟南：山東大學出版社，2002年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 莊慶信：《中西環境哲學－一個整合的進路》。台北：五南，2002年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 葉俊榮：《全球環境議題－台灣觀點》。台北：巨流，1999年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 錢永祥：《縱欲與虛無之上》。台北：聯經，2001年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) John Rawls 著，李少軍等譯：《正義論》。台北：桂冠，2003年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) John Rawls 著，萬俊人譯：《政治自由主義》。南京：譯林，2000年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) John Rawls 著，姚大志譯：《作為公平的正義：正義新論》。台北：左岸，2002年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) John Rawls 著，李國維等譯：《萬民法》。台北：聯經，2005年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hawken, Paul., Lovins, Amory., Lovins, L. Hunter著，吳信如譯：《綠色資本主義：創造經濟雙贏的策略》。台北：天下，2002年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sen, Amartya著，劉楚俊譯：《經濟發展與自由》。台北：先覺，2001年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sen, Amartya著，劉楚俊譯：《倫理與經濟》。台北：聯經，2000年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Wallerstein, Immanuel著，彭懷棟譯：《自由主義之後》。台北：聯經，2001年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 世界環境與發展委員會著，王之佳等譯：《我們共同的未來》。台北：台灣地球日，1992年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Porter, Michael E. 著，蕭羨一譯：《企業與環境》。台北：天下遠見，2001年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hawken, Paul., Lovins, Amory and L. Hunter著，吳信如譯：《綠色資本主義》。台北：天下，2002年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sandler, Todd著，葉家興譯：《經濟學與社會的對話》。台北：先覺，2003年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Carson, Rachel著，李文昭譯：《寂靜的春天》。台中：晨星，1996年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 2. 論文zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 何信全：〈儒家政治哲學的前景：從當代自由主義與社群主義論爭脈絡的考察〉，黃俊傑(編)，《傳統中華文化與現代價值的激盪與調融(一)》。台北：喜瑪拉雅研究發展基金，2002年，頁207-228。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───：〈多元社會交疊共識如何可能？─羅爾斯對社會整合之證成〉，《國立政治大學哲學學報》第五期，1999年，頁123-142。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 施俊吉：〈論羅爾斯的差異原則〉，收錄於戴華、鄭曉時編：《正義及其相關問題》。台北：中央研究院，1991年，頁305-16。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 張福建：〈羅爾斯的差異原則及其容許不平等的可能程度〉，收錄於戴華、鄭曉時編：《正義及其相關問題》。台北：中央研究院，1991年，頁281-304。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 戴 華：〈個人與社會正義：探討羅爾斯正義理論中的「道德人」〉，收錄於戴華、鄭曉時編：《正義及其相關問題》。台北：中央研究院，1991年，頁257-80。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───：《羅爾斯論「對錯的優先性」》，《人文及社會科學集刊》第二卷第一期（78/11），頁57-83。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───：〈羅爾斯論康德「定言令式程序」〉，《政治與社會哲學評論》，巨流出版社，2004年，第9期 ，頁79-112。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───：〈「永續發展」的規範意涵〉，《台灣經濟預測與政策》，中央研究院經濟研究所出版，1993年，第24期，頁63-87。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───：〈洛克的人格同一理論〉，收錄於戴華、錢永祥主編，《國科會八十二～八十五年度哲學學門專題計畫研究成果發表會論文集》。台北：中研院人文社會科學研究所，1999年，頁109-34。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───：〈帕菲特論「人格不同一」情況下的生育選擇〉，發表於國科會人文學中心：「批判與反思」研讀會，第六場，2007年6月。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 謝世民：〈合理契約論與分配正義〉，《歐美研究》季刊，第二十九卷，第四期，49-80，1999年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───：〈後啟蒙的哲學計畫：羅爾斯的政治自由主義〉，《二十一世紀》第75期，2003年。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───：〈羅爾斯與社會正義的場域〉，《政治與社會哲學評論》，巨流出版社，2004年，第9期 ，頁1-38。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 英文部分zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 1. Books:zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Attfield, Robin. The Ethics of Environmental Concern. New York : Columbia University Press, 1983.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Baron, Arcia W., Pettit, Philip.,& Slote, Michael. Three Methods of Ethics: A Debate. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell, 1997.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Barry, Brian. Theories of Justice. University of California Press, 1989.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Beckerman, Wilfred & Pasek, Joamma. Justice, Posterity, and the Environment. N.Y.: Oxford University, Press, 2001.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Berry, Thomas, CP. The Dream of the Earth. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 1988.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Blocker, H. Gene (ed.). John Rawls’ Theory of Social Justice: An Introduction. Ohio University Press, 1980.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Care, Norman. On Sharing Fate. Temple University Press, 1987.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Cohen, G. A. Self-ownership, Freedom, and Equality. Cambridge: Cambridge university Press, 1995.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Cooper, David E. & Palmer, Joy A.(eds.). The Environment in Question: Ethics and Global Issues. New York: Routledge, 1992.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Daly, Herman E. & K. N. Townsend(eds.). Valuing the Earth: Economics, Ecology, Ethics. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1993.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Daniels, Norman (ed.). Reading Rawls. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1989.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Dobson, Andrew (ed.). Fairness and Futurity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───. Justice and the Environment. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Dworkin, Ronald. Taking Rights Seriously. Cambridge, Mass. : Harvard University Press, 1978.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Elliot, Robert(ed). Environmental Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Frankena, William. (1973). Ethics, 2nd. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice-Hall.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Gauthier, David. Morality by Agreement. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Goodpaster, K. E. & Sayre, K. M. (ed.). Ethics and Problems of the 21st Century. Notre Dame, Ind. : University of Notre Dame Press, 1979.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hohfeld, Wesley. Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning. Union, N.J. : Lawbook Exchange, 2000.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Johnson, Lawrence E. Amorally Deep World: An Essay in Moral Considerability and Environmental Ethics. N. Y.: Cambridge University Press, 1991.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Kant, Immanuel. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, trans. and ed. by Gregor, Mary. N. Y.: Cambridge University Press, 1998.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Locke, John. The Second Treatise of Government. Oxford: Blackwell, 1976.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) McCormick, John. The Global Environmental Movement. John Wiley &Sons Press, 1995.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Mulgan, Tim. Future People: A Moderate Consequentialist Account of our Obligations to Future Generaitons. Clarendon Press, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Narveson, Jan & Dimock, Susan Whitney. Liberalism : New Essays on Liberal Themes. Kluwer Academic Publishers: 2001.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Nozick, Robert. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. N. Y. : Basic Books, 1974.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Olen, Jeffrey & Barry, Vincent. Applying Ethics: A Text with Readings, 4th. Belmont, California: Wadworth, 1992.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Parfit, Derek. Reasons and Persons. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Pogge, Thomas. Realizing Rawls. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───.(ed.). Global Justice. Mass.: Blackwell Publishing, 2003.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Purvis, Martin & Grainger, Alan (ed.). Exploring Sustainable Development: Geographical Perspectives. London: Earthscan Publications, 2004.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ramsay, Maureen. What`s Wrong with Liberalism? : A Radical critique of Liberal Political Philosophy. Leicester University Press: 1997.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1971；revised edition, 1999.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───. Political Liberalism. N. Y.: Columbia University Press, 2005.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───. The Law of Peoples. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1999.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───. Collected Papers. Freeman, Samuel (ed.). Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1999.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───. Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2001.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Richardson, Henry S. (ed.). Development and Main Outlines of Rawls’s Theory of Justice. Garland Publishing, Inc., 1999.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Roemer, J. E. Theories of Distributive Justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1996.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sandel, Michael, Liberalism and the Limits of Justice. N. Y. : Cambridge University Press, 1998.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) de-Shalit, Avner. Why Posterity Matters – Environmental Policies and Future Generations. N. Y.: Routledge, 1995.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Singer, Peter. A Companion to Ethics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1991.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Gray, John. Two Faces of Liberalism. Cambridge, U.K. : Polity Press 2000.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sandel, Michael J. Liberalism and the Limits of Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Visser’t Hooft, Hendrik. Justice to Future Generations and the Environment. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Watkins, Frederick. The Political Tradition of Liberalism. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1967.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) The World Commission on Environment and Development. Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Buchanan, Allen., Brock, Dan., Daniels, Norman. and Wikler, Daniel. From Chance to Choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 2. Articles:zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Adams, Robert. “Existence, Self-Interest, and the Problem of Evil,” Noûs 13 (1979): 53-65.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Arrow, Kenneth J. “Some Ordinalist-Utilitarian Notes on Rawls’s Theory of Justice,” Journal of Philosophy 70 (1973): 245-63.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Baier,Annette “The Rights of Past and Future Persons,” in Ernest Partridge(ed.), Responsibilities To Future Generations. N. Y.: Prometheus Books, 1981.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Barry, Brian. “Justice Between Generations,” in P.M.S Hacker & J. Raz (eds.), Law, Morality, and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───. “Rawls on Average and Total Utility: A Comment”, in Philosophical Studies (Minneapolis), 31: 5 (1977: May), pp.317-325.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───. “Sustainability and Intergenerational Justice,” in Environmental Philosophy, Vol. 4, edited by J. Baird Callicott & Clare Palmer. N. Y.: Routledge, 2005, pp. 105-23.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Bayles, Michael. “Harm to the Unconceived,” Philosophy & Public Affairs 5 (1976): 292-304.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Beckerman, Wilfred. “The Impossibility of a Theory of Intergenerational Justice,” in Joerg Chet Trammel(ed.), Handbook of Intergeneratioanl Justice. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2006.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Boucher, David. & Kelly, Paul. “The Social Contract and Its Critics,” in David Boucher & Paul Kelly (eds.). The Social Contract from Hobbes to Rawls. London; New York : Routledge, 1994.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) English, Jane. “Justice between Generations,” in John Rawls─Critical Assessments of Leading Political Philosopers, Volume II: Principles of Justice I. N.Y.: Routledge, 2003. (Source: Philosophical Studies 31:91-104)zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Feinberg, Joel. “ The Rights of Animals and Unborn Generations,” in Ernest Partridge(ed.), Responsibilities to Future Generations. N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 1981.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) George S. Kavka, “Rawls on Average and Total Utility,” Philosophical Studies (Minneapolis), 27:4 (175: Apr), pp.237-253;zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) George, Richard. “The Environment, Rights, and Future Generations,” in Ernest Partridge(ed.), Responsibilities To Future Generations. N. Y.: Prometheus Books, 1981.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Gosseries, Axel. “Intergenerational Justice,” in Hugh LaFollette(ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Practical Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Harman, Elizabeth. “Can We Harm and Benefit in Creating?” in Philosophical Perspectives, 18, Ethics, 2004, pp.89-113.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Kavka, George. “The Paradox of Future Individuals,” Philosophy & Public affairs 11 (1982): 93-112.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Macklin, Ruth. “Can Future Generations Correctly Be Said to Have Rights?” in Ernest Partridge(ed.), Responsibilities To Future Generations. N. Y.: Prometheus Books, 1981.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Paden, Roger. “Reciprocity and Intergenerational Justice,” in Public Affairs Quarterly, Volume 10, No.3, July 1996.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───. “Rawls’s Savings Principle and the Sense of Justice,” in Social Theory and Practice; 23,1; Spring 1997.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Pletcher, Galen. “The Rights to Future Generations,” in Ernest Partridge(ed.), Responsibilities To Future Generations. N. Y.: Prometheus Books, 1981.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Pluhar, Evelyn B. “The Justification of An Environmental Ethics,” Environmental Ethics, 5 (1983), pp. 47-61.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Rachels, Stuart. “A Set of Solutions to Parfit’s Problem,” in Nous, 35:2(2001), pp.214-38.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Rawls, John. “Justice as Firness: Political not Metaphysical,” in Samuel Freeman (ed.), John Rawls: Collected Papers. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1999.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Regan, Tom. “The Nature and Possibility of An Environmental Ethics,” Environmental Ethics, 3 (1981), pp. 19-34.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Reiman, Jeffrey. “Being Fair to Future People: The Non-Identity Problem in the Original Position,” Philosophy & Public affairs 35, no.1zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Scanlon, T. M. “Rawls’ Theory of Justice”, in Norman Daniels(ed.), Reading Rawls: Critical Studies on Rawls A Theory of Justice. New York: Basic Books, 1975, pp.169-205.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Scheffler, Samuel. “Rawls and Utilitarianism,” in Samuel Freeman(ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Rawls. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003, pp. 426-59.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Schwartz, Adina. “Moral Neutrality and Primary Goods,” Ethics 83 (1973): 294-307.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sen, Amartya. “Welfare Inequalities and Rawlsian Axiomatics,” Theory and Decision 7 (1976): 243-62.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───. “Justice: Means versus Freedoms,” Philosophy and Public Affairs 19 (1990): 111-21.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sikora, R. I. “Utilitarianism: the Classical Principle and the Average Principle,” in Canadian Journal of Pilosophy 5(1975), pp. 409-419.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Singer, Brent A. “An Extension of Rawls’ Theory of Justice to Environmental Ethics,” Environmental Ethics 10 (1988): 217-31.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Smolkin, Doran. “Toward A Rights-Based Solution to the non-Identity Problem,” in Journal of Social Philosophy, Vol.30, No.1, Spring 1999.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Surber, J. Paul. “Obligations to Future Generations: Explorations and Problemata,” in Journal of Value Inquiry, 11:2 (1977: Summer), pp.104-16.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Van Parijs, Philippe. “Social Justice and Individual Ethics,” Ratio Juris 8 (1995): 40-63.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ───. “Difference Principles,” in The Cambridge Companion to Rawls, edited by Samuel Freeman, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003, pp.200-40.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Voice, Paul. “Rawls’s Difference Principle and a Problem of Sacrifice,” South African Journal of Philosophy 10(1991): 28-31.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Woodward, James. “The Non-Identity Problem,” in Ethics 96(1986), pp.809-11.zh_TW