Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/136547


Title: 同情共感、安全與公共輿論法庭:邊沁的效益自由論
Sympathy, Security and Public Opinion Tribunal: Bentham’s Utilitarian Liberalism
Authors: 畢銪
Bi, You
Contributors: 陳建綱
Chen, Chien-Kang
畢銪
Bi, You
Keywords: 效益主義
同情共感
安全
自由
公共輿論法庭
Utilitarianism
Sympathy
Security
Liberty
Public Opinion Tribunal
Date: 2021
Issue Date: 2021-08-04 15:56:20 (UTC+8)
Abstract: 長期以來,人們普遍認為邊沁的效益主義忽略了自由這一重要的政治價值,甚至被當做一個反自由的理論體系。本文從邊沁對自由和安全這兩個概念的討論出發,在他的文本中尋找到三項重要的元素:同情共感、安全與公共輿論法庭。並且以這三項為基礎,重建邊沁的效益主義的自由觀。首先,邊沁對人性的理解並不是理性自利的「經濟人」,而是自利與利他兼有。並且邊沁不僅沒有排除道德情感的作用,相反非常重視同情共感與效益原則的深度聯結。效益原則的基礎是對痛苦與快樂的感受,而同情共感正是對他人的苦樂之感受。在這個意義上,同情共感是效益主義中不可或缺的一項道德價值。其次,邊沁在批判天賦權利論的過程中注意到概念的虛構性問題,而由此發展出的「釋義法」也成為理解他批判「自由」等虛構概念的關鍵點。邊沁用安全替代自由,不僅是為了在概念上釐清價值的邊界,而且也是為了在政治生活中更好地保有自由的實質。因此,邊沁不僅沒有混淆各種多元的價值,並且提出用效益作為一套公共理性來調和不同的價值之間的衝突。其三,公共輿論法庭作為承載自由價值的政治制度,對言論自由的證成不同於其他政治理論。公共輿論法庭所具有的包容性,也體現了世界主義的特徵。並且通過國際公共輿論法庭的制度,國際的自由和安全也可以得到一定程度的確保。
For a long time, it has been widely believed that Bentham’s utilitarianism ignores liberty, an important political value, and was even treated as an anti-liberty theoretical system. This article draws on Bentham’s discussion of the conceptions of liberty and security to identify three significant elements in his texts: sympathy, security, and Public Opinion Tribunal. On the basis of these three elements, Bentham’s utilitarian conception of liberty is reconstructed. Firstly, Bentham’s understanding of human nature is not that of a rational self-interested “economic man”, but that of both self-regard and social-regard, or say sympathetic-regard. And rather than excluding the role of sympathy, he attaches great importance to the deep connection between sympathy and utility principle. The principle of utility is based on the feeling of pain and pleasure, and sympathy is the feeling of the suffering and happiness of others. In this sense, sympathy is an essential moral value in utilitarianism. Secondly, in his critique of natural rights theory, Bentham noticed the fictitious nature of the conception, and the “paraphrasis” that he develops from this becomes a key point in understanding his critique of other fictitious conceptions such as “liberty”. By replacing liberty with security, Bentham not only sought to clarify the boundaries of values, but also embodies a more substantial commitment to liberty. Thus, rather than confusing the plurality of values, Bentham proposes the utility as a set of public reason to reconcile the conflicts between different values. Thirdly, as a political institution that bearing the value of liberty, the Public Opinion Tribunal offers a different approach to justify the value of free speech which is different from other political theories. The inclusiveness of the Public Opinion Tribunal also reflects the characteristics of cosmopolitanism. And through the system of International Public Opinion Tribunal, international liberty and security can be ensured to a certain extent.
Reference: 邊沁原典與譯著

Bentham, Jeremy
1838-43 The Works of Jeremy Bentham, ed. by John Bowring. Edinburgh: Thoemmes Press. (reprinted in 1995)
1871 Theory of Legislation, trans. by R. Hildreth from the French of Etienne Dumont. London: Trübner & Co.
1982 An Introduction to the Principles of Moral and Legislation. Methuen CO. Ltd.
1983a Constitutional Code, vol. 1, eds. by F. Rosen and J. H. Burns. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
1983b Deontology together with A Table of the Springs of Action and Article on Utilitarianism, ed. by Amnon Goldworth. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
1989 First Principles preparatory to Constitutional Code, ed. by Philip Schofield. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
1990 Securities Against Misrule and Other Constitutional Writings for Tripoli and Greece, ed. by Philip Schofield. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
1995 Colonies, Commerce, and Constitutional Law: Rid Yourselves of Ultramaria and Other Writings on Spain and Spanish America, ed. By Philip Schofield. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
2002 Rights, Representation, and Reform: Nonsense upon Stilts and Other Writings on the French Revolution, eds. by Philip Schofield, Catherine Pease-Watkin, and Cyprian Blamires. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2012 On the Liberty of the Press, and Public Discussion, and other Legal and Political Writings for Spain and Portugal, eds. by Catherine Pease-Watkin and Philip Schofield. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2017 The Correspondence of Jeremy Bentham. Vol.1: 1752–76, ed. by Timothy L.S. Sprigge. London: UCL Press.
傑若米.邊沁
1997 《政府片論》,沈叔平 等(譯)。北京:商務印書館。
2016 《道德與立法原理導論》,時殷弘(譯)。北京:商務印書館。

中文部分

以賽亞.伯林
2003 《自由論》,胡傳勝(譯)。南京:譯林出版社。
弗里德里希.海耶克
2017 《通向奴役之路》,藤維藻、朱宗風(譯),張楚勇(審)。香港:商務印書館。
李青
2018 〈論“功利主義”概念內涵在中國語境中的變遷——兼論utilitarianism漢語譯詞的變化及厘定〉,《同濟大學學報(社會科學版)》,29卷1期,頁92-107。
伯納德.曼德維爾
2002 《蜜蜂的寓言》,肖聿(譯)。北京:中國社會科學出版社。
亞當.斯密
2018 《道德情感論》,謝宗林(譯)。台北:五南。
孟德斯鳩
2019 《論法的精神》,許明龍(譯)。台北:五南。
約翰.彌爾
2017 《效益主義》,邱振訓(譯)。台北:暖暖書屋。
2018 《論自由》,孟凡禮(譯)。台北:五南。
哈特
2016 〈導言〉,《道德與立法原理導論》,邊沁(著),時殷弘(譯)。北京:商務
蒙塔古
1997 〈編者導言〉,《政府片論》,邊沁(著),沈叔平 等(譯)。北京:商務印書館。
陳建綱
2017 〈效益主義的發軔:初探邊沁的政治思想〉,《人文及社會科學集刊》,29卷4期,頁527-562。
2018 〈邊沁論權利:他的批判與證成〉,《臺灣民主季刊》,15卷3期,頁1-37。
2021 〈以人民主權超克政治之惡:探析邊沁的民主憲政思想〉,《政治與社會哲學評論》,74期,頁183-254。
諶洪果
2003 〈在迷惑與清醒之間徘徊:邊沁的法律語言觀及其對立法科學化的追求〉,《法律方法與法律思維》,頁25-46。
2006 〈法律實證主義的功利主義自由觀:從邊沁到哈特〉,《法律科學.西北政法學院學報》,卷4,頁17-28。
盧梭
1980 《社會契約論》,何兆武(譯)。北京:商務印書館。
遲洪濤
2012 〈邊沁民主理論的獨特性研究〉,《人民論壇》,5期,頁148-149。

英文部分

Armitage, David
2011 Globalizing Jeremy Bentham. History of Political Thought, 32(1), 63-82.
Bahmueller, Charles F.
1981 The National Charity Company: Jeremy Bentham's Silent Revolution. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Baumgardt, David
1952 Bentham and the Ethics of Today. Princeton University Press.
Bedau, Hugo Adam
2001 “Anarchical Fallacies: Bentham’s Attack on Human Rights,” in Ian Crter and Mario Ricciardi eds., Freedom, Power and Political Morality. New York: Palgrave, pp. 134-152.
Ben-Dor, O.
2000 Constitutional Limits and the Public Sphere: A Critical Study of Bentham's Constitutionalism. Oregon: Hart Publishing.
2007 The Institutionalisation of Public Opinion: Bentham’s Proposed Constitutional Role for Jury and Judges. Legal Studies, 27(2), 216-235.
Blackstone, William
1893 Commentaries on the Laws of England, 4 volumes. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Co.
Boralevi, Lea Campos
1984 Bentham and the Oppressed. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Bowle, John
1969 Hobbes and his Critics: A Study in Seventeenth Century Constitutionalism. Oxon: Frank Cass& Co. Ltd.
Browning, Gary K.
2016 A history of modern political thought: the question of interpretation. Oxford University Press.
Bruno, Jonathan R.
2017 Vigilance and Confidence: Jeremy Bentham, Publicity, and the Dialectic of Political Trust and Distrust. American Political Science Review, 111(2), 295-307.
Cello, Lorenzo
2020 Jeremy Bentham’s vision of international order. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 1-19.
Crimmins, James E.
1996 Contending interpretations of Bentham's utilitarianism. Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique, 29(4), 751-777.
2002 Bentham and Hobbes: An issue of influence. Journal of the History of Ideas, 63(4), 677-696.
Cutler, Fred
1999 Jeremy Bentham and the public opinion tribunal. Public Opinion Quarterly, 321-346.
Dinwiddy, J. R.
1978 “The Classical Economists and the Utilitarians,” in E. K. Bramsted and K. J. Melhuish eds., Western Liberalism: A History in Documents from Locke to Croce. London: Longmans, pp. 12-25.
Dube, Allison
1991 The Theme of Acquisitiveness in Bentham’s Political Thought. New York: Garland.
Elazar, Yiftah
2015 Liberty as a Caricature: Bentham's Antidote to Republicanism. Journal of the History of Ideas, 76(3), 417-439.
Elster, Jon
2013 Securities Against Misrule: Juries, Assemblies, Elections. Cambridge University Press.
Engelmann, Stephen G.
2011 “Introduction for Selected Writings,” in Jeremy Bentham, ed. by Stephen G. Engelmann, Selected Writings. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Franklin, Benjamin
1755 “Pennsylvania Assembly: Reply to the Governor, 11 November 1755,” Retrieved July 7, 2021, from https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-06-02-0107
Gert, Bernard
1967 Hobbes and Psychological Egoism. Journal of the History of Ideas, 28(4), 503-520.
Haidt, Jonathan
2012 The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Vintage.
Halévy, Elie
1972 The growth of philosophic radicalism. London: Faber.
Harrison, Ross
1983 Bentham. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Hart, H. L. A.
1982 Essays on Bentham: Jurisprudence and political philosophy. OUP Oxford. (reprinted in 2011)
Hobbes, Thomas
1994 Leviathan. Canada: Hackett Publishing Company.
Hoogensen, G., & Gjørv, G. H.
2005 International relations, security and Jeremy Bentham. Psychology Press.
Hume, David
1960 “Of the Original Contract,” in Ernest Barker ed., Social Contract. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hume, L. J.
1981 Bentham and Bureaucracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kaino, Michihiro
2009 Bentham’s Concept of Security in a Global Context: The Pannomion and the Public Opinion Tribunal as a Universal Plan. Journal of Bentham Studies, 11, 1-29.
Kelly, Paul J.
1990 Utilitarianism and Distributive Justice: Jeremy Bentham and the Civil Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
2001 Classical utilitarianism and the concept of freedom: a response to the republican critique. Journal of Political Ideologies, 6(1), 13-31.
Lieberman, David
2008 Bentham’s Democracy. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 28(3), 605-626.
Locke, John
1988 Two Treatises of Government, ed. by Peter Laslett. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Long, Douglas
1977 Bentham on Liberty: Jeremy Bentham's idea of liberty in relation to his utilitarianism. Toronto University Press.
Paley, William
2002 The Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
Parekh, Bhikhu
1973 Bentham’s Political Thought. Kent: Croom Helm Ltd. (reprinted in 2017)
1974 “Introduction for Jeremy Bentham: Ten Critical Essays,” in Bhikhu Parekh ed., Jeremy Bentham: Ten Critical Essays. London: Frank Cass.
Pease-Watkin, Catherine and Philip Schofield
2012 “Editorial Introduction for On the Liberty of the Press, and Public Discussion, and other Legal and Political Writings for Spain and Portugal,” in Catherine Pease-Watkin and Philip Schofield eds., On the Liberty of the Press, and Public Discussion, and other Legal and Political Writings for Spain and Portugal. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pitts, Jennifer
2005 A Turn to Empire: The Rise of Imperial Liberalism in Britain and France. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Postema, Gerald J.
1986(2019) Bentham and the Common Law Tradition. New York: Clarendon Press.
2014 “The Soul of Justice: Bentham on publicity, Law, and the Rule of Law,” in Xiaobo Zhai and Michael Quinn eds., Bentham’s Theory of Law and Public Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 40-62.
2019 Utility, Publicity, and Law: Essays on Bentham’s Moral and Legal Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Roberts, Warren
1979 Bentham's poor law proposals. The Bentham Newsletter, 3, 28-45.
Rosen, Frederick
1982 Jeremy Bentham: recent interpretations. Political Studies, 30(4), 575-581.
1983 Jeremy Bentham and Representative Democracy: A Study of the Constitutional Code. New York: Oxford University Press
1987 “Bentham and Mill on Liberty and Justice,” in G. Feaver and F. Rosen eds., Lives, Liberties and the Public Good: New Essays in Political Theory for Maurice Cranston. London: Macmillan Press, pp. 121-138.
1990 “The origin of liberal utilitarianism: Jeremy Bentham and liberty,” in Richard Bellamy ed., Victorian Liberalism: Nineteenth-century Political Thought and Practice. London: Routledge, pp. 58-70.
1992 Bentham, Byron, and Greece: Constitutionalism, Nationalism, and Early Liberal Political Thought. New York: Oxford University Press.
1998 Individual Sacrifice and the Greatest Happiness: Bentham on Utility and Rights. Utilitas, 10(2), 129-143.
2000 The idea of utility in Adam Smith's the theory of moral sentiments. History of European Ideas, 26(2), 79-103.
2003 Classical utilitarianism from Hume to Mill. New York: Routledge.
Schofield, Philip
2003 Jeremy Bentham, the principle of utility, and legal positivism. Current Legal Problems, 56(1), 1-39.
2006 Utility and Democracy: The political thought of Jeremy Bentham. OUP Oxford.
2009 Bentham: A Guide for the Perplexed. Bloomsbury Publishing.
2019 Jeremy Bentham on Freedom of the Press, Public Opinion, and Good Government. Scandinavica, 58(2), 39-57.
Schwartz, Pedro
1986 “Jeremy Bentham’s democratic despotism,” in R. D. Collison Black ed., Ideas in Economics. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp 74-103.
Sotiropoulos, Dimitris
2009 Why John Stuart Mill should not be enlisted among neoclassical economists. The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 16(3), 455-473.
Stephen, Leslie
1904 Hobbes. New York: The Macmillan Company.
Tyler, Colin
2017 Jeremy Bentham on Open Government and Privacy. Journal of Information Ethics, 26(1), 112-129.
Waldron, Jeremy
1987 Nonsense upon Stilts: Bentham, Burke and Marx on the Rights of Man. New York: Methuen.
Williams, Bernard and J. J. C. Smart
1973 Utilitarianism: For and Against. Cambridge University Press.
Description: 碩士
國立政治大學
政治學系
107252026
Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107252026
Data Type: thesis
Appears in Collections:[政治學系] 學位論文

Files in This Item:

File SizeFormat
202601.pdf17957KbAdobe PDF7View/Open


All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


社群 sharing