學術產出-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

Citation Infomation

題名 公民不服從之外:論暴力政治抵抗的正當性
Beyond Civil Disobedience: On the Legitimacy of Violent Political Resistance
作者 張展嘉
Chang, Chan-Chia
貢獻者 吳豐維<br>鄭光明
Wu, Feng-Wei<br>Cheng, Kuang-Ming
張展嘉
Chang, Chan-Chia
關鍵詞 暴力
非暴力
非文明不服從
公民不服從
政治抵抗
羅爾斯
Violence
Non-violence
Uncivil disobedience
Civil disobedience
Political resistance
John Rawls
日期 2022
上傳時間 1-Mar-2022 17:07:44 (UTC+8)
摘要 本論文主旨在於說明在政治抵抗中完全禁止暴力元素是不合理的要求。暴力,這個在政治抵抗場域常見的爭議元素,常左右人們對於一項抵抗運動正當性的判斷。這種看法源自於公民不服從理論中的非暴力要求,然而本論文將說明傳統的公民不服從理論內部依然存在許多未完全闡明的空間,故本論文將說明不該將之視為唯一判斷政治抵抗正當性之判準,其提出之非暴力要求亦非完全合理。
非文明不服從理論對傳統公民不服從理論採取批判態度,否定公民不服從具有較優越的規範性地位,並提出理由說明有些政治抵抗行為雖然無法符合公民不服從的規範與條件,但依然具有正當化可能。本文審視暴力在非文明不服從論者論述中的角色,並說明雖然暴力在非文明論者論述中更傾向被接納為一種可能具正當化潛力的手段,但其對暴力的分析與探討也難以稱得上足夠。
在討論過暴力在公民不服從與非文明不服從理論中的角色後,本文將進一步說明國家的正當性是如何影響運動正當性,而運動正當性是如何影響個別行為的正當門檻。此外本論文也將針對政治抵抗中的暴力進行細緻區分,說明什麼樣的暴力類型在特定處境中可能具有正當性,以及判斷個別暴力行為是否正當的判準有哪些。最後我將導出政治抵抗中的「升級」與「防衛」這兩種暴力在某些情況下可能會具有正當性之結論。
參考文獻 【中文】
李雪莉、楊智強、陳怡靜、余志偉、陳朗熹、劉貳龍,2020,《烈火黑 潮:城市戰地裡的香港人》,新北市:左岸文化。
彼得‧艾克曼、傑克‧杜瓦,2013,《非暴力抗爭――一種更強大的力量》,台北市:究竟出版社。
徐學庸,2020,〈蘇格拉底與守法:柏拉圖《克里同》論證結構〉,《國立政治大學哲學學報》第 43 期,頁 1-34。
曼威.柯司特,2020,《憤怒與希望:網際網絡時代的社會運動》,廖珮杏、劉維人譯,台北市:南方家園文化。
陳宜中,2007,〈公民不服從與自由民主:倒扁紅潮下的一些省思〉,《思想》第 4 期,頁 41-61。
傅恆德,2014,〈民主化的社會經濟研究:公民抗爭運動的跨國實證研究〉,《國家發展研究》第 14 卷第 1 期,頁 1-32
廖元豪,2014,〈公民不服從?還是民主法治倒退嚕?〉,《思想》第 27 期,頁 149-159。
端傳媒,2020,《2019 香港風暴—《端傳媒》反修例運動報導精選》,台北市:春山出版。
謝世民,2014,〈公民不服從德沃金的觀點〉,《以平等為本的自由主義:德沃金法政哲學研究》,台北市:開學文化。
【英文】
Brennan, J. 2019. When All Else Fails. NJ: Princeton University Press.
Chenoweth, E. and Stephan, M. 2011. Why Civil Resistance Works? The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict. New York City: Columbia university press. (E-Book.)
Chenoweth, E. and Stephan, M. 2012. Why Civil Resistance Works? The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict. New York City: Columbia university press. (Paperback.)
Cobb Jr., C. E. 2014 This Nonviolent Stuff’ll Get You Killed: How Guns Made the Civil Rights Movement Possible. New York: Basic Books.
Cohen, C. 1971 Civil Disobedience: Conscience, Tactics, and the Law. New York and London:Columbia University Press.
Delmas, C. 2016. Civil Disobedience. Philosophy Compass, 11(11):681-691.
Delmas, C. 2018. A Duty to Resist. New York: Oxford University Press.
Dworkin, R. 1985. A Matter of Principle. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Geras, N. 1989. Our Morals: The Ethics of Revolution. The Socialist Register,
25: 185–211.
Harcourt, B. 2012. The Politics of Incivility. Arizona Law Review, 54(2):345-373.
Honderich, T. 1976. Three Essays on Political Violence. Oxford: Basil Blackwell
Hume, D. 1985 [1752]. Of the Original Contract. In Essays: Moral Political, and Literary, Vol. 1. Ed. by E. F. Miller. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Classics
Hurd, H. 2001. Is It Wrong to Do Right When Others Do Wrong? A Critique of American Tort Law. Legal Theory, 7:307-40.
Kadivar, M.A. and Ketchley, N. 2018. Sticks, Stones, and Molotov Cocktails: Unarmed Collective Violence and Democratization. Socius, 4: 1-15.
Kirkpatrick, J. 2020. Book Reviews. In Political Theory, 48(4):528-542.
Lai, T.-H. 2019. Justifying Uncivil Disobedience. In Oxford Studies in Political Philosophy vol 5. Ed. by Sobel, D., Vallentyne, P. and Wall, S. Oxford University Press.
Lai, T.-H. 2020(2019). Uncivil Disobedience: Beyond the Orthodox View of Resistance and Counter-Resistance (Unpublished Doctoral Degree thesis). Australian National University, Australia.
Locke, J. 1980 [1690]. Second Treatise of Government. Ed. by Macpherson, C. B. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
Merleau-Ponty, M. 1969 Humanism and Terror. Trans. By O`Neill, J. Boston: Beacon Press
Pasternak, A. 2014. Voluntary Benefits from Wrongdoing. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 31(4):377-391.
Pasternak, A. 2018. Political Rioting: A Moral Assessment. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 46:384-418.
Plato. 1991. Crito. In Civil Disobedience in focus. Ed. By Bedau, H.A. New York: Routledge.
Pogge, T. 2007. John Rawls: His Life and Theory of Justice. Trans. By Kosch M. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rawls, J. 1999. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Raz, J. 1979. The Authority of law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Raz, J. 1986. The Morality of Freedom. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Sarkees, M. R. and Wayman, F. W. 2010. Resort to War: A Data Guide to Inter-state, Extra-state, Intra-state, and Non-state Wars, 1816–2007. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
Scheuerman, W. E. 2018 Civil Disobedience. Cambridge and Medford, MA: Polity Press.
Sebastian, S. 2015. Don’t Criticize Black Lives Matter for Provoking Violence. The Civil Rights Movement Did, Too. In Washington Post, October 1.
Thoreau, H. D. 1991. Civil Disobedience. In Civil Disobedience in focus. Ed. By Bedau, H.A. New York: Routledge.
Umaja, A. O. 2013. We Will Shoot Back: Armed Resistance in the Mississippi Freedom Movement. Manhattan: NYU Press.
Vanderheiden, S. 2005. Eco-terrorism or justified resistance? Radical environmentalism and the “War on Terror.” In Politics & Society, 33(3):425–47.
Walby, S., Towers, J., Balderston, S., Corradi, C., Francis, B., Heiskanen, M., Helweg-Larsen, K., Mergaert, L., Olive, P., Palmer, E., Stöckl, H. and Strid, S. 2017. The Concept and Measurement of Violence Against Women and Men. Bristol: Policy Press.
Walzer, M. 1967. The Obligation to Disobey. Ethics, 77(3): 163-175.
Wellman, C. H. 2005. Samaritanism and the duty to obey the law. In Is There a Duty to Obey the Law? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yen, A. 2015. On Civil Resistance and the Rule of Law. Asian Legal Philosophy, 2(1): 5-22.
Zinn, H.1997. The Zinn Reader: Writings on Disobedience and Democracy. New York: Seven Stories Press.
【網路資源】
BBC 中文網,2019,香港反逃犯條例抗議: 示威者破壞立法會背後的考量。檢自:https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/chinese-news-48842838 (Nov. 5, 2021)
BBC 緬甸語組和Grace Tsoi,2021,緬甸政變:流血死去的那些年輕人。檢自:https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/world-56737466 (Nov. 5, 2021)
Beech, H. 2020,黃還是藍?香港商家的分歧與撕裂。檢自:https://cn.nytimes.com/china/20200121/hong-kong-protests-yellow-blue/zh-hant/ (Nov. 5, 2021)
Dwokin, R. 1968, On not prosecuting civil disobedience. 檢自:https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1968/06/06/on-not-prosecuting-civil-disobedience/ (Jan. 8, 2022)
ETtoday 新聞雲社會中心,2014,反服貿衝政院驅離 174 人受傷 員警占 119 人。檢自:https://www.ettoday.net/news/20140324/338538.htm (Nov. 5, 2021)
Jenkins, J.C., Taylor, C.L., Abbott, M., Maher T.V., and Peterson, L. 2012. The World Handbook of Political Indicators IV. Columbus, OH: Mershon Center for International Security Studies, The Ohio State University. 檢自: https://sociology.osu.edu/worldhandbook (Nov. 5, 2021)
Smith, S. 2019, Book Review: A Duty to Resist: When Disobedience Should Be Uncivil by Candice Delmas. 檢自:https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/2019/04/12/book-review-a-duty-to-resist-when-disobedience-should-be-uncivil-by-candice-delmas/#comments (Jan. 8, 2022)
UNODC. 2015, International Classification of Crime for Statistical Purposes, Version 1.0. 檢自:https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/statistics/iccs.html (Nov. 5, 2021)
丘琦欣,2015,反服貿運動期間的警察暴力。檢自: https://newbloommag.net/2015/04/11/police-violence-sunflower-tw/ (Nov. 5, 2021)
羊正鈺,2018,【判決全文】反服貿運動佔領立院二審再判無罪,因「屬最後必要手段」。檢自:https://www.thenewslens.com/article/91460 (Nov. 5, 2021)
李翰暘,2019,十六萬人添馬公園撐警集會。檢自: https://www.yzzk.com/article/details/%E5%B0%81%E9%9D%A2%E5%B0%88%E9%A1%8C/2019-27/1562210659376/%E5%8D%81%E5%85%AD%E8%90%AC%E4%BA%BA%E6%B7%BB%E9%A6%AC%E5%85%AC%E5%9C%92%E6%92%90%E8%AD%A6%E9%9B%86%E6%9C%83/%E5%90%8D%E5%AE%B6%E5%8D%9A%E5%AE%A2/%E6%9D%8E%E7%BF%B0%E6%9A%98 (Jan. 8, 2022)
林祖偉,2019,香港抗議者的「裝修」和人人自危的「親中」企業。檢自:https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/chinese-news-50010488 (Nov. 5, 2021)
高梓根,2019,港人佔立法會貼字條「切勿破壞文物」 怎麼會是暴徒?檢自:https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/ch/news/3736446 (Nov. 5, 2021)
陳凱文,2021,陳凱文:戴耀廷混淆視聽。檢自:https://www.thinkhk.com/article/2021-01/12/46301.html (Nov. 5, 2021)
臺灣士林地方法院 104 年度 易 字第 628 號判決。檢自:https://law.judicial.gov.tw/FJUD/data.aspx?ty=JD&id=SLDM,104%2c%e6%98%93%2c628%2c20160516%2c2 (Nov. 5, 2021)
臺灣高等法院 105 年度上 易 字第 1232 號刑事判決。檢自:https://law.judicial.gov.tw/FJUD/data.aspx?ty=JD&id=TPHM,105%2c%e4%b8%8a%e6%98%93%2c1232%2c20160906%2c1 (Nov. 5, 2021)
聯合新聞網 轉角國際,2019,鏡頭背後/二號橋行動:港警進攻中大抓捕抗爭學生。檢自:https://global.udn.com/global_vision/story/8662/4160448 (Nov. 5, 2021)
蘋果新聞網,2019,港示威者遊行「裝修」中資商店 旺角小米招牌被大火燒光。檢自:https://tw.appledaily.com/international/20191020/TOEWSUTNVHMXRDMOAAQ3AWC7FU/ (Nov. 5, 2021)
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
哲學系
107154008
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107154008
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 吳豐維<br>鄭光明zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Wu, Feng-Wei<br>Cheng, Kuang-Mingen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 張展嘉zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Chang, Chan-Chiaen_US
dc.creator (作者) 張展嘉zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Chang, Chan-Chiaen_US
dc.date (日期) 2022en_US
dc.date.accessioned 1-Mar-2022 17:07:44 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 1-Mar-2022 17:07:44 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Mar-2022 17:07:44 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0107154008en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/139198-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 哲學系zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 107154008zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本論文主旨在於說明在政治抵抗中完全禁止暴力元素是不合理的要求。暴力,這個在政治抵抗場域常見的爭議元素,常左右人們對於一項抵抗運動正當性的判斷。這種看法源自於公民不服從理論中的非暴力要求,然而本論文將說明傳統的公民不服從理論內部依然存在許多未完全闡明的空間,故本論文將說明不該將之視為唯一判斷政治抵抗正當性之判準,其提出之非暴力要求亦非完全合理。
非文明不服從理論對傳統公民不服從理論採取批判態度,否定公民不服從具有較優越的規範性地位,並提出理由說明有些政治抵抗行為雖然無法符合公民不服從的規範與條件,但依然具有正當化可能。本文審視暴力在非文明不服從論者論述中的角色,並說明雖然暴力在非文明論者論述中更傾向被接納為一種可能具正當化潛力的手段,但其對暴力的分析與探討也難以稱得上足夠。
在討論過暴力在公民不服從與非文明不服從理論中的角色後,本文將進一步說明國家的正當性是如何影響運動正當性,而運動正當性是如何影響個別行為的正當門檻。此外本論文也將針對政治抵抗中的暴力進行細緻區分,說明什麼樣的暴力類型在特定處境中可能具有正當性,以及判斷個別暴力行為是否正當的判準有哪些。最後我將導出政治抵抗中的「升級」與「防衛」這兩種暴力在某些情況下可能會具有正當性之結論。
zh_TW
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 導論 1
第二章 公民不服從文獻之回顧及批評 9
第一節 政治抵抗理論的變與不變 9
第二節 公民不服從理論回顧:柏拉圖與梭羅 11
一、柏拉圖〈克里同〉篇:不義法律與守法義務 11
二、梭羅〈反抗公民政府〉 13
第三節 羅爾斯理論及其侷限 14
一、羅爾斯的《正義論》 15
二、羅爾斯式公民不服從定義 16
三、羅爾斯式公民不服從證成條件 20
四、羅爾斯式公民不服從的問題 21
五、今日如何看待羅爾斯的公民不服從理論 30
第四節 德沃金與拉茲的理論 31
一、拉茲的公民不服從客觀論 32
二、主觀論與客觀論的挑戰 33
三、德沃金的主觀論理論 34
四、主客觀論與運動正當性 37
第三章 非文明不服從 40
第一節 什麼是非文明不服從? 41
一、特徵與定義 42
二、約束條件 45
第二節 證成非文明不服從 49
一、對非文明不服從的質疑 51
二、從公平原則證成抵抗義務 53
三、非文明不服從作為一正當抵抗類型之證成 63
第三節 非文明不服從的定位與問題 73
第四章 政治抵抗中的暴力與自我防衛 75
第一節 政治抵抗中的暴力:定義與分類 77
一、暴力的定義 77
二、運動層次的暴力分類 79
三、個別行為層次的暴力行為分類 85
第二節 支持非暴力原則的理由 90
一、暴力會破壞社會穩定與公民友誼 91
二、暴力本質說 92
三、暴力手段成本較高 93
四、暴力無用論 94
五、小結 98
第三節 政府、運動、個別行為的正當性 99
一、政府正當性與運動正當性 100
二、約束非武裝暴力的原則 104
三、實際案例 107
第四節 面對警察行使的不義,我們能自我防衛嗎 111
一、特殊豁免命題與道德平等命題 112
二、支持特殊豁免命題的理由(一):政府威權性 113
三、支持特殊豁免命題的理由(二):不預設政府權威性的論證 114
第五節 政治抵抗運動中的自我防衛的可能 119
結論 123
參考資料 126
zh_TW
dc.format.extent 3972178 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107154008en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 暴力zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 非暴力zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 非文明不服從zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 公民不服從zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 政治抵抗zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 羅爾斯zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Violenceen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Non-violenceen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Uncivil disobedienceen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Civil disobedienceen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Political resistanceen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) John Rawlsen_US
dc.title (題名) 公民不服從之外:論暴力政治抵抗的正當性zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Beyond Civil Disobedience: On the Legitimacy of Violent Political Resistanceen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 【中文】
李雪莉、楊智強、陳怡靜、余志偉、陳朗熹、劉貳龍,2020,《烈火黑 潮:城市戰地裡的香港人》,新北市:左岸文化。
彼得‧艾克曼、傑克‧杜瓦,2013,《非暴力抗爭――一種更強大的力量》,台北市:究竟出版社。
徐學庸,2020,〈蘇格拉底與守法:柏拉圖《克里同》論證結構〉,《國立政治大學哲學學報》第 43 期,頁 1-34。
曼威.柯司特,2020,《憤怒與希望:網際網絡時代的社會運動》,廖珮杏、劉維人譯,台北市:南方家園文化。
陳宜中,2007,〈公民不服從與自由民主:倒扁紅潮下的一些省思〉,《思想》第 4 期,頁 41-61。
傅恆德,2014,〈民主化的社會經濟研究:公民抗爭運動的跨國實證研究〉,《國家發展研究》第 14 卷第 1 期,頁 1-32
廖元豪,2014,〈公民不服從?還是民主法治倒退嚕?〉,《思想》第 27 期,頁 149-159。
端傳媒,2020,《2019 香港風暴—《端傳媒》反修例運動報導精選》,台北市:春山出版。
謝世民,2014,〈公民不服從德沃金的觀點〉,《以平等為本的自由主義:德沃金法政哲學研究》,台北市:開學文化。
【英文】
Brennan, J. 2019. When All Else Fails. NJ: Princeton University Press.
Chenoweth, E. and Stephan, M. 2011. Why Civil Resistance Works? The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict. New York City: Columbia university press. (E-Book.)
Chenoweth, E. and Stephan, M. 2012. Why Civil Resistance Works? The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict. New York City: Columbia university press. (Paperback.)
Cobb Jr., C. E. 2014 This Nonviolent Stuff’ll Get You Killed: How Guns Made the Civil Rights Movement Possible. New York: Basic Books.
Cohen, C. 1971 Civil Disobedience: Conscience, Tactics, and the Law. New York and London:Columbia University Press.
Delmas, C. 2016. Civil Disobedience. Philosophy Compass, 11(11):681-691.
Delmas, C. 2018. A Duty to Resist. New York: Oxford University Press.
Dworkin, R. 1985. A Matter of Principle. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Geras, N. 1989. Our Morals: The Ethics of Revolution. The Socialist Register,
25: 185–211.
Harcourt, B. 2012. The Politics of Incivility. Arizona Law Review, 54(2):345-373.
Honderich, T. 1976. Three Essays on Political Violence. Oxford: Basil Blackwell
Hume, D. 1985 [1752]. Of the Original Contract. In Essays: Moral Political, and Literary, Vol. 1. Ed. by E. F. Miller. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Classics
Hurd, H. 2001. Is It Wrong to Do Right When Others Do Wrong? A Critique of American Tort Law. Legal Theory, 7:307-40.
Kadivar, M.A. and Ketchley, N. 2018. Sticks, Stones, and Molotov Cocktails: Unarmed Collective Violence and Democratization. Socius, 4: 1-15.
Kirkpatrick, J. 2020. Book Reviews. In Political Theory, 48(4):528-542.
Lai, T.-H. 2019. Justifying Uncivil Disobedience. In Oxford Studies in Political Philosophy vol 5. Ed. by Sobel, D., Vallentyne, P. and Wall, S. Oxford University Press.
Lai, T.-H. 2020(2019). Uncivil Disobedience: Beyond the Orthodox View of Resistance and Counter-Resistance (Unpublished Doctoral Degree thesis). Australian National University, Australia.
Locke, J. 1980 [1690]. Second Treatise of Government. Ed. by Macpherson, C. B. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
Merleau-Ponty, M. 1969 Humanism and Terror. Trans. By O`Neill, J. Boston: Beacon Press
Pasternak, A. 2014. Voluntary Benefits from Wrongdoing. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 31(4):377-391.
Pasternak, A. 2018. Political Rioting: A Moral Assessment. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 46:384-418.
Plato. 1991. Crito. In Civil Disobedience in focus. Ed. By Bedau, H.A. New York: Routledge.
Pogge, T. 2007. John Rawls: His Life and Theory of Justice. Trans. By Kosch M. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rawls, J. 1999. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Raz, J. 1979. The Authority of law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Raz, J. 1986. The Morality of Freedom. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Sarkees, M. R. and Wayman, F. W. 2010. Resort to War: A Data Guide to Inter-state, Extra-state, Intra-state, and Non-state Wars, 1816–2007. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
Scheuerman, W. E. 2018 Civil Disobedience. Cambridge and Medford, MA: Polity Press.
Sebastian, S. 2015. Don’t Criticize Black Lives Matter for Provoking Violence. The Civil Rights Movement Did, Too. In Washington Post, October 1.
Thoreau, H. D. 1991. Civil Disobedience. In Civil Disobedience in focus. Ed. By Bedau, H.A. New York: Routledge.
Umaja, A. O. 2013. We Will Shoot Back: Armed Resistance in the Mississippi Freedom Movement. Manhattan: NYU Press.
Vanderheiden, S. 2005. Eco-terrorism or justified resistance? Radical environmentalism and the “War on Terror.” In Politics & Society, 33(3):425–47.
Walby, S., Towers, J., Balderston, S., Corradi, C., Francis, B., Heiskanen, M., Helweg-Larsen, K., Mergaert, L., Olive, P., Palmer, E., Stöckl, H. and Strid, S. 2017. The Concept and Measurement of Violence Against Women and Men. Bristol: Policy Press.
Walzer, M. 1967. The Obligation to Disobey. Ethics, 77(3): 163-175.
Wellman, C. H. 2005. Samaritanism and the duty to obey the law. In Is There a Duty to Obey the Law? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yen, A. 2015. On Civil Resistance and the Rule of Law. Asian Legal Philosophy, 2(1): 5-22.
Zinn, H.1997. The Zinn Reader: Writings on Disobedience and Democracy. New York: Seven Stories Press.
【網路資源】
BBC 中文網,2019,香港反逃犯條例抗議: 示威者破壞立法會背後的考量。檢自:https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/chinese-news-48842838 (Nov. 5, 2021)
BBC 緬甸語組和Grace Tsoi,2021,緬甸政變:流血死去的那些年輕人。檢自:https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/world-56737466 (Nov. 5, 2021)
Beech, H. 2020,黃還是藍?香港商家的分歧與撕裂。檢自:https://cn.nytimes.com/china/20200121/hong-kong-protests-yellow-blue/zh-hant/ (Nov. 5, 2021)
Dwokin, R. 1968, On not prosecuting civil disobedience. 檢自:https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1968/06/06/on-not-prosecuting-civil-disobedience/ (Jan. 8, 2022)
ETtoday 新聞雲社會中心,2014,反服貿衝政院驅離 174 人受傷 員警占 119 人。檢自:https://www.ettoday.net/news/20140324/338538.htm (Nov. 5, 2021)
Jenkins, J.C., Taylor, C.L., Abbott, M., Maher T.V., and Peterson, L. 2012. The World Handbook of Political Indicators IV. Columbus, OH: Mershon Center for International Security Studies, The Ohio State University. 檢自: https://sociology.osu.edu/worldhandbook (Nov. 5, 2021)
Smith, S. 2019, Book Review: A Duty to Resist: When Disobedience Should Be Uncivil by Candice Delmas. 檢自:https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/2019/04/12/book-review-a-duty-to-resist-when-disobedience-should-be-uncivil-by-candice-delmas/#comments (Jan. 8, 2022)
UNODC. 2015, International Classification of Crime for Statistical Purposes, Version 1.0. 檢自:https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/statistics/iccs.html (Nov. 5, 2021)
丘琦欣,2015,反服貿運動期間的警察暴力。檢自: https://newbloommag.net/2015/04/11/police-violence-sunflower-tw/ (Nov. 5, 2021)
羊正鈺,2018,【判決全文】反服貿運動佔領立院二審再判無罪,因「屬最後必要手段」。檢自:https://www.thenewslens.com/article/91460 (Nov. 5, 2021)
李翰暘,2019,十六萬人添馬公園撐警集會。檢自: https://www.yzzk.com/article/details/%E5%B0%81%E9%9D%A2%E5%B0%88%E9%A1%8C/2019-27/1562210659376/%E5%8D%81%E5%85%AD%E8%90%AC%E4%BA%BA%E6%B7%BB%E9%A6%AC%E5%85%AC%E5%9C%92%E6%92%90%E8%AD%A6%E9%9B%86%E6%9C%83/%E5%90%8D%E5%AE%B6%E5%8D%9A%E5%AE%A2/%E6%9D%8E%E7%BF%B0%E6%9A%98 (Jan. 8, 2022)
林祖偉,2019,香港抗議者的「裝修」和人人自危的「親中」企業。檢自:https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/chinese-news-50010488 (Nov. 5, 2021)
高梓根,2019,港人佔立法會貼字條「切勿破壞文物」 怎麼會是暴徒?檢自:https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/ch/news/3736446 (Nov. 5, 2021)
陳凱文,2021,陳凱文:戴耀廷混淆視聽。檢自:https://www.thinkhk.com/article/2021-01/12/46301.html (Nov. 5, 2021)
臺灣士林地方法院 104 年度 易 字第 628 號判決。檢自:https://law.judicial.gov.tw/FJUD/data.aspx?ty=JD&id=SLDM,104%2c%e6%98%93%2c628%2c20160516%2c2 (Nov. 5, 2021)
臺灣高等法院 105 年度上 易 字第 1232 號刑事判決。檢自:https://law.judicial.gov.tw/FJUD/data.aspx?ty=JD&id=TPHM,105%2c%e4%b8%8a%e6%98%93%2c1232%2c20160906%2c1 (Nov. 5, 2021)
聯合新聞網 轉角國際,2019,鏡頭背後/二號橋行動:港警進攻中大抓捕抗爭學生。檢自:https://global.udn.com/global_vision/story/8662/4160448 (Nov. 5, 2021)
蘋果新聞網,2019,港示威者遊行「裝修」中資商店 旺角小米招牌被大火燒光。檢自:https://tw.appledaily.com/international/20191020/TOEWSUTNVHMXRDMOAAQ3AWC7FU/ (Nov. 5, 2021)
zh_TW
dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU202200243en_US