論文使用權限 Thesis access permission:校內外都一年後公開 withheld
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus: 已公開 available
校外 Off-campus: 已公開 available
論文名稱 Title |
論Michael Otsuka的左派放任自由主義分配正義觀 On Michael Otsuka's Left Libertarian Theory of Distributive Justice |
||
系所名稱 Department |
|||
畢業學年期 Year, semester |
語文別 Language |
||
學位類別 Degree |
頁數 Number of pages |
105 |
|
研究生 Author |
|||
指導教授 Advisor |
|||
召集委員 Convenor |
|||
口試委員 Advisory Committee |
|||
口試日期 Date of Exam |
2009-04-24 |
繳交日期 Date of Submission |
2009-05-19 |
關鍵字 Keywords |
自由平等主義、左派放任自由主義、分配正義、平等、自我所有權 distributive justice, self-ownership, equality, liberal egalitarianism, left-libertarianism |
||
統計 Statistics |
本論文已被瀏覽 5807 次,被下載 1612 次 The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 5807 times, has been downloaded 1612 times. |
中文摘要 |
本文的目的在於闡明左派放任自由主義的新近理論,即Michael Otsuka的分配正義觀。Otsuka的理論旨在論證有一種平等主義分配原則,可以與個人的自我所有權調和,他以此反駁長久以來許多學者所認為的,自我所有權與平等必然衝突之見。筆者分別就Otsuka對自我所有權的看法、世界資源的平等主義所有權之建構、以及自願結合的政治社會框架之構想進行討論,說明其理論中可取的觀點,並質疑其中的不合理之處。 |
Abstract |
In this article, I want to explain Michael Otsuka’s idea of distributive justice, the latest theory of the left-libertarianism. Otsuka argued that self-ownership can be combined with a kind of egalitarian ownership principle and he critics that the conflict between self-ownership and equality is an illusion. I will examine Otsuka’s theory about self-ownership, egalitarian proviso and the framework of political societies of voluntarism. And I will point out what is the wrong and right in his theory. |
目次 Table of Contents |
第一章 導論 第一節 研究動機與範圍 1 第二節 文獻回顧 14 第三節 章節安排 17 第二章 Otsuka論自我所有權 第一節 對完全的自我所有權之批評 21 第二節 自我所有權與徵稅 25 第三節 自我所有權與原初權利 27 第四節 自我所有權的明確性 31 第五節 小結 42 第三章 調和自我所有權與平等 第一節 從Locke 的但書到Otsuka的平等主義但書 43 第二節 調和自我所有權與平等的工作 49 第三節 跨世代的財產遺贈與繼承問題 55 第四節 Otsuka的調和工作之融貫問題 59 第五節 小結 71 第四章 自願結合的政治社會 第一節 正當的政治權威與政治社會 73 第二節 政治自願主義 75 第三節 孤領地的代價及賠償問題 79 第四節 多元選擇的諸政治社會之理想 81 第五節 非自願主義的跨政治統治體 84 第六節 對自願結合的政治社會架構之批評 84 結論 92 參考文獻 96 |
參考文獻 References |
Arneson, Richard 2000 “Lockean Self-Ownership: Towards a Demolition.” In Hillel Steiner and Peter Vallentyne (eds.) Left-Libertarianism and its Critics: The Contemporary Debate. New York: Palgrave. Brody, Baruch 2000 “Redistribution without Egalitarianism.” In Hillel Steiner and Peter Vallentyne (eds.) Left-Libertarianism and its Critics: The Contemporary Debate. New York: Palgrave. Cater, Ian 2004 “Libertarianism without Equality.” <http://ndpr.nd.edu/review.cfm?id=1418> Accessed 9 January 2009. Christman, John 2000 “Self-Ownership, Equality, and the Structure of Property Rights.” In Hillel Steiner and Peter Vallentyne (eds.) Left-Libertarianism and its Critics: The Contemporary Debate. New York: Palgrave. Cohen, G.A. 1995 Self-Ownership, Freedom, and Equality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dworkin, Ronald 1983 “Rights as Trumps.” in Jeremy Waldron (ed.) Theories of Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fabre, Cécile 2002 “Justice, Fairness, and World Ownership.” Law and Philosophy 21 :249-273. Feser, Edward 2004 On Nozick. Toronto: Wadsworth. Fried, Barbara H. 2004 “Left-Libertarianism: A Review Essay.” Philosophy & Public Affairs 32: 66-92. 2005 “Left-Libertarianism, Once More: A Rejoinder to Vallentyne, Steiner, and Otsuka.” Philosophy & Public Affairs 33: 216-222. Gibbard, Allan 2000 “Natural Property Rights.” In Hillel Steiner and Peter Vallentyne (eds.) Left-Libertarianism and its Critics: The Contemporary Debate. New York: Palgrave. Grosseries, Axel P. 2004 “Book Review.” Ethics 115: 158-160. Inoue, Akira 2007 “Can a Right of Self-Ownership be Robust?” Law and Philosophy 26 : 575-587. Locke, John 1988 Two Treatises of Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Nozick, Robert 1974 Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New York: Basic Books. Otsuka, Michael 2003 Libertarianism without Inequality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2005 “Equality, Ambition and Insurance.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society supplementary 78: 151-66. Risse, Mathias 2004 “Does Left-libertarian have Coherent Foundation?” Politics, Philosophy & Economics 3: 337-364. Steiner, Hillel 1994 An Essay on Rights. Oxford: Blackwell. 2000 “Original Rights and Just Redistribution.” In Hillel Steiner and Peter Vallentyne (eds.) Left-Libertarianism and its Critics: The Contemporary Debate. New York: Palgrave. Vallentyne, Peter, and Steiner, Hillel (eds.) 2000 Left-Libertarianism and its Critics: The Contemporary Debate. New York: Palgrave. Vallentyne, Peter, Steiner, Hillel, and Otsuka, Michael 2005 “Why Left-Libertarianism is not Incoherent, Indeterminate, or Irrelevant: A Reply to Fried.” Philosophy & Public Affairs 33: 201-215. |
電子全文 Fulltext |
本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。 論文使用權限 Thesis access permission:校內外都一年後公開 withheld 開放時間 Available: 校內 Campus: 已公開 available 校外 Off-campus: 已公開 available |
紙本論文 Printed copies |
紙本論文的公開資訊在102學年度以後相對較為完整。如果需要查詢101學年度以前的紙本論文公開資訊,請聯繫圖資處紙本論文服務櫃台。如有不便之處敬請見諒。 開放時間 available 已公開 available |
QR Code |