正义的自然责任与政治义务:从罗尔斯到沃尔德伦  

The Natural Duty of Justice and Political Obligation:From Rawls to Waldron

作　　者：毛兴贵[1] 

机构地区：[1]西南大学哲学系

出　　处：《南京社会科学》2016年第1期47-52,共6页Nanjing Journal of Social Sciences

基　　金：国家社科基金项目"当代西方政治哲学中的自由理论跟踪研究"(13BZZ011)的阶段性成果

摘　　要：根据罗尔斯的自然责任理论,公民的政治义务建立在正义的自然责任基础之上。罗尔斯的理论面临着无法解释政治义务的特殊性以及如何用一种非完善责任来解释政治义务等问题。沃尔德伦试图通过区分局内人与局外人并明确界定何为制度之运用于我们,但他不仅未能使罗尔斯的理论摆脱困境,而且引起了更多的问题。正义的自然责任可以用来证明公民并不负有政治义务。According to Rawls＇ theory of the natural duty of justice,political obligation of citizen is based on the natural duty of justice. Rawls＇ theory encounters many difficulties. For example,it cannot explain the specialness of political obligation,and the duty of justice as an imperfect duty cannot be used to explain political obligation,and so on. Waldron tries to defend Rawls by making a distinction between insider and outsider and defining ＂application＂. However,Waldron＇s defense cannot help Rawls out of his predicament. Moreover,Waldron＇s theory encounters many new challenges. In conclusion,the natural duty of justice can be appealed to show that citizen has no political obligation.

关 键 词：正义的自然责任 政治义务 罗尔斯 沃尔德伦 

分 类 号：D09[政治法律—政治学]