自愿为奴悖论分析与反驳  

Analysis and Refutation of the Paradox of Voluntary Slavery

作　　者：兰利新 LANLi-xin(School of Political Science and Public Management,China University of Political Science and Law,Beijing 100088,China)

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学政治与公共管理学院,北京100088

出　　处：《自然辩证法研究》2022年第11期37-43,108,共8页Studies in Dialectics of Nature

摘　　要：以“每个人都是自身所有者”为理论前提,“自愿为奴”是完全自我所有权在形式逻辑上的一个悖论,对于这个悖论,自由主义和自由至上主义持两种相互冲突的立场。通过对这一问题的重新审视,提出以下三个针对性的反驳意见:第一,对完全的自我所有权的拒绝,并不意味着一个人成为另一个人的部分奴隶。第二,当交换步骤是自愿完成的或不存在强制时,并不能构成正义的充分条件。第三,在自由契约原则下,自愿为奴唯一的可能就是自由雇佣制,而自由雇佣制是实现帕累托最优的制度性前提。因此,自愿为奴并不构成一个悖论,相反,是一个伪问题。Taking “every man has a property in his own person” as the theoretical premise, “voluntary slavery” is a paradox of full self-ownership in formal logic. For this paradox, liberalism and Libertarianism hold two conflicting positions. Through re-examination of this issue, the following three targeted refutations are put forward: First, the rejection of full self-ownership does not mean that one person becomes a partial slave of another person. Second, when the exchange step is completed voluntarily or there is no coercion, it does not constitute a sufficient condition for justice. Third, under the principle of free contract, the only possibility of voluntary slavery is the free employment system, and the free employment system is the institutional prerequisite for achieving Pareto optimality. Therefore, voluntary slavery does not constitute a paradox, on the contrary, it is a false problem.

关 键 词：自愿为奴 自我所有权 自由 契约 

分 类 号：N031[自然科学总论—科学技术哲学]