疫情下的生命政治与公共健康伦理学  

Biopolitics and Public Health Ethics under Pandemic

作　　者：朱彦明[1] ZHU Yanming(School of Philosophy and Social Development,Huaqiao University,Xiamen 341021,China)

机构地区：[1]华侨大学哲学与社会发展学院,福建厦门341021

出　　处：《中国医学伦理学》2023年第4期369-376,共8页Chinese Medical Ethics

基　　金：国家社会科学基金一般项目“新生殖技术应用的伦理问题研究”(22BZX091)。

摘　　要：福柯在《性经验史》中描绘了西方现代出现的两极生命权力形式,即针对个人身体的规训权力和针对人口的“生命政治”,并将之用于分析十七世纪欧洲出现的瘟疫。将福柯生命权力与集权主义关联起来,阿甘本创造了一个新的生命政治版本,并将之用于理解意大利出现的疫情,指出它是国家主权在“例外状态”下操纵个体生命,制造“赤裸生命”。面对疫情,阿甘本的生命政治显然无法解释公共健康干预的合理性,而福柯虽然在某种程度上避免了这个问题,但他的自由主义框架下的生命政治,还是可能导致对疫病患者和动物他者的暴力。鉴于生命政治在理解疫情上的限度,把视角转向公共健康伦理学,尝试在共同善的基础上思考个人利益和集体利益之间的协调。In The history of Sexuality,Foucault described the bipolar form of biopower that appeared in modern West:the disciplining power for the individual body and the biopolitics targeted the population,and used it to analyze the pandemic that appeared in Europe in the 17th century.By associating Foucault s biopower with authoritarianism,Agamben created a new version of biopolitics,used it to understand the COVID-19 in Italy,and pointed out that it was the state sovereignty manipulating individual life under exceptional conditions to create naked life.Facing the pandemic,Agamben s biopolitics obviously cannot explain the rationality of public health interventions.Foucault avoided this problem to some extent,while his liberal biopolitics under the framework of liberalism may still lead to violence against pandemic victim and animal.In view of the limitations of biopolitics in understanding the pandemic,this paper turned the perspective to public health ethics,and tried to think about the coordination between individual and collective interests on the basis of the common good.

关 键 词：疫情 生命政治 生命伦理学 自由 

分 类 号：R-052[医药卫生]