权利的能力理论证成及其补强  

The Capability Approach and its Supplementation in the Justification of Rights

作　　者：朱俊[1] ZHU Jun(School of Law,Chongqing University)

机构地区：[1]重庆大学法学院

出　　处：《人权法学》2024年第2期44-58,153,154,共17页Journal of Human Rights Law

基　　金：国家社科基金西部项目“中国共产党法治道路百年探索的基本经验研究”(21XDJ003)。

摘　　要：应有权利的证成依赖于对特定规范性依据或理由的支持。现有研究中,权利的证成性资源主要集中于道义论或结果论。无论是道义论还是结果论,在证成权利方面均存在不足,能力理论可以部分地填补这种不足。能力理论主张,从利他主义的普通人角度出发,国家为保障个体尊严,应当在最低限度以上去培育和发展个体的核心能力,使其在过上体面生活的意义上成为一个人。能力理论在汲取道义论与结果论理论优势的基础上,补强了权利的证成性资源,进而为权利研究特别是新兴(型)权利的研究奠定更为坚实的理论基础。The justification of rights relies on the support of particular normative grounds or reasons.Both deontological and consequentialist theories are insufficient in the justification of rights,and the capability approach can partially fill this gap.Firstly,the capability approach holds that the substantive freedom or viable capabilities of human beings are related to both natural endowments and a country’s political,economic,cultural,social and other environments.They emphasize both the human choice of substantive freedom and the space reserved for the choice of opportunities or the exercise of freedom;they not only stress that a decent political order must be guaranteed to all citizens and must be maintained above a minimum level,but also stress the non-absoluteness of freedom and choice.Secondly,the deontology model is represented by Rawls’theory of justice,a simplified version of which is that the more resources a State has,the better it will do,as long as it distributes them as equally as possible among all its citizens.However,this model does not explain and address differences in the ability of populations to translate resources into operational capacity,nor does it take into account the problems of stigmatization and discrimination as the theory,based on the notion of mutual benefit,presupposes normal and rational people and turns a blind eye to other social bonds such as altruism.Consequentialism,on the other hand,is typified by utilitarianism and emphasizes the observation of the overall or average utility of the quality of life in the State,which is problematic in at least four ways,namely,in its methodological failure to oppose the imposition of misery on the disadvantaged few,in its disregard of the diversity and incommensurability of the lifeworld while recognizing the oneness and commensurability of the status of fulfillment,in its ignoring the fact that human preferences are shaped by the society and the problem of discrimination,and even,in its ignoring of the possibility of the illusion of fulfi

关 键 词：能力理论 权利 证成 道义论 结果论 

分 类 号：D90[政治法律—法学理论]