【作者】 亓光；

【导师】 杨海蛟；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 政治学理论， 2012， 博士

【摘要】 公正作为重大的理论与实践问题，历来备受社会科学诸领域关注，古今中外相关的研究成果可谓汗牛充栋。但也随之带来了对公正概念的“理解问题”。本文之所以选择对公正概念的理解问题作为研究主题，主要出于三个方面的考虑。其一，拟为当代中国的战略发展目标提供理论支持和理论服务。众所周知，随着改革开放和社会主义现代化建设事业的不断推进，特别是经济社会的飞速发展，中国社会已经进入改革发展的关键期。随着经济体制的变革、社会结构的变动、利益格局的调整、思想观念的变化，社会各阶层间的利益冲突和区域发展的不协调等问题不断显现，城乡居民收入差距逐渐拉大，产业之间、代际之间、中央与地方之间的关系也出现了不同程度的不和谐状态。由上述问题引发了很多公正问题，这就需要从政治哲学的高度进一步研究公正。其二，针对国内理论界对公正的理解存在的问题，试图在认真考察政治哲学研究中既有的理解路径、解释方法与概念界定的基础上，运用政治诠释学的理论和方法，从总体上全方位地审视公正概念的理解问题，并对此进行逻辑的、谱系化和诠释性分析，拓展政治哲学在概念研究问题上的思路，从而为公正理论以及政治哲学的创新与发展贡献绵薄之力。其三，针对国内理论界对公正概念的解释较为任意和泛化的情况，力争在审慎考察公正概念的历史理解的基础上，在政治诠释学的视域中对公正的框架性、多维性、解释性特征进行分析，力图较为清晰地阐释“作为解释性框架概念的公正”，并以此为基础，辨析公正与其他主要相关范畴的关系，以便为说明和考量公正提供理论指导。论文主要运用规范研究的方法，对诠释学的基本内容、政治诠释学的理论谱系、政治诠释学与理解公正的逻辑关系、政治诠释学视域下的公正概念的历史理解、公正具有的概念结构与内涵、在政治概念体系中的地位、理解公正过程中的解释冲突等一些基本理论问题提出自己的一孔之见。第一，旨在较为系统地介绍诠释学和政治诠释学。论文认为诠释学不但是关于理解的哲学理论，而且是政治诠释学的基础，由此决定了政治诠释学的本质属性、理论视野、认识结构、基本方法和具体内容。在此基础上，阐释了政治诠释学的义界和特征，与此同时，阐明政治诠释学的本质，通过与哲学诠释学、解释的政治学、法学诠释学、“诠释学的伦理学”等相关理论的比较，揭示其特性。认为只有科学地认识政治诠释学，才能正确地理解政治诠释学作为一种理论视域的重要性。与此同时，为了说明政治诠释学是一种具体化的理论视域，论文从政治诠释学的根本任务、核心范畴、基本方法和认识结构等四个角度论述了其主要内容，为探究其与研究公正的理解问题之间的关联性提供知识谱系学的准备。第二，试图论述政治诠释学与理解公正之间的关系。在当代，人们对于公正的理解和解释丰富多彩、千变万化，形成了许多研究成果，在知识论层面，这些解释在思维方式上主要体现为两种主要路径，即建构论和行动论。本文通过对建构论和行动论的意指、特征与主要结论的总结，分析了其局限性。并通过对两种理论路径、相互批判以及整体的反思，指出政治诠释学有助于更好理解公正。并通过总结和阐述政治诠释学在理解公正过程中的理论优势和可能需要克服的缺陷，进一步说明在理解公正的过程中政治诠释学在历史理解、概念解释和承认话语等方面的作用。第三，运用政治诠释学考察和分析公正概念的在历史上的诸种理解。在归纳和检视公正的历史理解的三种现有模式的基础上，论述政治诠释学在分析公正的历史理解时的优势，认为公正的概念史可以从词义史、转义史和构义史等三个阶段展开，由此表现和证明公正如何在不同的时代背景、社会条件和解释者那里得到解释，并逐渐形成一个系统的分析框架。第四，发挥政治诠释学的解释功能和反思功能，借助政治诠释学的基本原理和核心范畴，指出解释性分析框架内的公正在政治世界中存在三维映像，并在当代政治生活和政治实践中的具有特殊的功能和作用。论文对公正与近似相似范畴进行比较，揭示公正作为基本政治概念的重要性。在此基础上，揭示公正的解释冲突的实质，说明在政治诠释学的视域中公正的解释冲突有可能实现“承认的理解”。应该指出的是，本文旨在提供一种更为开放的理论视野，试图唤醒人们审慎地对待并反思政治哲学中任何“公理性的思维”，倡导人们运用“逻辑空间的测绘法”的政治哲学新理念。事实上从政治诠释学角度分析公正的理解问题，仅仅是这一新理念的一种尝试。面向未来，此种政治哲学的理念和路径能够被更加自然和简洁地描述出来，并以其作为考量其他政治概念的途径和方法，在某种意义上，这或许是论文的“宏大理想”。当然，理解公正涉及的内容十分丰富，相关研究方兴未艾，本文只选择几个基本问题加以研究，并带有很大探索性，特别是在论述“对公正的理解问题”、构建政治诠释学的理论框架、分析作为解释性框架公正的过程中，牵涉大量的哲学知识、政治哲学知识和其他相关学科的知识，囿于个人能力和论文的篇幅，本文仅是管中窥豹、抛砖引玉而已。上述的问题的解决需要更多学者的共同努力。更多还原

【Abstract】 As a major theoretical and practical issue, the question of justice has taken centralstage in the field of social sciences, especially in politics, ethics, economics, law andsociology. Moreover, there are cartloads and housefuls of books about the concept ofJustice as yet. There are three reasons for my choice.First of all, I intend to provide support and service for the Chinese developmentstrategy with theories. With the further advancement of the Reforming and opening inChina, especially with rapid progress of economics and society, China has entered acritical period of reform and development. Contemporary China is undergoing extensiveand profound changes, and the society is going through a wide-range profoundtransformation. In keeping up with changes in domestic situations and in light of theexpectation of the people, it becomes necessary for us to take fairness and impartialityseriously so as to safeguard justice better. In order to meet the call of the time and thedemand of practice, these problems will have to be considered-how to understand justiceand to make it systematical and comprehensive with political philosophy.Secondly, I hope to contribute my humble effort to developing and creating thejustice theory and political hermeneutics. Within my scope of survey, research on the topicof understanding of justice is still lacking. I hope to try my best to promote this academictheorem, by constructing the theoretical system of political hermeneutics, promoting thehorizon of political hermeneutics, and by analyzing justice which is a core andcontroversial political concept. Over and above these specific contributions, myinterpretation intends to support the idea of“Re-examining the problem of understandingthe concept of justice”in relation to contested political concepts. Furthermore, I argue thatthe political hermeneutics is a new theoretical thinking for both justice theory and politicalphilosophy. Moreover, Chinese justice theory consists of a pragmatic vision of justice, specifiedby two features not making a distinction between many political items, and combiningseveral political values in a single political concept. In response, I argue that we can andshould detach other items from the concept of justice. To survey and research on theunderstanding of justice, I adopt the frame of hermeneutics and link the twotheories-hermeneutics and micro-political philosophy-together, to explore a new approachwhich I called“political hermeneutics”(PH). Given these presumptions, I view and pointout the three initially plausible demissions of justice in“political world”, and seek toreconstruct and reconstrue the conceptual characters of frame, multi-dimensions andinterpretive. I also do this, first, by interpreting“the concept as an interpretive framework”,to seek to reconfigure justice along other four key political concepts, and secondly, byshowing the hermeneutic applied functions, to expand our ideas on contesting politicalconcepts.With the approach of the normative study, I have analysis following specific topics inthis thesis: theoretical genealogy of political hermeneutics, the logic relevance of PH andunderstanding of the concept of justice, the history of understanding on the concept ofjustice in the PH horizon, and the concept structure and conception of justice as aninterpretive framework concept, which occupies core position of political value system,and by which we can reflect on our political practice, etc.I start by returning to the theoretical frame of hermeneutics. It evidently raises onepuzzle: what is hermeneutics? Where does that leave the contemporary politicalphilosophy? I start with the philosophical hermeneutic idea that the definition ofunderstanding is not necessarily plausible. This suggests that we must take theunderstanding problem or“Hermeneutic Paradox”seriously. My main argument is goingto be that what are the conceptions of hermeneutics is a philosophical problem. And then,for understanding hermeneutics, I think it bound to depend on grasping its essentialattribute, theoretical perspective, basic approach and primary contents. Consequently, theargument proceeds in three stages: First, I analyze the conceptions of hermeneutics and itshistory. Second, I put out the categorization of modern hermeneutics. Finally, I try toanswer some frequently asked questions about hermeneutics to widen our field of visionon“understanding things and interpreting problems”, focusing on some of normative aspects of hermeneutics, political philosophy and political conceptual theory.What, then, is the political hermeneutics? Is it distinctive from the other theories andapproaches of political philosophy? By analyzing the philosophical conceptions ofpolitical hermeneutics, I point out that PH is a fundamental requirement of theneo-thinking in the political philosophy. Then, more particularly, I compared it withphilosophical hermeneutics, interpretive politics, legal hermeneutics, and ethics ofhermeneutics. And I give another analogy with hermeneutics itself which will help us tograsp the uniqueness of PH in the genealogy of hermeneutics. At the end of this part, Iperform the political hermeneutic horizon we engage to understand and interpret fourprimary essentials, including basic tasks of PH, its central category, basic approaches andcognitive structure.This is one task that I propose to take up in this thesis. In the course of it, I want todevelop a logical relationship between PH and the understanding of the concept of justice,I also view two main interpretive approaches, namely constructionism and actionism.Sen’s recent research provides important insights into this subject and gives usefulorientation for anyone who wants to grapple with the questions raised by Sen, Dworkinand Edgar Morin. This thesis analyses the contents of transcendental institutionalism (TI)and realization-focused comparison (RC), each of which contributes to a fullerunderstanding of the PH. By implication, we might conclude that constructionism andactionism, especially like TI and RC, have no longer sufficed for the growing wants ofunderstanding political concepts like justice. They only sketches how to describe andexplain justice in expert’s own special vision, but he does ignore or skirt round all thesensitive questions that the concept of justice is a product of many interpretations andunderstandings this concept might not be equal to epistemic justice and applied it to socialreality. Typically, I argue the understanding of the concept of justice is a problem of PHand it needs PH’s horizon.As I mentioned earlier, the understanding history of the concept of justice is a vitalpart of this thesis. I have not yet suggested how to understand the history of justice. But,as I hope one can see three research directions emerging here: political theory mode,historical-semantic-political philosophy mode, and conceptual history mode, and thesethree modes are not sufficient to opt into the topic of this thesis. To sum up my point here, the idea of PH on the history of understanding the concept of justice would normallyentail three main grounds such as item history, tropic history and Als-conceptual history.This hermeneutic and abstract view gains its apparent plausibility from the kind ofconsiderations we often employ in judging the conceptual history of justice. The broadtrends which this thesis calls required theoretical clarification and articulation, and theyneed to be highlighted, in their view; the history of understanding the concept of justice isan understanding history in deed. Moreover, this history will be the well-grounded forexplaining what is the concept as an interpretive framework and will give a clearindication of why we need re-construe the concept justice as a concept of an interpretiveframework.While this re-construe may seem persuasive, I must also consider the politicalhermeneutic conception of justice outlined still faces a serious challenge. One mightobject to it on the grounds that it leaves some basic important normative aspects ofconceptual study not involved. Indeed, if this thesis is rational, the political hermeneuticconception is flawed. According to the ordinary epistemology, I need conceptualizingjustice. And if I maintain that justice as a concept, an interpretive framework is not aformal concept that may only exist in the PH’s logic; I shall give a further explanation.And the below is, I think, as it should be. To begin with, the idea that justice is a politicalconcept is always used in political world within the hypothesis of this thesis, Iconceptualize justice with three dimensions which is the images of domains of“Gesetzliche Rechte”in which one can more precisely consider his(or her) certain idea ofjustice to the particular social interactive activities. And then, this account may give us aspecific definition more or less, but it still need prove the concept of justice is thecore-concept logically in the multi-valued set of political concepts. So I have comparedjustice with freedom and equality, fairness, especially with just. In the end, I argue that theinterpretive map of the concept of justice illuminates some of the trade-offs we face whenwe try to find a compelling definition of justice. The trilemma of understanding,describing and achieving recognition also sharpens our thinking about the other possibilityinterpretations, insofar as it reminds us of expanding our visions on justice from a special,narrow-minded view to the dialectical, comprehensive understanding.All of these parts above should enhance the utility of the proposed horizon and approach to understand and interpret the concept of justice. Moreover, now, we cananticipate that the payoffs will be as vital for this thesis. In this context, I want to point outthat any definition of justice is only one detail on the map of the understanding justice. So,we can not make reorganization on a specific definition, whether it is comprehensive ornot. But we can make reorganization on the proposition of understanding itself and itsproceeds. And this type of proposal could ask a more large scope of dialogue, and we willbecome aware of that there is the inner unification of justice as a concept of interpretiveframework and reorganization discourse as the applied function of political hermeneutics.Over and above this specific contribution, my broader aim is to illustrate therelevance of the new axiomatic approach for understanding the concept of justice moregenerally, and to support the idea of“cartography of logical space”in relation toconceptualizing and contesting political concepts. The present discussion to map out thehermeneutic horizon of justice provides just one example of what such a cartographicexercise might look like. If readers find this approach natural and elegant, and perhapsworth replicating in the case of other conceptualizing and contesting political concepts, thethesis will have achieved its implicit purpose.It should now be clear what is meant by the claim that what is PH and how it appliesto understanding of the concept of justice. These are the“simplest”explanations insofar asthey are not comprehensive. But that is a story for another day.更多还原