【作者】 刘国栋；

【导师】 刘杰；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 政治学理论， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 卢梭思想宏大而庞杂,但是他的思想存在两个明显的特征。第一是思想的批判性和建构性功能并存,第二是思想的冲突性与和解性并存。个人空间和公共空间的关系或许能够成为卢梭思想研究的一个切入角度。论文第一章“绪论”部分概括了卢梭思想的国内和国外研究现状。学术界虽然没有以卢梭的个人和公共空间为主题的研究成果,但是普遍观察到了个人与社会的关系是卢梭思想的应有之意。卢梭的建构思想以他的人性论为前提,即论文第二章“心理原罪：卢梭批判和建构思想的原点”。人性原本只有两个自然的基本禀赋：自爱和同情。从自然人不会有意为恶这一点来看,人自然上是善的。关于卢梭自然人性善的判断,学术界的分歧不大。但是,大部分研究者没有发现卢梭人性判断的复杂性。他实际上认为,人类只要发生相互交往而进入社会状态,原本无辜的自爱就会异化为自尊。笔者称卢梭加之于社会状态当中的自尊为人性的心理原罪。因此,卢梭也就对人性做了双重的判定。自然善是人性的初级判定,而心理原罪是人性的高级判定。心理原罪是人性和社会罪恶的源头。人性当中的心理原罪因此是卢梭批判和建构思想的原点。卢梭对人性的双重判定决定了他建构思想理路的多样性。他的建构思想就是要在个人和公共空间的不同关系纬度下来治愈人性的心理原罪。论文第三章“波兰：极端公共空间路径”是卢梭所开出的第一张医治药方。他对波兰宪政改革的建议正好落脚于极端公共空间路径之上。个人和社会、政治和道德在这种路径下没有区分。个人的全部情感被转化为伟大的爱国心和公共美德,一个人只能有一种自尊的方式,只能有一种爱的表达方式。政治国家通过社会意见、公共教育和宗教等形式重新规制了个人心中的心理原罪。但是,极端公共空间路径牺牲了个人空间和个人情感的多样性,以及个人道德权利的主体性。虽然有着崇高的德性理由,强大的政治国家也无法满足人性的复杂和多样需求。物极必反,个人公共德性的幸福也可能会演变为生不如死的压力。论文第四章“孤独行走：极端个人空间路径”是卢梭为人们开出的第二张治愈心理原罪的药方。在极端个人空间路径之下,由于他者的缺失,个人心中的心理原罪不再具有发生作用的条件。个人完全处于类似于自然人的无辜自爱的情感逻辑支配之下,远离了情感的自我消耗。个人在该路径下重新回归自然,并且能够获得朴素的信仰。但是,个人在免除心理原罪和虚妄情感的同时,温情的个人生活、积极的公共道德也一并被抹杀了。极端个人空间路径自身也是不完满的,因为它同样无法满足人性的复杂和多样需求。为了在个人和公共空间的关系天平上保持平衡,卢梭必须开出更加全面的药方,即克拉朗式的亲密家庭、乡村社群路径和混合路径,即论文第五、六两章。克拉朗源自于卢梭的小说《新爱洛伊丝》(或称《朱丽》)。因为克拉朗独特的地理和人文风貌,个人的心理原罪既得到了限制,又能发展成为友谊、爱情、亲情等积极的个人德性和有限空间范围内的公共德性。良治社会的混合路径则同时吸收了极端公共空间路径、孤独行走的极端个人空间路径和克拉朗路径的好处,显得更加有效与合理。在良治社会的混合路径之下,卢梭通过公意和公民宗教的形式在个人和公共空间之间找到了最大的和解之道。个人的心理原罪既可以被转化为积极的个人德性,又可以被转化为对共同体崇高的爱。良治社会同时也是一个教育、宗教、政治和社会等各项制度都十分健康的社会形式。论文第七章“总结与反思”全面总结了卢梭的建构思想,并对相关的话题进行了反思性的讨论。如果混合路径还存在什么缺陷的话,那就只能是它的完美化自身所造成的。混合路径仍然存在着或隐或现的各种矛盾。但是,卢梭思想的贡献之处就在于他面对这些矛盾时所采取的态度。他承认个人和公共空间各自的合理性,同时正视它们之间的矛盾,进而努力调和矛盾。两者最终只能是相互定义和相互建构的。当卢梭试图调和个人和公共空间的关系时,他采用了公民宗教的形式。可是,他的公民宗教理论与其说是可供实施的计划,不如说是指导性的原则。卢梭为现代社会提供道德、心理支撑的任务远没完成。更多还原

【Abstract】 Rousseau’s whole system of thought is composed by critique and construction, tensions and reconciliation. Where does Rousseau start when he composed his whole though system? In the introduction chapter this research finds that though there is little straightforward research on Rousseau’s private and public sphere relationship thought, many scholars acknowledged Rousseau’s critique theory and tensions of his construction thought. This research tries to interpret Rousseau’s attitudes facing tensions and his reconciliation on the spectrum of private and public sphere relationship.Rousseau’s construction thought is based upon his judgment of human nature which the second chapter will discuss about. There are only two simple principles or natural laws preceding reason for the savages:amour-de-soi and pity. Human nature is good by nature, because those savages are naturally exempted from evil transgressions. Though almost everything is Rousseau is in debate, scholars made agreement on human nature’s natural goodness of Rousseau. This research however argues that quite many scholars underestimate the complexity of human nature of Rousseau’s theorization. When Rousseau says human nature is naturally good, he merely put it in a quite strict and absolute sense. The vanity of human nature which Rousseau names as amour-propre looms as a phantom in all modes of society. This dissertation names this relative passion of human as human nature’s psychological original sin. Thus it seems like that Rousseau made two judgments about human nature:naturally good and socially amour-propre. Human nature’s spycholigical sin is the start-point of Rousseau’s critique and construction theory. Rousseau’s embarrassing standard of human nature determines the complexity and even tension of his construct thought.The third chapter of this dissertation analyses Rousseau’s extreme public path. Rousseau argues that amour-propre can be redirected solely to the patrie which each individual can only have one singular mode of self-love to express. This dissertation maintains that Rousseau’s constitutional reform plan for Poland resides exactly on this approach. In Poland there is no division between private and public, society and politics. The state manipulates people’s private life through education, social opinions and religion. However Rousseau must be well acknowledged that Poland’s success would be greatly at the cost of human nature’s diversity and moral subjectivity all of which Rousseau values highly so as to influence Kant greatly.Alternatively each individual can lead a life as a recluse, an exemplary life which Rousseau undertook when himself fleeing from European civilization center as a solitary walker at the forest of Montmorency North Paris in1750s or Val-de-Travers around Motiers Switzerland in1760s. On this solitary walker path there is no vanity in human nature because you are all alone there. However you will not feel lonely because of the beauty of nature and the gratitude that you feel from the Almighty God. But when one avoids all sufferings and pains from social life in society, he also spares those blessings and happiness from family members, intimate friends and public virtue, which all make the solitary walker path per se cost highly.(Chapter4)In order to maintain a balance between private and public sphere and to meet the diversity demands of human nature, Rousseau must supply more reasonable solutions which are the Clarens world in his novel Julie and a mixed middle path of a well-ordered society. Because of its geographic isolation character in mountains and its pure simplicity the world of Clarens can keep a balance between restless human natural passions and the intimacy of public sphere. St. Preux, Wolmar, Claire and Julie can live together in the same house. The mixed middle path of a well-ordered society which assimilates all the three above construct paths and avoids their respective dangers seems to be the most harmonious and reasonable solution for Rousseau. In this mixed middle path Rousseau finds private and public sphere can be reconciled by way of the idea of general will and civil religion. Human nature’s psychological original sin is re-directed to intimate friendship, pure love and each individual’s attachment to the fatherland which would be a well-ordered and well-constructed republic.(Chapters5and6)However if there is any danger or drawback of the mixed middle path, it would be its character of perfection. Equilibrium and perfection among parts is especially suspicious because of the latent and remittent tensions each other. Rousseau on the one hand recognizes those tensions among private individual, family member, second corporations and the state. While on the other hand he endeavors to reconcile them in a well-ordered society through institutional projects of general will and civil religion and restrictions of human ferocious passions. This dissertation however argues that his idea of civil religion which can be recognized both from The Social Contract and Emile is rather guiding principles that in no way can to be put into practice. In this sense Rousseau’s task of providing moral and psychological support for modern society is far unfinished.(chapter7)更多还原