【作者】 吴新民；

【导师】 包利民；

【作者基本信息】 浙江大学 ， 外国哲学， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 本文选取柏拉图的惩罚思想为研究对象。柏拉图一直被认为是理想主义的代表,这导致他对惩罚问题的思考长期没有受到学术界应有的重视。实际上,柏拉图基于自己的政治实践和思想直觉,在当时雅典民主制兴起的历史条件下,就惩罚理论提出了一系列后来被思想史所证明具有深远影响的重要命题。他的惩罚思想对于他的伦理政治哲学十分重要,在某种意义上,可以说对柏拉图的哲学在政治教化方面的奥秘的解读离不开对其惩罚学说的分析。本文对柏拉图惩罚理论的研究,是从对惩罚道德进行一种“主体间本位”与“主体本位”的二分取向视角切入的。作者的基本观点是:柏拉图并不是一个职业刑罚学家,他对惩罚问题的思考是他的政治伦理思想的重要组成部分。柏拉图政治伦理的主要任务是在城邦中构建主体间的道德秩序。由于希腊传统维护主体间道德秩序的报应观念有其固有的不足,容易受到以虚无主义为特色的智者运动的攻击,柏拉图改变了道德的教化策略,他主要不是直接用报应和严惩来维护主体间性的道德关系,而是设法把主体间道德内化为主体道德,于是,基本的刑罚理论中,柏拉图反对报应论,提倡改造改造论。一方面,惩罚改造论是一种主体本位的道德论证方式,符合他的主体论道德哲学,另一方面,改造论通过提高改造主体的德性,也能间接促进主体间道德关系的形成。但是,柏拉图的思想并非那么简单。由于报应在保障主体间道德方面有着悠久的传统,在当时公众眼中是一种根深蒂固的直觉,所以柏拉图又或明或暗地在其国家的刑罚体系学说中启用报应主义,从而在其的惩罚思想内部形成了改造与报应之间的一种张力结构。对这一主题的阐述分为五章进行。第一章提出了一个通观全文的模式:惩罚的政治伦理可以分为主体间本位与主体本位两种取向。以赔偿、报应、恢复为目的的惩罚属于以主体间性为道德本位的惩罚观,而以阻遏和改造为目的的惩罚观属于以主体性为道德本位的惩罚观。作者认为,首先从宏观上确定惩罚道德的这两种不同的价值倾向,有助于更好地理解柏拉图惩罚思想中的问题意识和解题策略。第二章的主题是考察柏拉图惩罚思想产生的社会价值背景。作者分别考察了希腊传统的两种价值类型——主体一阶价值与主体间二阶正义道德——与惩罚思想之间的关系。在前一种范式之下,惩罚表现为通过报复来恢复或增强自己的time(地位、荣誉、利益),而后一种道德范式成为主流的价值观之后,惩罚则表现为以报应的形式(包括神的报应)对主体间道德秩序的维护。到了柏拉图所处的时代,智者通过启蒙和还原提高了人的主体性地位,但是,同时他们的“启蒙”解构的说法却对刚刚确立的主体间正义道德关系形成了威胁,容易走向一种道德虚无主义。摆在柏拉图面前的任务是反击智者以重新有力地建构主体间的道德关系。第三章介绍了柏拉图的主体道德理论,并指出这种主体道德理论对他的惩罚思想具有重要的影响。柏拉图的道德理论以苏格拉底的“无人自愿作恶”为起点,强调道德与幸福的一致性。这样的思路使得柏拉图可以从理论上为作恶者“免责”,为否定惩罚报应论提供正当基础。在行为与品质之间,柏拉图更为强调品质的重要性,这决定了他的惩罚理论是着眼于改善作恶者的品性,而非报复他们的邪恶行为。而且柏拉图对犯罪心理的分析暗示对作恶者改造的手段必须是多重的:既包括认知,又包括教育、训练,甚至还有类似医疗的技术。第四章介绍柏拉图不同时期对话录中的惩罚理论。总的来说,从早期对话录对报应惩罚的批评,把惩罚规定为一种“善”,到后期以立法的形式确定惩罚以改造为宗旨,柏拉图对惩罚问题的考虑与其主体取向的道德哲学是一致的,主要强调对人的灵魂的改造。其中《蒂迈欧篇》还暗中揭示了改造的生理学基础。但是,无论是早期对话录中还是晚期对话录中,柏拉图同时却又在或明或暗地启用报应主义的惩罚手段,在多部对话录的结尾神话中他更是公开肯定了报应论的惩罚观念。这形成了柏拉图的惩罚理论中最有特色的改造与报应之间的张力。第五章是全文的结论。笔者先总结了赔偿、阻遏、改造与报应等思路在柏拉图惩罚思想中所处的地位,接着再从主体间本位到主体本位的角度概括柏拉图惩罚思想的政治伦理教化策略转换意义,最后反思柏拉图的惩罚理论可能出现的残酷性严重问题。作者指出,由于一方面柏拉图把赔偿民事化,使得赔偿只是惩罚的预备性措施,另一方面他又用改造来限制阻遏,使阻遏在其惩罚理论中只是处于附属地位,所以改造在其惩罚理论中的核心地位并没有因为他肯定赔偿与阻遏而被动摇。报应说在柏拉图惩罚理论中的定位始终不是很肯定,虽然柏拉图在早期对话录中曾经明确地批判过报应,但是在其晚期的《法律篇》中,柏拉图却规定了与报应几乎完全相同的惩罚措施,而且柏拉图在几个末世神话中还公开地强调报应论惩罚。作者认为,柏拉图惩罚思想内潜藏的改造与报应之间的张力应该从政治道德教化的角度去理解。其实,柏拉图用改造来代替报应作为惩罚的目的并不是要反对报应所维护的主体间道德关系,这只是一种政治教化的策略转换:用提高被改造对象的德性来间接促进主体间的道德关系的形成。最后,作者反思了柏拉图的惩罚理论在实践上可能导致对犯罪人残酷惩罚的倾向。因为柏拉图的惩罚理论在讲对罪犯进行改造时,主要强调对其主体间道德关系的维系,允许伤害罪犯本人的生活性价值,这就可能导致在刑罚实践中鼓励对罪犯的身体、生命、生活等一阶价值的伤害,也就难以保证不出现不人道的结果。更多还原

【Abstract】 Plato’s theory of punishment is the subject of this paper. As Plato was seen as the representative of idealism, scholars often tend to overlook his theory of punishment. However, I believe that t Plato’s thought of punishment was very important for his philosophy. To some extent the whole secret of his political education lies in his theory of punishment. Plato was not a professional penologist, so we must understand his thought of punishment from the point of view of his political strategy overall.The goal of Plato’s political theory was to construct inter-subjective moral orders in the state. Retributivism, which was the main method to claim the inter-subjective moral order in Greek tradition, was vulnerable to be criticized by Sophists because of its inherent faults. So Plato changed his strategy of moral education. Instead of using retribution as the measure to maintain the inter-subjective moral order directly, Plato cultivated it by transforming the inter-subjective moral order into the subjective morality. In philosophy of law, Plato preferred reform to retribution not only because reform accords with his subjective moral philosophy but also because reform can promote the development of inter-subjective moral order indirectly by inhancing the agent’s moral virtue. On the other hand, since the justice of retribution was firmly rooted in the public mentality at that time, Plato implicitly approved the measures of retribution in his theory of punishment. So there is a tension between reform and retribution in Plato’s thought of punishment.The paper consists of five chapters. In chapter 1, the author claims that the way of justifying the punishment can be divided into two ways. One is based on intersubjective standard morality and the other is based upon subjective standard morality. Understanding these two different ways of justifying the punishment is helpful to apprehend the problems Plato is facing and his strategy to solve them.In chapter 2, the author explores the contexts of Plato’s thought of punishment, namely the relation between Greek social values and punishment. Under the aggressive values from Homer, the function of punishment was to restore the victim’s time , while under the cooperative values since Hesiod , the purpose of punishment was to maintain the inter-subjective moral orders by retribution. In Plato’s time, Sophists had enlightened the subjectivity of humankind, but at the same time the inter-subjective morale orders was deeply in threat by the rationale of subjectivity they advocated. The compelling task Plato has faced was to refute Sophists so as to re-establish the inter-subjective moral order.In chapter 3, the author introduces Plato’s moral theory and its impact upon his theory of punishment. On one hand Socrates’ imperative that "No one does wrong willingly" could exculpate the wrongdoer, but on the other hand his insistence of Giving prior consideration on disposition over behavior indicated that punishment should be aimed at improving the wrongdoers’ disposition rather than retaliating the wrongdoer for their behavior. Moreover. Plato’s analysis of the wrongdoer’s soul suggested that the methods to reform should be multiple: cognition, education, conditioning, even medicine could be used.In chapter 4, the author narrates Plato’s theory of punishment in his different works at different period. Generally speaking, from criticizing retributivism and regarding punishment as "good" in early works to specifying reform as the end of punishment in later works, Plato’s thought of punishment consistes with his moral theory that man’s soul should be cared first. Whereas, retribution was implicitly used in either early works or later works, which indicated that Plato’s theory of punishment has a tension between reform and retribution.Chapter 5 is the conclusion. The author firstly evaluates the status of restitution, deterrence, reform and retribution in Plato theory of punishment, then uncovers thepolitical senses of Plato’s theory of punishment------transforming the strategy of moraleducation from inter-subjectivity to subjectivity, finally makes a reflection upon a problem of cruelty to which Plato’s theory of punishment could give rise.更多还原