【作者】 李晔；

【导师】 李萍；

【作者基本信息】 中山大学 ， 伦理学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 伦理规范的“基础”是伦理学研究最为根基性的问题,是判断伦理规范要求是否具有合理性与正当性最为根本性的依据,但无疑也是伦理学史上最为艰难的问题。首先是对“基础”概念含义的界定,这决定了本文的研究范围和主题。但这种界定不能仅仅通过对“基础”这一概念本身的语义学分析来获得,而必须与所研究的伦理规范所具有的本质和属性结合起来。本文以伦理规范作为社会的制度性实在的本质为出发点,围绕对伦理规范的“规范性”特征和要求的说明,展开对伦理规范的“基础”问题研究。与伦理规范的本质和特征相结合,关于规范“基础”概念的含义及此研究需要处理的领域,主要有三个方面。第一是“来源”的意义,这是描述性、事实性或谱系学意义上的“基础”含义。这一方向的“基础”理解决定了伦理规范基础研究可能主要在于社会学、历史学与解释性方向,它更多地是规范的产生与功能的因果性说明,这是一种“回溯”式的方法。通过这种回溯式与来源性解释说明,来论证伦理规范的合法性,因此这一进路主要关注的是伦理规范的“合法性”问题。第二是“理由”与论证性的含义,主要立足于伦理规范的理论与逻辑论证,主要关注的是规范的“合理性”问题。第三是有效性或接受性含义,在这种意义上,立足于伦理规范的实践性与规范性特征,如果一种规范不能被行动者接受并依其行动,那就不成为“规范”。这一进路所关注的主要是伦理规范的接受、归属、行动动机问题。相对前两方面的“合法性”与“合理性”而言,这一方面可称为“有效性”问题。其次,将伦理规范“基础”问题放在当代科学与哲学的时代背景和要求中来考察。从人类文化思想发展来看,我们处在一种被称为科学时代、后形而上学时代的历史时期,这一时代特征带来了两方面的后果,一是必须探求在这样的时代,什么样的关于“基础”的理解被认为是合法的,什么样的关于“基础”的研究方法被认为是正当有效的。如果说,伦理规范是关涉“应该”的准则与要求,那么这里就需要说明和论证最终什么样的关于“应该”的依据和论证被认为是可接受的和恰当的。二是揭示出时代的理论背景和观念框架对于伦理规范基础研究的根本性意义。也就是说,历史地看,正是这些理论背景和思想观念框架提供理所当然和毋庸置疑的支点。但是,通过这种揭示可能使它们在反思中受到质疑并失去其基础地位。就理论论证这一方面来讲,逻辑上,道德规范基础研究可能有三种基本思路:1、存在论或本体论途径,直接寻找规范要求或原则(实在论);2、逻辑方法与途径,从“是”推出“应该”,或者其他的逻辑推演途径;3、实践论方向,建构与实用主义理由(建构论)。本文具体分析了实在论与建构论这两种最具有代表性的理论模式关于伦理规范基础问题的探索与回答,并通过二者的论辩分析各自对于伦理规范基础问题解决的优势和问题。在分析的过程中,也涉及到各自的逻辑论证方法与问题,这主要表现在对“开放问题”、“尤绪弗洛”难题和“先验论证”的研究中。同时,根据传统伦理学研究将“客观性”作为伦理规范或原则合法性与合理性论证的一个最为核心的基础,本文一方面梳理了各种客观性思想,另一方面围绕“规范性”概念,提出客观性论证不能成为伦理规范基础的合法性论证。本文也分析了沟通理论希望摆脱这种传统思维与论证可能带来的结果所进行的理论探索,因为沟通伦理学相比较而言更为关注规范性的基础本身,它的中心论题可以说是元伦理学原则的正当性、有效性与合理性论证问题,包括恰当的正当性程序的确定,它强调的是论辩不可避免的和理论上必然的前提意义上的“基础”,希望由此解决伦理规范以及伦理学本身的“基础”问题。最后,围绕规范理论论证的普遍性、合理性与规范接受和行动的有效性、情境性之间的关系,以我国伦理学界关于“亲情伦理”、“普遍伦理”、“环境(生态)伦理”的讨论为例,展现了伦理规范基础的社会历史性与发展演化规律,进而推进对全球化与后形而上学时代伦理规范基础问题研究,以及人类与我们自身伦理问题的思考。更多还原

【Abstract】 The“foundations”of ethical norms has been one of the most basic problems during the ethical inquiring history, and one fundamental ground according to which various ethical norms has been judged to see whether they have the legitimacy and rationality, yet it has been one of the most difficult questions during ethics history.In the first place is the definition of the concept of“foundation”, which determinates the scope and subjects in this work. The definition cannot be derived simply from the semantics analysis of the“foundation”concept, but should be in connection with the nature and properties of ethical norms. This dissertation starts from the nature of ethical norms as social and institutional reality, focuses on the accounts of“normativity”characteristics and requirement of ethical norms, carries out the research about the issue of“foundations”of ethical norms.According with the nature and characteristics of ethical norms, there are mainly three fields that have to be deal with concerning the denotations of“foundation”concept. The first is the meaning of“source”, that is, where it came from, which is the descriptive, empirical and phenomenological denotation. This dimension about the understanding of“foundation”might limit the research about the foundations of ethical norms mainly in sociological, historical and hermeneutical fields, and makes the research program more become some kind of causal accounts about its springing up and functions, which is one kind of“traced”methods. In light of the“traced”and“coming”interpretations, it wants to show the legitimacy of ethical norms, so this kind of approaches focuses on the“legitimacy”issue. The second meaning is“reasons”, emphasizes theoretical and logical justifications of ethical norms, focuses on the“justification”issue. The third is the meaning of“validity”and“acceptance”, focuses on the practicality and normativity of ethical norms. In a sense it would not become one ethical norm, if it cannot be accepted and followed by agents. This dimension focuses on the acceptance, subscription, motivation issues, contrary to the former two dimensions about“legitimacy”and“justification”, this dimension can be called“validity”.In the second place, our times, called scientific and post-metaphysical epoch, have influences upon the methodology in ethics researching, From which may follow two kinds of effects, on the one hand, we have to explore what kind of accounts about“foundations”would be recognized as“legitimate”, and what kind of researching methods would be thought of valid in this epoch. On the other hand, it can show us the fundamental significance that the theoretical backgrounds and idea frameworks have in our epoch on the probing into the foundations of ethical norms.Logically, there may be three kinds of fundamental approaches to the research about ethical norms’foundations. 1, Ontological approaches, which attempt to derive ethical norms or principles directly from the word (realism); 2, Logical methods or approaches, which want to derive“ought”from“is”, as well as other logical approaches; 3, Practical approaches, which provide ethical norm with constructivist or pragmatist reasons (constructivism).This dissertation concretely analyzed moral realism and constructivism, which are the two kinds of models that have probed and given some answers to the question about ethical norms’foundations, and show their advantages and problems respectively in their argumentations concerning the resolve to the issue of ethical norms’foundations. In course of the analysis, logical methods or justification as well as their problems involved, are demonstrated obviously through the probing into“open question”,“Euthyphro dilemma”, and“transcendental justification”. At the same time, contrary to traditional ethics, which puts the“objectivity”in the centre of probe into the issue of legitimacy and justification of ethical norms, this dissertation, on the one hand, studies some philosophical thoughts about objectivity, on the other hand, according to the“normative”characteristics, proposes that the objectivity justification cannon be the legitimate justification for the foundations of ethical norms.This dissertation also analyzes communicative ethics, because communicative ethics is concerned with the grounding of the normativity itself. Its central focus is the problem of the rational validation or justification of metaethical principles, including the specification of appropriate validation procedures. It stresses the unavoidable and rationally necessary“premises”of argumentation, and hopes to resolve the problem about“foundations”of ethical norms and ethics itself.In the last place, focusing on the relationship between universality and rationality of ethics theoretical justification, and the validity and speciality of acceptance and action, taking the examples concerning argumentations of“kinship”,“universal”, and“environmental (ecological)”ethical thoughts, this dissertation demonstrates the social historical natures and evolving laws of ethical normative foundations. It maybe further the research program in the globalization and post-metaphysical epoch, and further the thinking of our ethical problems.更多还原