English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 110052/141001 (78%)
Visitors : 46384646      Online Users : 1428
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    政大機構典藏 > 文學院 > 哲學系 > 學位論文 >  Item 140.119/135974
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/135974


    Title: 論康德寬恕的概念:以公私領域的區分來分析
    On Kant’s Concept of Forgiveness——from the Distinction between Public Sphere and Private Sphere
    Authors: 薛雅心
    Hsueh, Ya-Hsin
    Contributors: 汪文聖
    Wang, Wen-Sheng
    薛雅心
    Hsueh, Ya-Hsin
    Keywords: 康德
    根本惡
    良知
    寬恕
    應報論
    道德形上學

    尊重
    Kant
    Radical Evil
    Conscience
    Forgiveness
    Retributivism
    Metaphysics of Morals
    Love
    Respect
    Date: 2021
    Issue Date: 2021-07-01 19:33:25 (UTC+8)
    Abstract:   在康德理論下,人有向善的稟賦,也有為惡的性癖,人的兩重性使人具有實 踐道德法則的能力,也有著背離道德法則犯錯的可能,與他人發生爭執與衝突。 對於惡行,康德以應報主義的觀點,主張由法律介入進行平等的懲罰,來彰顯正 義並維護社群共同體的秩序,而犯罪者除了要面對外在法律的懲罰,也要面對良 知的裁決,即內在法庭的審判,而這將帶來悔恨、愧疚等痛苦之情使人需要寬恕。
      本文主要目的在於探問:康德應報理論下,寬恕如何可能?透過公私領域的 劃分指出,公共領域中僅存在著赦免,私人領域中的愛與尊重則讓有條件寬恕成 為可能。法律的懲罰使正義得以伸張,有助於私人領域中受害者與加害者雙方的 復合,而雙方的復合將對共同體的穩定與和諧有所助益。
    Reference: 外文部分
    Amstutz, Mark. (2005). The Healing of Nations:the promise and limits of forgivenes, MA: Rowman & Littlefield.
    Arendt, Hannah. (1958). The Human Condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Arendt, Hannah. (1976). The life of the mind. One/Thinking, San Diego/New York/London: Harcourt inc.
    Aristotle. (1975). Nicomachean Ethics, translated by Hippocrates G. Apostle. Grinell, Iowa: Peripatetic Press.
    Bernstein, Richard. (2002). Radical Evil, Malden. MA: Polity Press in association with Blackwell Publishing, Ltd.
    Blöser, Claudia. (2019). “Human Fallibility and the Need for Forgiveness”. in Philosophia, Vol.47(1), pp.1-19.
    Dawall, Stephen. (2008). “Kant on Respect, dignity, and the duty of respect”, Kant’s Ethics of Virtue, Monika Betzler ed., Berlin ; New York, N.Y. : Walter de Gruyter, pp. 175-200.
    Garrard, Eve and McNaughton, David. (2003). “In Defence of Unconditional Forgiveness.” in Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, New Series, Vol. 103, pp.39-60.
    Govier, Trudy. (1999).“Forgiveness and the Unforgivable”. in American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 36(1), pp.59-75.
    Griswold, Charles L. (2007). Forgiveness : A Philosophical Exploration, Cambridge University Press.
    Guyer, Paul. (2000). Kant on Freedom, Law, and Happiness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Hegel ,G. W. F. (1991) Elements of the Philosophy of Right, trans. by H.B. Nisbet, Cambridge University Press.
    Hill, Thomas, (1999). “Kant on Wrongdoing, Desert, and Punishment”, in Law and Philosophy, Vol.18:407-441.
    Höffe, Otfried. (1982) Kants Begründung des Rechtszwangs und der Kriminalstrafe, [w:] Reinhard Brandt (red.), Rechtsphilosophie der Aufklärung. Symposium Wolfenbüttel 1981, Berlin, s. 355-356.
    Holmgren, Margaret. (1993). “Forgiveness and the Intrinsic Value of Persons”.in American Philosophical Quarterly. Vol. 30, pp.341-352.
    Jeremy Bentham, (1864). Theory of Legislation, trans. by R. Hildreth, London: Trübner & Company.
    Kant, Immanuel.(1781). Kritik der reinen Vernunft, in Kants Werke, Akademie Textausgabe, Bd. 3, 4. (Critique of Pure Reason, tans. and ed. by Paul Gauyer, Cambridge University Press, 1998. )
    Kant, Immanuel. (1983).Perpetual Peace, and Other Essays on Politics, History, and Morals. trans.by Ted Humphrey. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub. Co., 1983.
    Kant, Immanuel.(1785). Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten, in Kants Werke, Akademie Textausgabe, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co, 1968. Bd. 4. (Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, trans. and ed. by Allen Wood, Yale University Press, 2002.)
    Kant, Immanuel.(1788). Kritik der praktischen Vernunft, in Kants Werke, Akademie Textausgabe, Bd. 5. (Critique of Practical Reason, trans. by Mary Gregor, Cambridge University Press, 2015.)
    Kant, Immanuel. (1793). Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft, in Kants Werke, Akademie Textausgabe, Bd. 6. (Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason, trans. and ed. by Allen Wood, Yale University Press,1998.)
    Kant, Immanuel. (1797). Metaphysik der Sitten, in Kants Werke, Akademie Textausgabe, Bd. 6. (The Metaphysics of Morals, translated and edited by Mary Gregor, Cambridge University Press, 1996.)
    Kant, Immanuel. (1997). Collins note on Kant’s moral philosophie lectures(Lecture on Ethics), trans. and ed. by Peter Heath.
    Kotkas, Toomas. (2011). “Kant on the Right of Pardon: A Necessity and Ruler’s Personal Forgiveness”. Kant-Studien. Vol.102, pp.413-421.
    Lotz, Christian. (2006). “The Events of Morality and Forgiveness: From Kant to Derrida”. in Research in Phenomenology. Vol.36:255-273.
    Moore, K.D., (1989). Pardons: Justice, Mercy, and the Public Interest, Oxford University Press.
    Moran, Kate. (2013). “For Community`s Sake: A (Self-Respecting) Kantian Account of Forgiveness”. inProceedings of the XI International Kant-Kongress., De Gruyter, 2013, pp.419-430.
    Mulholland, Leslie Arthur. (1990). Kant`s system of rights, New York; Columbia University Press.
    Murphy, G. Jeffrie. (1987). “Does Kant have a Theory of Punishment?”, Columbia Law Review, Vol.87:509-532.
    Murphy, G. Jeffrie. (1994). Kant :The Philosophy of Right, Mercer University Press.
    Murphy, G. Jeffrie. (1998). “Hatred: a qualified defense”. in G. Murphy and J. Hampton(Eds.), Forgiveness and Mercy, New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Ricoeur, Paul. (1996). Love and Justice, in The Hermeneutics of Action, edited by Richard Kearney, London; Thousand Oaks, Calif. : Sage Publications.
    Ricoeur, Paul. (1996). Reflections on a new ethos for Europe, in The Hermeneutics of Action, edited by Richard Kearney, London; Thousand Oaks, Calif. : Sage Publications.
    Satne, Paula. (2016). “Forgiveness and Moral Development”. in Philosophia, Vol. 44:1029-1055.
    Schmitz, H-G. (2002), Die Menschheit zum Scheusal machen. Zu Kants Auffassung der Todesstrafe, in: Perspektiven der Philosophie, Bd.28, S. 197-226, Amsterdam.
    Seel, Gerhard. (2009).“How Does Kant Justify the Universal Objective Validity of the Law of Right?”. International Journal of Philosophical Studies, Vol. 17:71-94.
    Sussman, David. (2005). “Kantian forgiveness”. in Kant-Studien, Vol 96(1):85-107.
    Willaschek, Marcus. (1997). “Why the Doctrine of Right Does Not Belong in the Metaphysicsof Morals”. Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik, Vol. 5: 205-227.
    Wood, Allen. (2002). “The Final Form of Kant`s Practical Philosophy.” In Kant`s Metaphysics of Morals: Interpretative Essays, ed. by Mark Timmons. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Wood, Allen. (2008). Kantian Ethics, Cambridge University Press.
    Wood, Allen. (2009). Kant`s moral religion, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
    Wood, Allen. (2009).“Duties to Oneself, Duties of Respect to Others”, The Blackwell Guide to Kant’s Ethics, ed. by Thomas Hill.
    Wood, Allen. (2011). “Punishment, retribution and the coercive enforcement of right”, in Kant’s Metaphysics of Morals A Critical Guide, Lara Denis ed., Cambridge University Press.

    中文部分
    Ralph C. S. Walker,(2007),〈康德《道德底形上學之基礎》中的「敬重」〉,李彥儀譯,國立政治大學哲學學報,第18期,頁141-172。
    王立峰,(2006),〈康德的懲罰觀:公正優先兼顧功利——讀《法的形而上學原理》〉,中國政法大學學報,第24卷第5期,頁167-175。
    李明輝,(2016),〈康德論德行義務:兼論麥金泰爾對康德倫理學的批評〉,《歐美研究》第四十六卷第二期,頁211-241。
    李明輝,(2020),〈康德哲學中的 Menschheit 及其文化哲學意涵〉,中研院文哲所「文化哲學的模型」學術研討會。
    汪文聖,(2017),〈敘事在鄂蘭與呂格爾間的關聯:從實踐的意義出發來看〉,《政治與社會哲學評論》,第61期,頁129-174。
    汪文聖,(2019),《現象學作為一種實踐哲學》,新北市:聯經。
    林永崇,(2009),〈關懷與友愛——康德論德行義務與人的終極目的〉,《哲學與文化》第36卷第2期,頁93-117。
    林遠澤,(2007),〈論康德定言令式的共識討論結構—試從理性存有者的道德觀點闡述康德的先驗規範邏輯學〉,《台灣大學哲學論評》,第三十三期,頁181-230。
    康德,(2003),《康德著作全集》v.6 (單純理性限度內的宗教),李秋零主編,北京:中國人民大學出版,頁(單純理性限度內的宗教),李秋零主編,北京:中國人民大學。
    康德,(2004),《實踐理性批判》,鄧曉芒譯,台北市:聯經出版。
    康德,(2013),《康德歷史哲學論文集》,李明輝譯,台北市:聯經出版。
    康德,(2014),《道德底形上學之基礎》,李明輝譯,台北市:聯經出版。
    康德,(2015),《道德底形上學》,李明輝譯,台北市:聯經出版。
    許家馨,(2014),〈應報即復仇? — 當代應報理論及其對死刑之意涵初探〉,《中研院法學期刊》,第 15 期,頁207-282。
    陳欣白,(2012),〈由康德的應報論觀點出發思考台灣死刑存廢的爭論〉,陳起行等編,《後繼受時代的東亞法文化:東亞法哲學研討會論文集・第八屆》,臺北市:政治大學法學院。
    陳瑤華,(2006)。〈康德論根本惡〉,《東吳政治學報》,第23期,頁59-84。
    漢娜鄂蘭,(2006),《黑暗時代群像》,鄧伯宸譯,新北市:立緒文化。
    漢娜鄂蘭,(2013),《平凡的邪惡:艾希曼耶路撒冷大審紀實》,施奕如譯,台北市:玉山社出版。
    漢娜鄂蘭,(2016),《人的條件》,林宏濤譯,台北市:商周出版。
    漢娜鄂蘭,(2017),《責任與判斷》,蔡佩君譯,新北市:左岸文化。
    蔡英文,(2002),《政治時間與公共空間:漢納・鄂蘭的政治思想》,台北市:聯經出版。
    蔡英文,(2007),〈政治之罪惡與寬恕的可能性:以Hannah Arendt的解釋為焦點〉,新竹:交通大學社會與文化研究所,頁1-28。
    蔡英文,(2009),〈政治之罪惡與寬恕的可能性:以Hannah Arendt的解釋為焦點〉,張福建編,《公民與政治行動:實證與規範之間的對話》,臺北:中央研究院人文社會科學研究中心,頁1-40。

    網際網路
    《路加福音》,檢索日期:2021年3月29日,
    https://www.o-bible.com/cgibin/ob.cgi?version=hb5&book=luk&chapter=23
    《馬太福音》,檢索日期:2021年3月29日,
    https://www.o-bible.com/cgibin/ob.cgi?version=hb5&book=mat&chapter=5
    《使徒行傳》,檢索日期:2021年3月29日,
    https://www.o-bible.com/cgibin/ob.cgi?version=hb5&book=act&chapter=3
    《民數記》,檢索日期:2021年3月29日,
    https://www.o-bible.com/cgibin/ob.cgi?version=hb5&book=num&chapter=14
    《中華民國刑法》,檢索日期:2021年3月29日,
    https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=C0000001
    《論語・子路》,檢索日期:2021 年 3 月 29 日,
    https://ctext.org/analects/zi-lu/zh
    《孟子・告子上》,檢索日期:2021年3月29日,
    https://ctext.org/mengzi/gaozi-i/zh
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    哲學系
    105154011
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105154011
    Data Type: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/NCCU202100477
    Appears in Collections:[哲學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    401101.pdf1381KbAdobe PDF2265View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback