政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/51942
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文笔数/总笔数 : 109952/140887 (78%)
造访人次 : 46280038      在线人数 : 1211
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜寻范围 查询小技巧：
  • 您可在西文检索词汇前后加上"双引号"，以获取较精准的检索结果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜寻，建议至进阶搜寻限定作者字段，可获得较完整数据
    •  进阶搜寻
    政大機構典藏 > 文學院 > 哲學系 > 國科會研究計畫 >  Item 140.119/51942


    请使用永久网址来引用或连结此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/51942


    题名: 言論自由的限度---以猥褻言論以及仇恨言論為例析之
    其它题名: The Obscene and the Hateful--- Studies in the Limits of Free Speech
    作者: 鄭光明
    贡献者: 行政院國家科學委員會
    國立政治大學哲學系
    关键词: 言論自由;仇恨言論;蕭爾;史特勞斯;費斯;約克森;勸服原則 ；自主原則 ；言論檢查
    freedom of speech;hate speech;Frederick Schauer;David Strauss;Owen Fiss;Daniel Jacobson;the persuasion principle;the principle of autonomy;censorship
    日期: 2010
    上传时间: 2011-11-14 10:50:12 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 自1990年以降，美國政治哲學界出現了一股反對穆勒 (John Stuart Mill) 的言論自由的主張：其一是以蕭爾 (Frederick Schauer) 為首的「言論自由的懷疑論」(the free speech skepticism)，其二則是以史特勞斯 (David Strauss) 以及費斯 (Owen Fiss) 為代表的「言論自由的修正論」(the free speech revisionism)。依「言論自由的懷疑論」，自由主義對於言論自由理想的追求，不僅是誤入歧途，而且還會不自覺得落入種族主義 (racism) 的泥沼。另一方面，依「言論自由的修正論」，穆勒的自由原則值得捍衛，然而穆勒對於言論自由的絕對捍衛，則應該稍作妥協才是。相較之下，我們則可稱穆勒對言論自由的主張為「言論自由的絕對主義」(the free speech absolutism)。本計畫首先要問：究竟那一個主張才站得住腳呢？其次，對於言論自由問題，許多學者主張我們應以「平衡進路」(the balancing approach to speech rights) 來加以考量。所謂「平衡進路」，是首先把言論自由從「自由領域」(the sphere of liberty) 中剔除，並把它和其他價值放在天平兩端加以考量，以便考量那一個價值最終應勝出。我們要問：「平衡進路」是否站得住腳呢？這是本研究計畫所將處理的兩大主要問題。為此，本計畫將首先深入探討自由主義主張言論自由背後的理由所在，包括對「自主原則」(the principle of autonomy)、「勸服原則」(the persuasion principle)、「觀念的自由市場論證」(the marketplace of ideas argument)、消極/積極自由等理論之深入探究，期能從根本回答上述兩大主要問題。對這兩個主要問題的深入探究，不僅能使我們更能明瞭何謂言論自由，也能使我們更能明瞭言論自由的相關爭論 (如仇恨言論以及色情問題) 背後的根本衝突所在。
    Free expression has never lacked adversaries. There has recently emerged a new wave of arguments favoring the regulation of speech and expression. In this project, I will begin by briefly distinguishing two different approaches in which it has been claimed that freedom of speech should be rejected: the liberal revisionism and the free speech skepticism. Whereas they both reject freedom of speech, they do so in different ways and to different degrees. The liberal revisionists attempt to argue from John Stuart Mill’s premises to the conclusion that certain opinions—for instance, pornography and hate speech—can, at least in principle, be legitimately suppressed. The revisionists suggest that their approach merely sacrifices low-quality speech. The free speech skeptics, on the other hand, view the liberal ideal of freedom of expression as misguided or worse. My primary concern in this project will be the liberal revisionists. I will see if liberal revisionism will chill far more speech than is actually prosecuted, and whether it will undermine legitimate moral and political debate. Moreover, I will see if Mill’s classically liberal and unfashionably absolutist defense of free speech proves much better than the revisionist version. Establishing the validity of the arguments of this project can be seen as contributing to a more general project. Most obviously, it will help us to sketch the outlines of a way of understanding the right to free speech. Key Words: freedom of speech, hate speech, Frederick Schauer, David Strauss, Owen Fiss, Daniel Jacobson, the persuasion principle, the principle of autonomy, censorship
    關聯: 基礎研究
    學術補助
    研究期間:9908~ 10007
    研究經費:638仟元
    数据类型: report
    显示于类别:[哲學系] 國科會研究計畫

    文件中的档案:

    档案 描述 大小格式浏览次数
    99-2410-H004-044-MY3.pdf880KbAdobe PDF2164检视/开启
    index.html0KbHTML2267检视/开启


    在政大典藏中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.


    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 ©   - 回馈