English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 20 |  Items with full text/Total items : 90058/119991 (75%)
Visitors : 24097414      Online Users : 1808
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 > 期刊論文 >  Item 140.119/62268
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/62268


    Title: 什麼是言論自由:一軸觀點
    Other Titles: What Is Freedom of Speech?-A Single Axis Theory
    Authors: 鄭光明
    Cheng, Kuang-Ming
    Contributors: 哲學系
    Keywords: 言論自由的三軸;魏斯特;德渥肯;理解要求
    three axes of freedom of speech;Caroline West;Ronald Dworkin;the comprehension requirement
    Date: 2013.06
    Issue Date: 2013-12-09 10:39:50 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 自由主義者德渥肯(Ronald Dworkin)認為把言論自由視為一種「積極自由」會得出荒謬的結論,因此不能成立。對此,魏斯特認為其「理解要求」(the comprehension requirement)可使得言論自由不變成「積極自由」,因此可成功回應德渥肯的質疑。筆者將證明德渥肯的主張言之成理,至於魏斯特的「理解要求」則仍會使得言論自由變成「積極自由」,因此無法成立。此外,筆者也將主張:我們必須以自由主義的「機會」(opportunity)概念來理解言論的散播,而且此一「機會」概念必須是一種「全有或全無」(all-or-none)的概念,以避免使得言論自由變成一種「積極自由」。
    Feminists Caroline West and David Braddon-Mitchell argue that speech can be free insofar as its distribution is permitted or enabled, it can be understood, and it is not prevented from being considered. But Ronald Dworkin argues that the right to free speech, according to the feminist view, would be a "positive" right which liberals are unlikely to want to accept. West believes that her comprehension requirement will put some constraints by which we will acquire a conception that is consistent with the liberal conception of free speech. The central aim of this paper is to show why West's comprehension requirement is mistaken. This suggests that the right to free speech should be a "negative" one, which does not impose unacceptably illiberal duties on hearers. One way of expressing the right to free speech, in the familiar liberal language of negative rights, is this: that were speakers to speak, and were hearers to want to hear the idea the speaker expressed by so speaking, there is no government agent whose actions deprive speakers the opportunity for distributing that idea.
    Relation: 政治與社會哲學評論, 45, 63-110
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[哲學系] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    63110.pdf3691KbAdobe PDF871View/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
    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。
    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。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback