English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 112721/143689 (78%)
Visitors : 49579112      Online Users : 923
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 140.119/139198
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/139198


    Title: 公民不服從之外:論暴力政治抵抗的正當性
    Beyond Civil Disobedience: On the Legitimacy of Violent Political Resistance
    Authors: 張展嘉
    Chang, Chan-Chia
    Contributors: 吳豐維
    鄭光明

    Wu, Feng-Wei
    Cheng, Kuang-Ming

    張展嘉
    Chang, Chan-Chia
    Keywords: 暴力
    非暴力
    非文明不服從
    公民不服從
    政治抵抗
    羅爾斯
    Violence
    Non-violence
    Uncivil disobedience
    Civil disobedience
    Political resistance
    John Rawls
    Date: 2022
    Issue Date: 2022-03-01 17:07:44 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 本論文主旨在於說明在政治抵抗中完全禁止暴力元素是不合理的要求。暴力,這個在政治抵抗場域常見的爭議元素,常左右人們對於一項抵抗運動正當性的判斷。這種看法源自於公民不服從理論中的非暴力要求,然而本論文將說明傳統的公民不服從理論內部依然存在許多未完全闡明的空間,故本論文將說明不該將之視為唯一判斷政治抵抗正當性之判準,其提出之非暴力要求亦非完全合理。
    非文明不服從理論對傳統公民不服從理論採取批判態度,否定公民不服從具有較優越的規範性地位,並提出理由說明有些政治抵抗行為雖然無法符合公民不服從的規範與條件,但依然具有正當化可能。本文審視暴力在非文明不服從論者論述中的角色,並說明雖然暴力在非文明論者論述中更傾向被接納為一種可能具正當化潛力的手段,但其對暴力的分析與探討也難以稱得上足夠。
    在討論過暴力在公民不服從與非文明不服從理論中的角色後,本文將進一步說明國家的正當性是如何影響運動正當性,而運動正當性是如何影響個別行為的正當門檻。此外本論文也將針對政治抵抗中的暴力進行細緻區分,說明什麼樣的暴力類型在特定處境中可能具有正當性,以及判斷個別暴力行為是否正當的判準有哪些。最後我將導出政治抵抗中的「升級」與「防衛」這兩種暴力在某些情況下可能會具有正當性之結論。
    Reference: 【中文】
    李雪莉、楊智強、陳怡靜、余志偉、陳朗熹、劉貳龍,2020,《烈火黑 潮:城市戰地裡的香港人》,新北市:左岸文化。
    彼得‧艾克曼、傑克‧杜瓦,2013,《非暴力抗爭――一種更強大的力量》,台北市:究竟出版社。
    徐學庸,2020,〈蘇格拉底與守法:柏拉圖《克里同》論證結構〉,《國立政治大學哲學學報》第 43 期,頁 1-34。
    曼威.柯司特,2020,《憤怒與希望:網際網絡時代的社會運動》,廖珮杏、劉維人譯,台北市:南方家園文化。
    陳宜中,2007,〈公民不服從與自由民主:倒扁紅潮下的一些省思〉,《思想》第 4 期,頁 41-61。
    傅恆德,2014,〈民主化的社會經濟研究:公民抗爭運動的跨國實證研究〉,《國家發展研究》第 14 卷第 1 期,頁 1-32
    廖元豪,2014,〈公民不服從?還是民主法治倒退嚕?〉,《思想》第 27 期,頁 149-159。
    端傳媒,2020,《2019 香港風暴—《端傳媒》反修例運動報導精選》,台北市:春山出版。
    謝世民,2014,〈公民不服從德沃金的觀點〉,《以平等為本的自由主義:德沃金法政哲學研究》,台北市:開學文化。
    【英文】
    Brennan, J. 2019. When All Else Fails. NJ: Princeton University Press.
    Chenoweth, E. and Stephan, M. 2011. Why Civil Resistance Works? The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict. New York City: Columbia university press. (E-Book.)
    Chenoweth, E. and Stephan, M. 2012. Why Civil Resistance Works? The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict. New York City: Columbia university press. (Paperback.)
    Cobb Jr., C. E. 2014 This Nonviolent Stuff’ll Get You Killed: How Guns Made the Civil Rights Movement Possible. New York: Basic Books.
    Cohen, C. 1971 Civil Disobedience: Conscience, Tactics, and the Law. New York and London:Columbia University Press.
    Delmas, C. 2016. Civil Disobedience. Philosophy Compass, 11(11):681-691.
    Delmas, C. 2018. A Duty to Resist. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Dworkin, R. 1985. A Matter of Principle. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Geras, N. 1989. Our Morals: The Ethics of Revolution. The Socialist Register,
    25: 185–211.
    Harcourt, B. 2012. The Politics of Incivility. Arizona Law Review, 54(2):345-373.
    Honderich, T. 1976. Three Essays on Political Violence. Oxford: Basil Blackwell
    Hume, D. 1985 [1752]. Of the Original Contract. In Essays: Moral Political, and Literary, Vol. 1. Ed. by E. F. Miller. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Classics
    Hurd, H. 2001. Is It Wrong to Do Right When Others Do Wrong? A Critique of American Tort Law. Legal Theory, 7:307-40.
    Kadivar, M.A. and Ketchley, N. 2018. Sticks, Stones, and Molotov Cocktails: Unarmed Collective Violence and Democratization. Socius, 4: 1-15.
    Kirkpatrick, J. 2020. Book Reviews. In Political Theory, 48(4):528-542.
    Lai, T.-H. 2019. Justifying Uncivil Disobedience. In Oxford Studies in Political Philosophy vol 5. Ed. by Sobel, D., Vallentyne, P. and Wall, S. Oxford University Press.
    Lai, T.-H. 2020(2019). Uncivil Disobedience: Beyond the Orthodox View of Resistance and Counter-Resistance (Unpublished Doctoral Degree thesis). Australian National University, Australia.
    Locke, J. 1980 [1690]. Second Treatise of Government. Ed. by Macpherson, C. B. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
    Merleau-Ponty, M. 1969 Humanism and Terror. Trans. By O`Neill, J. Boston: Beacon Press
    Pasternak, A. 2014. Voluntary Benefits from Wrongdoing. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 31(4):377-391.
    Pasternak, A. 2018. Political Rioting: A Moral Assessment. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 46:384-418.
    Plato. 1991. Crito. In Civil Disobedience in focus. Ed. By Bedau, H.A. New York: Routledge.
    Pogge, T. 2007. John Rawls: His Life and Theory of Justice. Trans. By Kosch M. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Rawls, J. 1999. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
    Raz, J. 1979. The Authority of law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    Raz, J. 1986. The Morality of Freedom. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    Sarkees, M. R. and Wayman, F. W. 2010. Resort to War: A Data Guide to Inter-state, Extra-state, Intra-state, and Non-state Wars, 1816–2007. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
    Scheuerman, W. E. 2018 Civil Disobedience. Cambridge and Medford, MA: Polity Press.
    Sebastian, S. 2015. Don’t Criticize Black Lives Matter for Provoking Violence. The Civil Rights Movement Did, Too. In Washington Post, October 1.
    Thoreau, H. D. 1991. Civil Disobedience. In Civil Disobedience in focus. Ed. By Bedau, H.A. New York: Routledge.
    Umaja, A. O. 2013. We Will Shoot Back: Armed Resistance in the Mississippi Freedom Movement. Manhattan: NYU Press.
    Vanderheiden, S. 2005. Eco-terrorism or justified resistance? Radical environmentalism and the “War on Terror.” In Politics & Society, 33(3):425–47.
    Walby, S., Towers, J., Balderston, S., Corradi, C., Francis, B., Heiskanen, M., Helweg-Larsen, K., Mergaert, L., Olive, P., Palmer, E., Stöckl, H. and Strid, S. 2017. The Concept and Measurement of Violence Against Women and Men. Bristol: Policy Press.
    Walzer, M. 1967. The Obligation to Disobey. Ethics, 77(3): 163-175.
    Wellman, C. H. 2005. Samaritanism and the duty to obey the law. In Is There a Duty to Obey the Law? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Yen, A. 2015. On Civil Resistance and the Rule of Law. Asian Legal Philosophy, 2(1): 5-22.
    Zinn, H.1997. The Zinn Reader: Writings on Disobedience and Democracy. New York: Seven Stories Press.
    【網路資源】
    BBC 中文網,2019,香港反逃犯條例抗議: 示威者破壞立法會背後的考量。檢自:https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/chinese-news-48842838 (Nov. 5, 2021)
    BBC 緬甸語組和Grace Tsoi,2021,緬甸政變:流血死去的那些年輕人。檢自:https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/world-56737466 (Nov. 5, 2021)
    Beech, H. 2020,黃還是藍?香港商家的分歧與撕裂。檢自:https://cn.nytimes.com/china/20200121/hong-kong-protests-yellow-blue/zh-hant/ (Nov. 5, 2021)
    Dwokin, R. 1968, On not prosecuting civil disobedience. 檢自:https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1968/06/06/on-not-prosecuting-civil-disobedience/ (Jan. 8, 2022)
    ETtoday 新聞雲社會中心,2014,反服貿衝政院驅離 174 人受傷 員警占 119 人。檢自:https://www.ettoday.net/news/20140324/338538.htm (Nov. 5, 2021)
    Jenkins, J.C., Taylor, C.L., Abbott, M., Maher T.V., and Peterson, L. 2012. The World Handbook of Political Indicators IV. Columbus, OH: Mershon Center for International Security Studies, The Ohio State University. 檢自: https://sociology.osu.edu/worldhandbook (Nov. 5, 2021)
    Smith, S. 2019, Book Review: A Duty to Resist: When Disobedience Should Be Uncivil by Candice Delmas. 檢自:https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/2019/04/12/book-review-a-duty-to-resist-when-disobedience-should-be-uncivil-by-candice-delmas/#comments (Jan. 8, 2022)
    UNODC. 2015, International Classification of Crime for Statistical Purposes, Version 1.0. 檢自:https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/statistics/iccs.html (Nov. 5, 2021)
    丘琦欣,2015,反服貿運動期間的警察暴力。檢自: https://newbloommag.net/2015/04/11/police-violence-sunflower-tw/ (Nov. 5, 2021)
    羊正鈺,2018,【判決全文】反服貿運動佔領立院二審再判無罪,因「屬最後必要手段」。檢自:https://www.thenewslens.com/article/91460 (Nov. 5, 2021)
    李翰暘,2019,十六萬人添馬公園撐警集會。檢自: https://www.yzzk.com/article/details/%E5%B0%81%E9%9D%A2%E5%B0%88%E9%A1%8C/2019-27/1562210659376/%E5%8D%81%E5%85%AD%E8%90%AC%E4%BA%BA%E6%B7%BB%E9%A6%AC%E5%85%AC%E5%9C%92%E6%92%90%E8%AD%A6%E9%9B%86%E6%9C%83/%E5%90%8D%E5%AE%B6%E5%8D%9A%E5%AE%A2/%E6%9D%8E%E7%BF%B0%E6%9A%98 (Jan. 8, 2022)
    林祖偉,2019,香港抗議者的「裝修」和人人自危的「親中」企業。檢自:https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/chinese-news-50010488 (Nov. 5, 2021)
    高梓根,2019,港人佔立法會貼字條「切勿破壞文物」 怎麼會是暴徒?檢自:https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/ch/news/3736446 (Nov. 5, 2021)
    陳凱文,2021,陳凱文:戴耀廷混淆視聽。檢自:https://www.thinkhk.com/article/2021-01/12/46301.html (Nov. 5, 2021)
    臺灣士林地方法院 104 年度 易 字第 628 號判決。檢自:https://law.judicial.gov.tw/FJUD/data.aspx?ty=JD&id=SLDM,104%2c%e6%98%93%2c628%2c20160516%2c2 (Nov. 5, 2021)
    臺灣高等法院 105 年度上 易 字第 1232 號刑事判決。檢自:https://law.judicial.gov.tw/FJUD/data.aspx?ty=JD&id=TPHM,105%2c%e4%b8%8a%e6%98%93%2c1232%2c20160906%2c1 (Nov. 5, 2021)
    聯合新聞網 轉角國際,2019,鏡頭背後/二號橋行動:港警進攻中大抓捕抗爭學生。檢自:https://global.udn.com/global_vision/story/8662/4160448 (Nov. 5, 2021)
    蘋果新聞網,2019,港示威者遊行「裝修」中資商店 旺角小米招牌被大火燒光。檢自:https://tw.appledaily.com/international/20191020/TOEWSUTNVHMXRDMOAAQ3AWC7FU/ (Nov. 5, 2021)
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    哲學系
    107154008
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107154008
    Data Type: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/NCCU202200243
    Appears in Collections:[哲學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    400801.pdf3879KbAdobe PDF2348View/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