請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/39047完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 陳文團 | |
| dc.contributor.author | Chi-Cheng Lee | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 李志成 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-13T16:59:11Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2006-02-21 | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2005-02-21 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2005 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2005-02-14 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 參考書目
一、Habermas著作 1. Habermas, Jürgen. (1962) Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit, Darmstadt: Hermann Luchterland Verlag; trans. T. Burger, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1989. 2. Habermas, Jürgen. (1963) Theorie und Praxis, Darmstadt: Hermann Luchterhand Verlag; trans. J. Viertel, Theory and Practice, Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1973. 3. Habermas, Jürgen. (1968) Erkenntnis und Interesse, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp; trans. J. Shapiro, Knowledge and Human Interests, Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1971; Oxford: Polity Press, 1987. 4. Habermas, Jürgen. (1970) Zur Logik der Sozialwissenschaften, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp; trans. S. Nicholsen and J. Stark, On the Logic of the Social Sciences, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1988 5. Habermas, Jürgen. (1970) Toward a Rational Society: Student Protest Science and Politics, Boston: Beacon Press. 6. Habermas, Jürgen. (1973) Legitimationsprobleme im Spätkapitalismus, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp; trans. T. McCarthy, Legitimation Crisis, Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1975. 7. Habermas, Jürgen. (1976) Zur Rekonstruktion des historischen Materialismus, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp; trans. T. McCarthy, Communication and the Evolution of Society, Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1979. 8. Habermas, Jürgen. (1981) Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 2 vols; trans. T. McCarthy, The Theory of Communicative Action, Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1984/1987. 9. Habermas, Jürgen. (1983) Moralbewußtsein und kommunikatives Handeln, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp; trans. C. Lenhardt and S. Nicholsen, Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action, U.K.: Polity Press, 1995. 10. Habermas, Jürgen. (1985) Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp; trans. F. Lawrence, The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1987. 11. Habermas, Jürgen. (1985/1987) Kleine Politische Schriften, vols. V and VI, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp; trans. S. Nicholsen, The New Conservatism: Cultural Criticism and the Historians’ Debate, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1989. 12. Habermas, Jürgen. (1986) Autonomy and Solidarity, London: Verso, 1986. 13. Habermas, Jürgen. (1988) Nachmetaphysisches Denken, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp; trans. W. Hohengarten, Postmetaphysical Thinking, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992. 14. Habermas, Jürgen. (1991) Vergangenheit als Zukunft, Pendo Verlag, 1991. 15. Habermas, Jürgen. (1991) Erläuterungen zur Diskursethik, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, trans. Ciaran P. Cronin, Justification and Application, MA: MIT Press, 1994. 16. Habermas, Jürgen. (1992) Faktizität und Geltung, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp; trans. W. Rehg, Between Facts and Norms, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996. 17. Habermas, Jürgen. (1996), Die Einbeziehung des Anderen, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp; The Inclusion of the Other , Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1998. 18. Habermas, Jürgen. (1998), Die Postnationale Konstellation, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp; edited and with an introduction by Max Pensky, The Postnational Constellation : Political Essays , Cambridge, UK : Polity Press, 2001. 19. Habermas, Jürgen. (1998), Wahrheit und Rechtfertigung, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp. Truth and Justification, Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 2003. 20..Habermas, Jürgen. (1998), ed. by Maeve Cooke. On the Pragmatics of Communication, Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1998. 21. Habermas, Jürgen. (2003). The Future of Human Nature, Cambridge: Polity Press, 2003. 二、英文參考書目： 1. Aboulafia, Mitchell and Myra Bookman and Catherine Kem. Habermas and Pragmatism, London, New York : Routledge, 2002. 2. Alway, Joan. Critical Theory and Political Possibilities: Conceptions of Emancipatory Politics in the Works of Horkheimer, Adorno, Marcuse, and Habermas, Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1995. 3. Apel, Karl-Otto.The Response of Discourse Ethics to the Moral Challenge of the Human Situation as Such and Especially Today, Louvain: Peeters, 2001. 4. Arens, Edmund, The Logic of Pragmatic Thinking: from Peirce to Habermas, translated by David Smith, Atlantic Highlands, N.J. : Humanities Press, 1994. 5. Aristotle, The Nicomachean Ethics, in The Basic Works of Aristotle, edited and with an introduction by Richard McKeon, New York: Random House, 1941. 6. Ashenden, Samantha and David Owen (ed.). Foucault Contra Habermas, London: SAGE Publications, 1999. 7. Baynes, Kenneth. The Normative Grounds of Social Criticism: Kant, Rawls, Habermas, New York: State University of New York Press, 1992. 8. Best, Steven. The Politics of Historical Vision: Marx, Foucault, Habermas, New York: Guilford Press, 1995. 9. Bernstein, J. M. Recovering Ethical Life: Jurgen Habermas and the Future of Critical Theory, London: Routledge, 1995. 10. Borradori, Giovanna. Philosophy in A Time of Terror, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2003. 11. Calhoun, Craig (ed.). Habermas and the Public Sphere, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1992. 12. Cooke, Maeve. Language and Reason: A Study of Habermas's Pragmatics, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1994. 13. Craib, Ian, Modern Social Theory : From Parsons to Habermas, New York : Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1992. 14. Crossley, Nick and John Michael Roberts. After Habermas, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2004. 15. Deflem, Mathieu. Habermas, Modernity, and Law, London: Sage Publications, 1996. 16. D’entreves Maurizio P. and Seyla Benhabib (ed.). Habermas and the Unfinished Project of Modernity, UK: Polity Press, 1996. 17. Dews, Peter (ed.). Autonomy & Solidarity, Interview with Jürgen Habermas, London: Verso, 1986. 18. Evans, Gareth, John McDowell (ed.). Truth and Meaning, Oxford: Clarendon press, 1976. 19. Frie, Roger. Subjectivity and Intersubjectivity in Modern Philosophy and Psychoanalysis: A Study of Sartre, Binswanger, Lacan, and Habermas , Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 1997. 20. Frankena, William K. Ethics, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1963. 21. Fleming, Marie. Emancipation and Illusion :Rrationality and Gender in Habermas's Theory of Modernity, Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, c1997. 22. Ingram, David. Habermas and the Dialectic of Reason, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987. 23. Gunnarsson, Logi. Making Moral Sense: Beyond Habermas and Gauthier, Cambridge, UK, New York : Cambridge University Press, 2000. 24. Gutting, Gary. Pragmatic Liberalism and the Critique of Modernity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. 25. Greiff, De Pablo, and Ciaran Cronin, ed. Global Justice and Transnational Politics: Essays on the Moral and Political Challenges of Globalization, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2002. 26. Hare, R.M. The Language of Morals, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1952. 27. Harrington, Austin. Hermeneutic Dialogue and Social Science: A Critique of Gadamer and Habermas, London, New York: Routledge, 2001. 28. Heath, Joseph. Communicative Action and Rational choice, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, c2001. 29. Hendley, Steve. From Communicative Action to the Face of the Other: Levinas and Habermas on Language, Obligation, and Community, Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books, c2000. 30. Hegel, G.W.F. Philosophy of Right, tr. by T.M. Knox, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976. 31. Honneth, Axel and Joas, Hans. Communicative Action, Essay on Jürgen Habermas’s The Theory of Communicative Action, Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991. 32. Honneth, Axel. Cultural-Political Interventions in the Unfinished Project of Enlightenment, translations by Barbara Fultner, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, c1992. 33. Honneth, Axel. The Critique of Power: Reflective Stages in a Critical Social Theory, translated by Kenneth Baynes, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1991. 34. Kant, Immanuel. Groundwork of the Morals, H.J. Paton trans., New York: Haper & Row, 1964. 35. Kant, Immanuel. The Metaphysics of Morals, Mary Gregor (trans. & ed.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. 36. Kelly, Michael, ed., Critique and Power: Recasting the Foucault / Habermas , Cambridge, Massachusetts : MIT Press,1994. 37. Kymlica, Will. Contemporary Political Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. 38. Marsh, Jame L. Unjust Legality, New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2001. 39. MacIntyre, A. After Virtue. Norte Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1981. 40. Meriwether, Nicholas K. On the Priority of the Good over the Right : Habermas vs. Macintyre, Thesis (Ph. D.)--Purdue University 1995. 41. Meehan, Johanna ed., Feminists read Habermas : Gendering the Subject of Discourse, New York: Routledge, 1995. 42. Morris, Martin James. Reason, Society, and Dialectic: Habermas and the Paradigm Shift in Critical Theory, 1996. 43. McCarthy, George E. Romancing Antiquity: German Critique of the Enlightenment from Weber to Habermas , Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 1997. 44. McCumber, John. Philosophy and Freedom: Derrida, Rorty, Habermas, Foucault, Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 2000. 45. Phillps, Alfred. Lawyers’ Language, London and New York: Routledge Press, 2003. 46. Pressler, Charles A. Sociology and Interpretation: From Weber to Habermas, Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996. 47. Pleasants, Nigel. Wittgenstein and the Idea of a Critical Social Theory: a Critique of Giddens, Habermas and Bhaskar, London, New York: Routledge, 1999. 48. Steuerman, Emilia. The Bounds of Reason: Habermas, Lyotard, and Melanie Klein on Rationality, London, New York: Routledge, 2000. 49. Rasmussen, David M. And Swindal, James eds., Jürgen Habermas I-IV, London: Sage Publications, 2002. 50. Rasmussen, David M. Reading Habermas, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1990. 51. Rescher, Nicholas. Pluralism: Against the Demand for Consensus, Oxford : Clarendon Press ; New York : Oxford University Press, 1993. 52. Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1971. 53. Rawls, John. Political Liberalism, New York: Columbia University Press, 1993. 54. Rehg, William. Insight and Solidarity ---- A Study in the Discourse Ethics of Jürgen Habermas, London: University of California Press, 1994. 55. Rosenfeld, Michel and Arato, Andrew, eds., Habermas on Law and Democracy, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998. 56. Swindal, James. Reflection Revisited: Jürgen Habermas's Discursive Theory of Truth, New York: Fordham University Press, 1999. 57. Taylor, Charles. Sources of the Self, The Making of the Modern Identity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986. 58. Teigas, Demetrius, Knowledge and Hermeneutic Understanding: A Study of the Habermas-Gadamer Debate, Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press ; London Cranbury, NJ : Associated University Presses, 1995. 59. Thompson, John B. and David Held (ed.). Habermas, Critical Debates, London: Macmillan Press, 1982. 60. Toulmin, Steven, Richard Rieke , Allan Janik. An Introduction to Reasoning, New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1984. 61. Velazquez, Josef Manuel. A Commentary on the Discourse Ethics of Jürgen Habermas and Karl-Otto Apel, Thesis (Ph. D.)--Fordham University, 1995. 62. Williams, Robert R. ed., Beyond Liberalism and Communitarianism : Studies in Hegel's Philosophy of Right, Albany : State University of New York Press, c2001. 63. Whiht, Stephen K. ed., The Cambridge Companion to Habermas, Cambridge ; New York : Cambridge University Press, 1995. 三、英文期刊論文： 1. Alexy, Robert. “Constitutional Rights, Balancing, and Rationality”, Ratio Juris, June 2003, Vol. 16 Issue 2, pp.131-141. 2. Alexy, Robert. “On the Structure of Legal Principles”, Ratio Juris, September 2000, Vol. 13 Issue 3, pp.294-305. 3. Allen, Amy. “Power, Subjectivity, and Agency: Between Arendt and Foucault”, International Journal of Philosophical Studies, May 2003, Vol.10 Issue 2, pp.131-150. 4. Apel, Karl-Otto. “Pragmatism as Sense-Critical Realism Based on a Regulative Idea of Truth: In Defense of a Peircean Theory of Reality and Truth”, Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society; Fall 2001, Vol. 37 Issue 4, pp.443-475. 5. Apel, Karl-Otto. “Discourse Ethics as a Response to the Novel Challenges of Today's Reality to Corrsponsibility”, Journal of Religion; October 93, Vol. 73 Issue 4, pp.496-514. 6. Apel, Karl-Otto. “C. S. Peirce and the Post-Tarskian Problem of an Adequate Explication of the Meaning of Truth: Towards a Transcendental-Pragmatic Theory of Truth”, Part II, Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, Winter 1982, Vol. 18 Issue 1, pp.3-18. 7. Avio, Kenneth L. “Scarcity, Discourses of Implementation, and Habermasian Law and Democracy”, Ratio Juris, June 2000, Vol.3 Issue 2, pp.148-162. 8. Baumeister, Andrea T. “Habermas: Discourse and Cultural Diversity, Political Studies”, December 2003, Vol. 51 Issue 4, pp.740-759. 9. Benchimol, Alex. “The Cultural Politics of the Habermasian Public Sphere: A Re-examination of the Modernity/ Postmodernity Debate in its National, Social and Political Contexts”, European Legacy, August 2001, Vol. 6 Issue 4, pp.471-491. 10. Bohman, James. “Public Reason and Cultural Pluralism: Political Liberalism and the Problem of Moral Conflict”, Political Theory, Vol.23, No.2 (May, 1955), pp.253-279. 11. Brandom, Robert. “Facts, Norms, and Normative Facts: A Reply to Habermas”, European Journal of Philosophy, December 2000, Vol. 8 Issue 3, pp.356-375. 12. Brunkhorst, Hauke. “Rights and the Sovereignty of the People in the Crisis of the Nation State”, Ratio Juris, Mar 2000, Vol. 13 Issue 1, pp.49-63. 13. Chamey, Evan. “Political Liberalism, Deliberative Democracy, and the Public Sphere”, The American Political Science Review, Vol.92, NO.1(March, 1998), pp.97-110. 14. Cohen, Joshua. “Reflections on Habermas on Democracy”, Ratio Juris, December 1999, Vol. 12 Issue 4, pp.385-417. 15. Cooke, Maeve. “Authenticity and Autonomy: Taylor, Habermas, and the Politics of Recognition”, Political Theory, Vol.25, No.2 (April, 1997), pp.252-288. 16. Cooke, Maeve. “Meaning and Truth in Habermas's Pragmatics”, European Journal of Philosophy, April 2001, Vol. 9 Issue 1, pp.1-24. 17. Cooke, Maeve. “Socio-Cultural Learning as a 'Transcendental Fact': Habermas's Postmetaphysical Perspective”, International Journal of Philosophical Studies, February 2001, Vol. 9 Issue 1, pp.63-84. 18. Cooke, Maeve. “Five Arguments for Deliberative Democracy”, Political Studies, December 2000, Vol. 48 Issue 5, pp.947-970. 19. Cronin, Ciaran. “Democracy and Collective Identity: In Defense of Constitutional Patriotism”, European Journal of Philosophy, April 2003, Vol. 11 Issue 1, pp.1-29. 20. Dahms Harry F. “Theory in Weberian Marxism: Patterns of Critical Social Theory in Lukacs and Habermas”, Sociological Theory, Vol.15, No.3 (November, 1997), pp.181-214. 21. de Greiff, P. “Habermas on Nationalism and Cosmopolitanism”, Ratio Juris, December 2002, Vol. 15 Issue 4, pp.418-439. 22. Finlayson, James Gordon. “Modernity and Morality in Habermas's Discourse Ethics”, Inquiry, September 2000, Vol. 43 Issue 3, pp.319-341. 23. Finnis, John. “Natural Law and the Ethics of Discourse”, Ratio Juris, December 1999, Vol. 12 Issue 4, pp.354-374. 24. Flynn, Jeffrey. “Habermas on Human Rights: Law, Morality, and Intercultural Dialogue”, Social Theory & Practice, July 2003, Vol. 29 Issue 3, pp.431-458. 25. Freundlieb, Dieter. “Why Subjectivity Matters: Critical Theory and the Philosophy of the Subject”, Critical Horizons, September 2000, Vol. 1 Issue 2, pp.229-246. 26. Goldman, Alvin I. “Science, Publicity, and Consciousness”, Philosophy of Science, Vol.64, No.4 (December, 1997), pp.525-545. 27. Grant, Colin B. “Discursive Democracy as the Political Taming of Globalization? On Recent Political Essays by Jürgen Habermas”, Review of Contemporary German Affairs, November 2000, Vol. 8 Issue 2, pp.133-149. 28. Gurciullo, Sebastian. “Making Modern Identity: Charles Taylor's Retrieval of Moral Sources”, Critical Horizons, April 2001, Vol. 2 Issue 1, pp.93-126. 29. Habermas, Jürgen. “On Law and Disagreement. Some Comments on Interpretative Pluralism”, Ratio Juris, June 2003, Vol. 16 Issue 2, pp.187-195. 30. Habermas, Jürgen. “Toward a European Political Community”, Society, July /August 2002, Vol. 39 Issue 5, pp.58-62. 31. Ingram, David. “The Limits and Possibilities of Communicative Ethics for Democratic Theory”, Political Theory, Vol. 21, No.2 (May, 1993), pp.294-321. 32. Johnson, Pauline. “Discourse Ethics and the Normative Justification of Tolerance”, Critical Horizons, September 2000, Vol. 1 Issue 2, pp.281-306. 33. Ku, Agnes S. “Revisiting the Notion of “Public” in Habermas’s Theory --Toward a Theory of Politics of Public Credibility”, Sociological Theory, Vol. 18, No.2 (July, 2000), pp.216-240. 34. Kuper, Andrew. “Rawlsian Global Justice: Beyond the Law of Peoples to a Cosmopolitan Law of Persons”, Political Theory, Vol.28, No.5 (October., 2000), pp.640-674. 35. MacKendrick, Kenneth. “The Moral Imaginary of Discourse Ethics”, Critical Horizons, September 2000, Vol. 1 Issue 2, pp.247-270. 36. Markell, Patchen. “Making Affect Safe for Democracy? : On Constitutional Patriotism”, Political Theory, Vol.28, No.1 (February, 2000), pp.38-63. 37. Matar, Anat. “Habermas and Dummett: Beyond Dogmatism and Scepticism”, International Journal of Philosophical Studies, August 2001, Vol.9 Issue 3, pp.417-431. 38. McCarthy, Thomas. “Kantian Constructivism and Reconstructivism: Rawls and Habermas in Dialogue”, Ethics, Vol.105, No.1 (October., 1994), pp.44-63. 39. McMahon, Christopher. “Discourse and Morality”, Ethics, Vol. 110, No. 3 (April, 2000), pp.514-536. 40. Mehta, Pratap Bhanu. “Cosmopolitanism and the Circle of Reason”, Political Theory, Vol. 28, No. 5. (October, 2000), pp.619-639. 41. Michelman, Frank I. “Morality, Identity and Constitutional Patriotism”, Ratio Juris, September 2001, Vol. 14 Issue 3, pp.253-272. 42. Mill, David van. “The Possibility of Rational Outcomes from Democratic Discourse and Procedures”, The Journal of Politics, Vol.58, No.3 (August, 1996), pp.734-752. 44. Moon, J. Donald. “Rawls and Habermas on Public Reason: Human Rights and Global Justice”, Annual Review of Political Science, 2003, Vol.6 Issue 1, pp.257-275. 45. Mouffe, Chantal. “Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism?”, Social Research, Fall 99, Vol.66 Issue 3, pp.745-759. 46. Olson, Kevin. “Do Rights Have a Formal Basis? Habermas’ Legal Theory and the Normative Foundations of the Law”, Journal of Political Philosophy, September 2003, Vol.11 Issue 3, pp.273-295. 47. Piercey, Robert. “Not Choosing Between Morality and Ethics”, Philosophical Forum, Spring 2001, Vol. 32 Issue 1, pp.53-73. 48. Scharp, Kevin. “Communication and Content: Circumstances and Consequences of the Habermas-Brandom Debate”, International Journal of Philosophical Studies, March 2003, Vol. 11 Issue 1, pp.43-62. 49. Schmidt, James. “What Enlightenment Project?”, Political Theory, Vol. 28, No. 6. (December, 2000), pp.734-757. 50. Schwinn, Thomas. “False Connections: Systems and Action Theories in Neofunctionalism and in Jürgen Habermas”, Sociological Theory, Vol.16, No.1(March, 1998), pp.75-95. 51. Screenivasan, Gopal. “What Is the General Will?”, The Philosophical Review, Vol. 109, No.4 (October, 2000), pp.545-581. 52. Simmons, A. John. “Justification and Legitimacy”, Ethics, Vol. 109, No. 4. (July, 1999), pp.739-771. 53. Somers, Margaret R. “Narrating and Naturalizing Civil Society and Citizenship Theory: The Place of Political Culture and the Public Sphere”, Sociological Theory, Vol.13, No.3 (November, 1995), pp.229-274. 54. Steinberger, Peter J. “The Impossibility of a “Political” Conception”, The Journal of Politics, Vol.62, No.1 (February, 2000), pp.147-165. 55. Urbinati, Nadia. “Representation as Advocacy: A Study of Democratic Deliberation”, Political Theory, Vol.28, No.6 (December, 2000), pp.758-786. 56. Warren, Mark E. “Deliberative Democracy and Authority”, The American Political Science Review, Vol.90, No.1 (March, 1996), pp. 46-60. 57. Weinberger, Ota. “Legal Validity, Acceptance of Law”, Legitimacy. Some Critical Comments and Constructive Proposals, Ratio Juris, December 1999, Vol. 12 Issue 4, pp.336-354. 58. Wellmer, Albrecht. “The Debate About Truth: Pragmatism Without Regulative Ideas”, Critical Horizons; 2003, Vol.4 Issue 1, pp.29-55. 60. White, Stephen K. “Weak Ontology and Liberal Political Reflection”, Political Theory, Vol.25, No.4(August, 1997), pp.502-523. 四、中文參考書目 1. 龔群《正義論》，北京：商務印書館 2003。 2. 汪行福《通向話語民主之路與哈貝馬斯對話》，四川：四川人民出版社 2002。 3. 章國鋒《關於一個公平世界的「烏托邦」構想》，山東：山東人民出版社 200 4. 汪行福《走出時代的困境》，上海：上海社會科學院出版社 2000。 5. 楊深坑《溝通理性. 生命情懷與教育過程》，台北：師大書苑出版2000。 6. 陳曉林《學術巨人與理性困境：韋柏、巴柏、哈伯瑪斯》，台北：時報出版社 1987 7. 李英明 《哈伯馬斯》，台北市：東大1986 五、中文期刊： 1. 洪鎌德，＜法律、道德、民主和法治國家的發展--哈伯瑪斯法律觀的析評＞（上）(下) ，「哲學與文化」，28:2=321 民90.02 頁97-114；28:3=322 民90.03 頁206-217。 2. 張鼎國，＜文傳統承與社會批判──回顧Apel, Habermas, Gadamer, Ricoeu間的詮釋學論爭＞，「國立政治大學哲學學報」第五期。 3. 曹志成，＜人文社會科學邏輯基礎的探討--以哈伯瑪斯對「生活世界」的詮釋為解釋線索＞，「東吳哲學學報」8 民92.08 頁75-123。 4. 黃宗顯，＜共識論述與差異政略思想在學校行政革新上的和合與適用性：Habermas、Lyotard與中國「道」思想的詮釋性應用＞， 「教育研究集刊」49:2 民92.06 頁97-115。 5. 顏厥安，＜溝通、制度與民主文化--由哈伯瑪斯的法理論初探社會立憲主義＞，「國立臺灣大學法學論叢」30:3 民90.05 頁1-48。 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/39047 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 本文主旨在討論當代德國著名的哲學家哈伯瑪斯所提出的「話語倫理學」，闡釋在當代社會的文化衝突中，尤其處於後形上學時代，社會行動如何獲得合理且有效的規範，用以協調公共領域的道德、法律和政治實踐。話語倫理學採取「去先驗化的」（de-transcendental）康德哲學立場，透過語用學的轉向，在理想化條件下，藉由合理的論辯過程中，所證成的一種程序主義的道德理論。本身分為二大部份，一部份是普遍道德規範的證成；另一部份，此規範在法律和政治實踐上的應用，即透過話語原則重構近代實證法律體系。首先，我們闡述哈伯瑪斯哈伯瑪斯作話語和溝通行動基礎的「普遍語用學」（universal pragmatics），釐清語言的在溝通使用中達到相互理解的可能條件為何？其中涉及到真理理論和意義理論的問題。其次，我們進入話語倫理學的主體討論，指出話語倫理學所具有的「道德話語」（moral discourse）特性，與其他實踐理性「倫理話語」（ethical discourse）、和「實用話語」（pragmatic discourse）的差異。同時說明此種主張「正義的優先性」（the priority of the justice）的兩大原則：「普遍化原則」（principle of universalization）和「語話原則」（principle of discourse）如何被證成，並分析與當代主張「善的優先性」（the priority of the good）的「倫理話語」思想上迥異之處。其次，分析作為話語原則應用的法律和政治話語，如何克服當代法律中「正當性」（Legitimität）和「合法律性」（Legalität）的吊詭，在自由主義和共和主義二大民主制之外，轉換成為程序主義的法律典範，建立所謂的「審議政治」（deliberate politics）的民主制典範。再者，為指出話語倫理學的獨特性，特別與當代三種具代表性的思想做比較：羅爾斯（政治自由主義）、傅柯（後現代主義）和泰勒（社群主義），深入分析這些理論在道德和政治實踐的差異性。最後，本文嘗試提出一些批判和補充，作為進一步思考的依據。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | In this thesis I attempt to discuss Habermas’s “discourse ethics” and argue how it can provide a possible solution to contemporary moral and political conflicts. Especially, in post-metaphysical times, discourse ethics try to justify the common, reasonable and valid norm to integrate social actions. From a Kantian point of view, but with de-transcendental position, discourse ethics wants to reconstructure a procedural moral theory, its aim is to discuss the conditions of reaching mutual understanding (further, acquire consensus) through discursive process intersubjectively.
First, I explain Habermas’s universal pragmatics as the basic of communicative action and discourses, and analyze its components, including theory of truth and meaning. Secondly, I want to discuss how to justify two main principles of discourse ethics: principles of universalization and discourse, and explain their meanings and application. However, Habermas divides the three use modes of practical reason: ethical, moral, and pragmatic. Discourse ethics is a moral discourse, not ethical discourse, the former emphasizes the priority of the justice or right, and the latter claims the priority of the good. I want to analyze their differences. Thirdly, there are two aspects in discourse ethics, one is justification of universal moral norm, and the other is to apply this moral norm to legal or political practices. I attempt to interpret the crisis of the modern legal system (positive law), namely it is insufficient to justify the resource of legitimation alone through legal process, and to explain discourse ethics how to solve this problem. In conclusion, I want to compare discourse ethics with other theories: political liberalism (Ralws), postmodernism (Foucault) and communitarianism (Taylor). Finally, I try to supply some critical and available opinions. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-13T16:59:11Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-94-D84124003-1.pdf: 1081609 bytes, checksum: 4a70a95741be1ba2d3775c603fa762dc (MD5) Previous issue date: 2005 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 目 錄
第一章 序 論 1 第一節 現代性的危機 1 第二節 話語與溝通行動 6 第三節 本文的結構和內容 9 第二章 倫理、道德和法律 11 第一節 當代倫理學的困境 11 第二節 話語倫理學特色 18 第三節 實踐話語的三種運用 21 第四節 道德和法律 24 第五節 話語和生活世界 29 第三章 話語倫理學的語用學基礎 33 第一節 主體性哲學的典範轉移 33 第二節 重構科學和經驗科學 36 第三節 語用學的意義理論 45 第四節 有效性要求和理想言說情境 53 第五節 達到理解或獲得贊同 56 第六節 真理性和正確性 61 第四章 話語倫理學的證成原則 65 第一節 話語倫理學的論證結構 65 第二節 話語倫理學二原則 68 第三節 話語倫理學的證成基礎 76 第四節 道德話語的澄清和困難 80 第五章 話語倫理學的應用原則 89 第一節 有效的法律如何可能？ 89 第二節 法律的重構：主觀權利和法治國 92 第三節 法律的確定性和正確性：法理學合理性基礎 98 第四節 司法詮釋和立法權的衝突 102 第五節 民主政治的三種規範模式 104 第六節 法律話語的矛盾 107 第六章 批判與回應 115 第一節 兩種當代康德主義之爭 115 第二節 權力和話語 129 第三節 道德和倫理之間的衝突 133 第四節 民族主義和個人自由 140 第七章 結 論 145 參考書目 149 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.subject | 哈伯瑪斯 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 普遍化原則 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 話語倫理學 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 批判理論 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 正當性 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | critical theory | en |
| dc.subject | principle of universalization | en |
| dc.subject | Habermas | en |
| dc.subject | legitimation | en |
| dc.subject | discourse ethics | en |
| dc.title | 哈伯瑪斯話語倫理學的證成與應用 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Justification and Application of Habermas's Discourse Ethics | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 93-1 | |
| dc.description.degree | 博士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 顧忠華,張旺山,張鼎國,錢永祥 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 普遍化原則,話語倫理學,批判理論,正當性,哈伯瑪斯, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Habermas,legitimation,discourse ethics,critical theory,principle of universalization, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 160 | |
| dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2005-02-17 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 文學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 哲學研究所 | zh_TW |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 哲學系 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-94-1.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 1.06 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件，除了特別指名其著作權條款之外，均受到著作權保護，並且保留所有的權利。