黑格爾《法哲學原理》中的刑罰思想與相關爭議

Abstract

在傳統的討論當中，關於黑格爾的刑罰思想是不是一種應報主義，一直以來引發許多的爭議。黑格爾反對刑罰是為了達到對犯罪的威嚇或矯正等其他目的；相對於此，他透過許多方式來說明犯罪與刑罰之間存在著必然的連結關係。因此，許多學者認為黑格爾是應報主義者，然而也有一些學者反對這樣的詮釋。 然而，在此爭議之中，隱含的可能是對於概念的誤解或混淆，進而導致學者之間意見的分歧。此外，刑罰本身就其手段的特殊性，它透過剝奪人身自由、財產甚至生命的方式來表達對犯罪的譴責，這些方式被認為是強制地將痛苦或壞事加諸人的身上。若刑罰的實行缺乏合理的根據，則無異於任意地對人施加侵害。因此，對於刑罰的證成是所有刑罰理論的重要面向，而黑格爾的刑罰思想作為一種刑罰理論，也同樣必須面對這個問題。 在本論文的在第一章，將提出特殊的區分方法作為詮釋黑格爾刑罰思想的架構。第二章將以此架構闡述《法哲學原理》中關於刑罰的思想。接下來第三章進行對於爭議的處理，區分應報主義、報復和復仇的不同，並以此基礎回應學者們的不同意見。最後，第四章探討黑格爾對於刑罰的證成是否成功，並以此作為結論。

In traditional discussions, the issue regarding whether Hegel is a retributivist has engendered controversy. Hegel rejects that punishment is to achieve some purpose, threat or reformation, for instance. Rather, he expounds that there is a necessary link between crime and punishment. According to this view, many scholars advocate that Hegel is a retributivist, though some doesn't. However, this controversy may results from misunderstanding or confusion of the concept. In addition, punishment needs to be justified in so far as punishment serves as a way to inflict pain or evil on criminals, i.e. fine, imprisonment, death penalty, and for this reason, inquiry to the problem of justification of Hegel’s theory of punishment is also an important aspect in this thesis. In the first chapter of this thesis, I will start with introducing an approach to interpret Hegel’s thought of punishment, and based on this approach, in chapter two, I will expound Hegel’s thought of punishment in Elements of the Philosophy of Right. In chapter three, I will proceed to deal with the controversy through distinguishing among retributivism, retribution and revenge. In chapter four, I will discuss whether Hegel’s theory provides a justification for punishment or not.