Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/63460Full metadata record
| ???org.dspace.app.webui.jsptag.ItemTag.dcfield??? | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 顏厥安 | |
| dc.contributor.author | Chu-Ning Zheng | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 鄭楚甯 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-16T16:43:15Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2022-06-09 | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2020-06-09 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2020 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2020-04-21 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 中文參考文獻
孔恩, 程樹德, 傅大維,&王道還(2017). 科學革命的結構. 遠流 謝世民. (2015). 理由轉向: 規範性之哲學研究. 國立臺灣大學出版中心. 顏厥安. (2004). 規範, 論證與行動: 法認識論論文集. 元照出版公司. 陳愛娥, & Larenz, K. (1996). 法學方法論. 台北: 五南. 康德, &李明輝. (1990). 道德底形上學之基礎. 台北: 聯經. ______. (2013). 康德歷史哲學論文集. 台北: 聯經. ______. (2015). 道德底形上學. 台北: 聯經. 康德, &鄧曉芒. (2004). 純粹理性批判. 台北: 聯經. ______. (2004). 實踐理性批判. 台北: 聯經. 韋伯,康樂,&簡惠美.(2003). 法律社會學. 台北: 遠流. 哈伯瑪斯 Jürgen Habermas, &童世駿.(2003) 事實與格式. 臺灣商務 英文參考文獻 Anscombe, G. E. M. (2000). Intention. Harvard University Press. Aristotle, A. D., Brown, L., & Ross, W. D. (2009). The nicomachean ethics: Oxford world’s classics. Oxford University Press. Baker, L. R. (2013). Naturalism and the first-person perspective. Oxford University Press. Baillie, J. (2006). Routledge philosophy guidebook to Hume on morality. Routledge. Bertea, S., & Pavlakos, G. (Eds.). (2011). New essays on the normativity of law. Bloomsbury Publishing. Chang, R. (2009). Voluntarist reasons and the sources of normativity. Coleman, J. L. (2002). The practice of principle. Oxford University Press. Dworkin, R. (1977). Taking rights seriously. London: Duckworth. ______. (1986). Law's empire. Harvard University Press. Finnis, J. (2011). Natural law and natural rights. Oxford University Press. Frankena, W. K. (1958). Obligation and motivation in recent moral philosophy. George, R. P. (Ed.). (1999). The autonomy of law: essays on legal positivism. Clarendon Press. Habermas, J. (2015). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. John Wiley & Sons. Hart, H. L. A. (1982). Essays on Bentham: Jurisprudence and political philosophy. O Oxford University Press. ______. (1994). The concept of law. Oxford University Press. Hobbes, T. (1946). Leviathan, edited by M. Oakeshott. Clarendon Press. Hume, D. & Selby-Bigge, L. A. (1967). A Treatise of Human Nature. Oxford University Press. Hylton, P. R. (1990). Idealism, and the Emergence of Analytic Philosophy. Oxford University Press. James, S. (1997). Passion and action: The emotions in seventeenth-century philosophy. Clarendon Press Kant, I. (1991). Kant: political writings. Cambridge University Press. ______. (1999). Critique of pure reason. Cambridge university press. ______. (2002). Critique of practical reason. Hackett Publishing. Kant, I., & Wood, A. W. (2018). Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals: With an Updated Translation, Introduction, and Notes. Yale University Press. Kelsen, H. (1967). Pure theory of law. Univ of California Press. ______. (1991). General theory of norms. Oxford University Press. Korsgaard, C. M., Cohen, G. A., Geuss, R., Nagel, T., & Williams, B. (1996). The sources of normativity. Cambridge University Press. Korsgaard, C. M. (1986). Skepticism about practical reason. The Journal of Philosophy, 83(1), 5-25. ______. (1989). Personal identity and the unity of agency: A Kantian response to Parfit. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 101-132. ______. (1996). Creating the kingdom of ends. Cambridge University Press. ______. (2003). Realism and constructivism in twentieth-century moral philosophy. Journal of Philosophical Research, 28(Supplement), 99-122. ______. (2008). The constitution of agency: Essays on practical reason and moral psychology. Oxford University Press. ______. (2009). Self-constitution: Agency, identity, and integrity. Oxford University Press. Kuhn, T. S. (2012). The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago press. Leiter, B. (Ed.). (2006). The future for philosophy. Oxford University Press. ______. (2007). Naturalizing Jurisprudence : Essays on American Legal Realism and Naturalism in Legal Philosophy. Oxford University Press. ______. (2008). American legal realism. The Blackwell guide to the philosophy of law and legal theory. John Wiley & Sons, 2008. Lucas, J. R. (1966). The principles of politics. Macarthur, D., & De Caro, M. (Eds.). (2004). Naturalism in Question. Harvard University Press. ______. (2010). Naturalism and normativity. Columbia University Press. Mackie, J. (1990). Ethics: Inventing right and wrong. Penguin UK. Maguire, B. (2015). Grounding the autonomy of ethics. Oxford studies in metaethics, 10, 188-215. McBride, N. J., & Steel, S. (2018). Great Debates in Jurisprudence. Macmillan International Higher Education. McPherson, T. (2011). Against quietist normative realism. Philosophical Studies, 154(2), 223-240. Moser, P. K., & Trout, J. D. (Eds.). (1995). Contemporary materialism: a reader. Routledge. Nagel, T. (1979). The possibility of altruism. Princeton University Press. Parfit, D. (2011). On what matters: volume one (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press. ______. (2011). On what matters: volume two (Vol. 2). Oxford University Press. Plato, & Waterfield, R. (1993). Plato: Republic. Oxford University Press. Platts, M. (1980). Ways of meaning: an introduction to a philosophy of language. MIT Press. Perry, S. (2006). Hart on social rules and the foundations of law: Liberating the internal point of view. Fordham L. Rev., 75, 1171. Price, R. (1967). A review of the principal questions in morals. Clarendon Press. Quine, W. V. O. (1976). Two dogmas of empiricism. In Can Theories be Refuted? (pp. 41-64). Springer, Dordrecht. ______. (1981). Theories and things. Harvard University Press. Rawls, J. (2005). Political liberalism. Columbia University Press. ______. (2009). A theory of justice. Harvard university press. Raz, J. (1979). The authority of law: essays on law and morality. Oxford University Press. ______. (1994). Ethics in the public domain: essays in the morality of law and politics. Oxford University Press. ______. (1999). Explaining normativity: On rationality and the justification of reason. Ratio, 12(4), 354-379. ______. (1999). Practical reason and norms. Oxford University Press. ______. (2005). The myth of instrumental rationality. J. Ethics & Soc. Phil., 1, 1. ______. (2009). Between authority and interpretation: On the theory of law and practical reason. Oxford University Press. ______. (2009). Reasons: explanatory and normative. In New Essays on the Explanation of Action (pp. 184-202). Palgrave Macmillan, London. ______. (2010). Reason, reasons and normativity. Oxford studies in metaethics, 5, 5-24. Shook, J. R., & Kurtz, P. (2009). The Future of Naturalism. Humanity Books Skorupski, J. (2012). The domain of reasons. OUP Oxford. Smith, M. (1987). The Humean theory of motivation. Mind, 96(381), 36-61. Turner, S. P. (2010). Explaining the normative. Polity. Weinreb, L. L. (2016). Legal reason: The use of analogy in legal argument. Cambridge University Press. Williams, B. (1981). Moral luck: philosophical papers 1973-1980. Cambridge University Press. ______. (2011). Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy. Routledge. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/63460 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 規範性是什麼？法律是否具有規範性？，上述這組關於法律規範性的議題無疑是當今法理學領域中的最受關切的領域之一。因為這領域不但涉及法律本質的討論，更在某層面上拓展且深化了自然法與法實證主義間的討論。
本文的主軸一開始將放在倫理學對於”實踐理由”此一議題的討論上，分別藉由三組立場互異的後設倫理學立場，來分析作為實踐理由的規範性，最後運用柯思嘉(C.M Korsgaard)的理論來做總結。並藉著這組分析架構的框架，來討論當代幾個較為重要的法實證主義理論。 本文共分九個章節，第壹至三章討論自然主義與規範主義兩大陣營對於規範性的看法，肆至陸章則對實踐理由進行分析，並分別檢視內在主義與外在主義主要立場，最後以柯思嘉的立場作結。第柒章討論為何以及如何將這組討論架構適用在當代的法律理論中，第捌章則討論個別當代法理學學者的理論，第九章則以柯思嘉理論的視野來作為總結。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | “What is the normativity ?” , ”Does the law has normativity or not ? ” The aforementioned issue concerning legal normativity is undoubtedly one of the fields where scholars are most concerned in jurisprudence today. The issues do not only matter the nature of law, but also expand and deepen the discussion between Natural Law and Legal Positvism in certain level.
The purpose of this study began with the discussion of “practical reasons” in ethics, and the three different groups of Meta-Ethic positions are used to analyzed the normativity as practical reasons, and finally the C.M. Korsgaard’s theory is used to summarized . Through the frame of analyzed structure, several important contemporary theories of Legal Positvism are discussed. This thesis is divided into 9 chapters. From 1~3 chapter, this article discussed the views of normativity from Naturalism and Normativism. Later, in the content of 4~6 chapter, this article analyzed practical reasons, and investigated the main topics of Internalism and Externalism in meta-ethics; moreover, it ended in the Korsgaard’s arguments. The chapter 7 would discussed why and how this analytic frame was applied into the discussion of contemporary legal theories. Then, the chapter 8 focused on the theory of individual jurisprudence scholars. The chapter 9 draw a conclusion which based on the theory with Korsgaard’s vision. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-16T16:43:15Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-109-R04a21009-1.pdf: 7363646 bytes, checksum: b0f900e81b7b62f75522da8e14424047 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2020 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 壹、 前言 4
貳、 規範性問題與自然主義的挑戰 6 一、 世界中的規範面向 6 二、 自然主義者的挑戰 7 三、 無法加以定義的自然主義 9 四、 自然主義的兩種信條 12 五、 規範論者的質疑 15 1. 放置問題 16 2. 化約論與科學的統一性 17 六、 自然主義與規範性 20 1. 規範性的自然化：化約 20 2. 特納的反擊 21 七、 法學中對於規範性的論辯 26 八、 小結：尚未終止的論辯 29 參、 規範性的樣貌 31 一、 各種脈絡脈絡中的規範性 31 二、 作為實踐理由的規範性 33 三、 規範性與自主命題 34 1. 倫理學理論的必要條件 35 2. 法律理論的自主性 38 肆、 理由與行動 42 一、 理由的種類 42 二、 內在理由與外在理由 42 1. 理由與動機 42 2. 威廉斯對於理由的分析 43 3. 帕菲特與外在主義者們的反駁 46 4. 理由外在論的缺陷 50 5. 外在與內在的鴻溝 52 伍、 規範性的拘束力 53 一、 實在論的問題 53 二、 柯思嘉的反思認可理論 55 1. 反思的心靈結構 55 2. 道德判斷的基礎：理論的演進 57 3. 自由意志的法則 60 4. 規範性的來源 64 陸、 人類的行動模式 66 一、 激情與慾望 66 二、 休謨與休謨式的行動理論 71 三、 理性存在者的行動模式 74 四、 柯思嘉行動理論的未竟之業 79 柒、 法律的規範性如何可能 81 一、 法律理論與規範性的關係 81 二、 法律理論的第一組分類條件 82 三、 自然主義式理論的缺陷 86 四、 法律理論的第二組分類條件 87 五、 法律理論的第三組分類條件 88 六、 法律規範性分類標準的意義 89 捌、 當代法律理論中的規範性 92 一、 作為行動理由的法律命題 92 二、 美國法律唯實主義 93 三、 哈特的柔性法實證主義 96 四、 拉茲的剛性法實證主義 100 1. 排他性理由 101 2. 阻斷理由 103 3. 權威理論的困境 104 玖、 如何依據法律而行動 107 參考文獻 110 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.subject | 自然主義 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 規範性 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 法律的規範性 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 實踐理由 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 柯思嘉 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 康德 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Normativity of Law | en |
| dc.subject | Naturalism | en |
| dc.subject | Practical Reasons | en |
| dc.subject | Kant | en |
| dc.subject | Korasgaard | en |
| dc.subject | Normativity | en |
| dc.title | 在自然主義與規範主義之間：由實踐理由的觀點來看待法律規範性的條件 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Between Naturalism and Normativism: The presupposition of Legal Normativity as Practical Reason | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 108-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 莊世同,王鵬翔,謝世民,戴華 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 規範性,法律的規範性,實踐理由,自然主義,柯思嘉,康德, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Normativity,Normativity of Law,Practical Reasons,Naturalism,Korasgaard,Kant, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 115 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201904374 | |
| dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2020-04-21 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 法律學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 法律學研究所 | zh_TW |
| Appears in Collections: | 法律學系 | |
Files in This Item:
| File | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-109-1.pdf Restricted Access | 7.19 MB | Adobe PDF |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.