English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 11 |  Items with full text/Total items : 88837/118541 (75%)
Visitors : 23543471      Online Users : 238
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 140.119/98609
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/98609


    Title: 德沃金與藍騰論仇恨言論
    Dworkin and Langton on hate speech
    Authors: 張原斌
    Contributors: 鄭光明
    張原斌
    Keywords: 仇恨言論
    德沃金
    平等尊重
    平等關懷
    藍騰
    消極自由
    積極自由
    Date: 2016
    Issue Date: 2016-07-01 15:09:08 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 德沃金(Ronald Dworkin)提出了權利觀點(right-based view),主張政府不能管制仇恨言論(hate speech),權利觀點要求政府必須做到「平等尊重」(equal concern)與「平等關懷」(equal respect)每一位公民,使每位公民都因為獲得「關懷」與「尊重」而相互「平等」,若是政府管制仇恨言論,則政府便沒有做到平等尊重與平等關懷每一位公民,因此,政府不能管制仇恨言論。
    藍騰(Rae Langton)為德沃金整理出了論證架構,然而卻主張:德沃金的權利觀點所得出的結論並非如同德沃金所說的「政府不應該管制仇恨言論」,而應該是「政府應該管制仇恨言論」。
    為何德沃金與藍騰從同樣的論證架構與權利觀點出發,卻推導出兩種完全相反的結論?為了解決這個問題,我於本文將主張藍騰所整理出來的論證架構其實尚未涉及德沃金的權利觀點,並且我會引用消極自由(negative liberty)與積極自由(positive liberty)的概念,說明為何德沃金與藍騰對「政府應不應該管制仇恨言論」此議題的結論會有如此差異,最後我將證明德沃金的觀點較有道理。
    Reference: Austin, John L. (1962). How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Berlin, I. (2002). Liberty: Incorporating Four Essays on Liberty. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
    Brison, S. J. (1998). The Autonomy Defense of Free Speech. Ethics, 108, 2:312-339.
    Delgado, R. & J. Stefancic. (2001). Critical Race Theory: An Introduction. New York, NY: New York University Press.
    Dworkin, R. (1977). Taking Rights Seriously. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Dworkin, R. (1991). Two Concepts of Liberty. In E. Ullmann- Margalit and A. Margalit eds., Isaiah Berlin: A Celebration (pp. 100-109). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    Dworkin, R. (1993). Women and Pornography. New York Review of Books, 40, 17: 36-42.
    Dworkin, R. (1997). MacKinnon’s Words. In Freedom's Law: The Moral Reading of the American Constitution (pp. 227-243). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Dworkin, R. (2000). Sovereign Virtue: The Theory and Practice of Equality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Dworkin, R. (2009). Foreword. In I. Hare and J. Weinstein eds., Extreme Speech and Democracy (pp. i-ix). Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press.
    Edmonds, D. & N. Warburton. (2014). Philosophy Bites Again. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
    Feinberg, J. (1973). Social Philosophy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    Hornsby, J. & R. Langton. (1998). Free Speech and Illocution. Legal Theory, 4: 21-37.
    Langton, R. (1990). Whose Right? Ronald Dworkin, Women, and Pornographers. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 19, 4: 311-359.
    Langton, R. (1993). Speech Acts and Unspeakable Acts. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22, 4: 293-330.
    Langton, R. (1998). Subordination, Silence, and Pornography’s Authority. In R. C. Post (Ed.), Censorship and Silencing: Practices of Cultural Regulation (pp. 261-283). Los Angeles: The Getty Research Institute.
    Mill, J. S. (1997). Mill: The Spirit of The Age, On Liberty, The Subjection of Women. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.
    Smolla, R. A. (1992). Free Speech in an Open Society. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.
    Sullivan, K. & G. Gunther. (2003). First Amendment Law. New York, NY: Foundation Press.
    Taylor, C. (1979). What’s Wrong With Negative Liberty?. In Philosophy and the Human Sciences: Philosophical Papers 2 (pp. 211-229). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Walker, S. (1994). Hate Speech: The History of an American Controversy. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

    陳宜中,(2007),〈仇恨言論不該受到管制嗎?反思德沃金的反管制論證〉,《政治與社會哲學評論》,第23期,頁47-87。
    陳宜中,(2009),〈色情管制爭議中的言論自由〉,《人文及社會科學集刊》,第21卷,第3期,頁389-429。
    劉靜怡,(2015),〈國家法律禁止不了的事〉,《台灣法學雜誌》,第264期,頁29-30。
    鄭光明,(2012),《從語言哲學到色情查禁:藍騰的反色情論證》,台北:五南。
    鄭光明,(2013),〈什麼是言論自由:一軸觀點〉,《政治與社會哲學評論》,第45期,頁63-110。
    鄭光明,(2015),《我的自由,不自由?10則青春校園的哲學激辯》,台北:三民。
    鄭光明,(2015a),〈瓦爾準與藍騰論仇恨言論〉,《東吳哲學學報》,第32期,頁1-36。
    蘇慧婕,(2015),〈從諷刺言論談言論管制的司法審查難題〉,《台灣法學雜誌》,第264期,頁26-28。
    龔艷,(2013),《仇恨言論法律規制研究》,廈門:廈門大學。
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    哲學系
    101154005
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0101154005
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[哲學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    400501.pdf1478KbAdobe PDF1054View/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