论西方契约论的两个传统:自利与非自利-《南京师大学报（社会科学版）》

文章信息/Info

Title:: Two Traditions of Social Contract Theory in the West:Contractarianism and Contractualism

摘要:: 西方契约论大体有两个传统:一是从霍布斯到洛克再到哥梯尔发展形成的自利契约论。这一理论认为,道德判断的依据是基于谈判各方立足自身利益经谈判所制定的契约或达成的共识,自利理性是唯一的理性原则。二是从卢梭到康德再到罗尔斯、斯坎伦发展形成的非自利契约论。这一理论认为,道德原则是由平等自由的个体基于某种共同的意志或理想达成的共识所决定,自利理性并非唯一的理性原则。应该说,这两种传统都试图证明或预设某种终极的价值,但每一种价值本身却又无法解释所有的道德问题。因而,二者都无法回答规范伦理学中“什么使一个行动成为道德的行动”的问题,而斯坎伦所指出的“他人无法合理的反驳”则为我们指出了未来道德共识的可能路向。

Abstract:: There are two traditions of social contract theory in the West. The one, known as contractarianism, has developed from Hobbes to Locke to Gauthier. According to this tradition, morality is the agreement reached by self-interested rational agents in a moral community through some sort of negotiation. The principle they follow in their negotiation is the one of prudence. The other, known as contractualism, has developed from Rousseau to Kant to Rawls and Scanlon. According to this tradition, morality is the agreement reached by equal and free agents who are motivated by “general will” or some common ideals, such as equality, rather than the prudential principle. Contractarianism seems to have more problems, because morality does not seem to be established only upon the prudential principle. Scanlon’s contractualism is more promising in answering the normative ethical question of “what makes an act morally right,” since he holds that what is right or wrong is ultimately determined by the principles that “no one could reasonably reject”.