個人自主、社群意識與關懷德性：自由主義普遍性公民身分觀的修正

(1)

(2)

壹、緒論

西方自由主義有一悠久的傳統。二十世紀中葉以後，自由主義算是戰勝了共產主義，成為大多數國家仿效的政治思潮，不僅如此，自由主義的各種價值觀，也儼然成為一種普效的生活方式。不過，在歷經自由主義國家的興盛之後，也逐漸引起了政治哲學家的反省，他們認為自由主義的許多預設及主張，容易造成個人與社群的分離，不僅造成了對公共事務的冷漠，也使得個人心靈產生我行我素式的疏離。社群主義（ communitarianism）、多元文化主義（ multiculturalism）及女性主義（ feminism）等也各自對自由主義提出了一些修正，成為二十世紀末重要的政治哲學議題（ Kymlicka & Norman, 1995）。

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

二點，第一，幸福的生活不在於預設某種實質的價值，而在於個人的選擇能力；其二，社會或國家的進步，不在於預設某種實質的價值，也不在於要求個人犧牲，表現忠誠或付出，同樣在於個人自主的選擇能力。

二、自由主義的公民身分觀

坎諾瓦（ P. J. Conover）明確指出，公民身分（ citizenship）定義了個人與政治社群之間的基本關係，政治社群是由成員與制度共同組成，因此，公民身分指的就是個別公民彼此之間，以及與制度之間的關係如何。在這種基礎上，個人要回答的問題是：我是誰？我能做什麼？我應該做什麼？坎諾瓦認為，公民資格（身分），包含了三個要素：法律、心理及行為三層面。所謂法律層面，包括誰有資格成為公民，公民應有的權利、義務；心理層面，涉及了公民認同（ citizen identity ），是指公民在社群中，彼此共享的一種情感，這種認同可以促進公民間的團結，進而提升社會的凝聚力；行為層面牽涉到公民德行（ citizen virtue），是指公民在實踐公民角色時所應具備的美德（劉姝言， 1998： 84）傳統自由主義在公民身分上，是採取一種普遍性的公民觀，在一個政治社群中，每一個人都是權利的擁有者（ bearer of rights），公民身分是指每一個人都和他人一樣，都是自由、平等、理性的存在者，都擁有相同的權利和義務（林火旺，1998a：385），在這種以「權利」為主導的架構中，「公民認同」與「公民德性」並不被視為第一優位。馬歇爾（ T. H. Marshall）在二次大戰後，最有系統的提出「公民身分即是權利」的觀念，認為公民身分基本上是用來保障每個人都是完整及平等的社會成員，只有透過增加人民的公民權利，才能確保其身為某一政治社群的歸屬感。馬歇爾根據英國近三百年來的發展，將公民身分畫分為三個主要的權利範疇：（ Kymlicka & Norman, 1995 ： 285~286; Marshall, 1965： 78，蘇峰山， 1996）

(7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

(12)

(13)

(14)

(15)

(16)

(17)

現象( 4 )_。有鑑於此，女性主義基本上有兩種立場，其一是更落實普遍性之公民觀，「先作人，再作男人女人」，是自由派女性主義之立場。如奧肯（ Okin,1989）特別重視公權力應介入家庭糾紛，以保障在於家庭中常處於弱勢地位的女性。女性主義之發展，最初是從反本質的立場，去挑戰兩性分工的刻板印象，為了要證明女性不輸男性，要先確立平等的原則。不過，女性主義學者逐漸意識到，整個社會的結構及文化，其實是以男性為主體，這不是抽象的強調男女平等就可竟其功。從「差異」的立場，反而更能凸顯女性的境遇，從而可以擬定更適切的婦女政策。楊格的差異政治學，是典型的代表。關懷倫理學，也是在「差異」的概念下發展。但是，關懷倫理很難避免一項本質論（ essentialism）的指控，即男女有別是源自於男女身心差異上的事實，特別是女性的育兒是出於生物上的天性，而政治活動是人為世界之實踐活動。政治事務，對外擴張的軍事行動，以及人與人之間資源交易的經濟活動很自然的劃入男性之工作領域，而育兒、居家、看護被視為是私領域，隸屬女性之工作。換言之，關懷倫理以及部分女性主義學者所提倡的母性思考（ maternal thinking），都被批評為本質論，可能更易於鼓勵使女性安於傳統「主內」之角色。瓊斯也認為女性主義的政治公民身分，有其兩難，她認為：在界定政治行動及公民德行時，如何能包含這些差異而又不致於產生公民身分的性別隔離，確實是一大挑戰。（ Jones & Jonasdottir,1988： 18）

(18)

(19)

(20)

(21)

(22)

同的論證，都企圖調和個人自主與社群文化的認同之間的可能緊張關係。

二、自主與公民德行

(23)

社會德行（獨立與容忍）、經濟德行（職業倫理、延宕滿足、適應）、政治德行等（有能力辨別且尊重他人權利、願意參與討論）（ Galston,1991： 221-224）。秦立克等下面的話頗能代表公民德行在自由社會的重要性：（ Kymlicka & Norman, 1995： 291）

(24)

(25)

(26)

(27)

(28)

(29)

(30)

(31)

(32)

徐百齊譯（ 2000）：社約論，盧梭原著。台北：商務。張秀雄主編（ 1998）：公民教育的理論與實施。台北：師大書苑。 清大通識教育中心（ 1999）： 1999 海峽兩岸通識教育與公民養成學術研討會。簡成熙（ 2000）：正義倫理與關懷倫理的論辯－女性倫理學的積極意義。教育資料集刊， 25 輯， 185～ 212。簡成熙（ 2000）：多元文化教育的論證、爭議與實踐：從自由主義與社群主義論起，見但昭偉、蘇永明主編，文化、多元文化與教育，教育哲學與文化，第一期。台北：五南。瞿海源（ 1998）：跨世紀公民教育的問題，見殷海光文教基金會主編，市民社會與民主的反思。台北：桂冠。劉姝言（ 1998）：自由主義的公民教育觀，見張秀雄主編，公民教育的理論與實施。台北：師大書苑。劉毓秀主編（ 1997）：女性、國家、照顧工作。台北：女書文化。蕭高彥、蘇文流主編（ 1998）：多元主義。台北：中研院中山人文社會科學研究所。蘇永明（ 2000）：垂直多元與水平多元的思考模式，見但昭偉、蘇永明主編，文化、多元文化與教育，教育哲學與文化，第一期。台北：五南。蘇峰山（ 1996）：公民資格與公民教育，中研院社會學研究所「公民道德與社會學研討會」論文。

二、英文部份

Barcalow, E. (1994). Moral Philosophy : Theories and issues.

Blemont, CA. :Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Benhabib, S. (1994). Situating the self : gender , community and

postmodernism in contemporary ethics. Cambridge : Polity Press.

Benhabib, S. (1998). The generalized and the concrete other : The

Kohlberg-Gilligan Controversy and Feminist Theory, In M. Gatens,

(33)

Blum, L. (1993). Gilligan and Kohlberg : Implications for moral theory.

In M. J. Larrabee (Ed.) An ethic of care. New York : Routledge.

Chodorow, N. (1978). The reproduction of mothering. Berkeley :

University of California Press.

Clement, G. (1996). Care, autonomy, and justice : Feminism and the

ethic of care. Boulder, Colorado : Westview Press.

Conover, P. et al. (1991) The nature of citizenship in the United States

and Great Britain : Empirical comments on theoretical themes.

Journal of politics. 53, 800-832.

Dagger, R. (1997). Civic virtues : Rights, citizenship, and republican

liberalism. Oxford : Oxford University Press.

Dietz, M. G. (1998). Citizenship with a feminist face : The problem

with maternal thinking. In J. B. Landes (Ed.) Feminism : the prblic

and the private. Oxford : Oxford University Press.

Dworkin, R. (1978). Liberalism. In S. Hampshire (Ed.) Public and

Private morality. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.

Feinberg, W. (1997). The goals of multicultural education : A critical

re-evaluation. In F. Margonis (Ed.) Philosophy of Education 1996.

Urbana, Illinois : Philosophy of Education Society.

Frazer, E. & Lacey, N. (1993) The politics of community : A feminist

critique of the liberal-communitarian debate. New York : Harvester

/Wheatsheaf.

Friedman, M. (1996). Feminism and modern friendship : Dislocating

the community. In S. Avineri & A. De-Shalit (Eds.)

Communitarianism and Individualism. Oxford : Oxford University

Press.

Fullinwider, R. (1996). Public education in a multicultural society :

Policy, theory, critique. N. Y. : Cambridge University Press.

Galston, W. (1991). Liberal purposes : Goods, virtues, and duties in

(34)

Gutmann, A. (1987). Democratic education. Princeton, N. J. :

Princeton University Press.

Gutmann, A. (Ed.) (1994). Multiculturalism : Examining the politics

of recognition. Princeton, N. J. : Princeton University Press.

Held,V. (1993). Feminist morality : Transforming culture, society

and politics. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.

Horton, J. (Ed.) (1993). Liberalism, multiculturalism and toleration.

London : The Macmillan Press Ltd.

Jones,K. B. & Jonasdottir, A. （ Eds.） (1988) The political interests of

gender. London : Sage.

King, D. & Waldron, J. (1988) Citizenship, social citizenship and the

defense of the welfare state. British Journal of Political Science. 18,

415-43.

Kymlicka, W. (1989). Liberalism, community and culture. Oxford :

Clarendon Press.

Kymlicka, W. (1996). Multicultural citizenship : A liberal theory of

minority rights. Oxford : Clarendon Press.

Kymlicka, W. (Ed.) (1995). The rights of minority cultures. New

York : Oxford University Press.

Kymlicka, W. & Norman, W. (1995). Return of the citizen : A survey

of recent work on citizenship theory. In R. Beiner (Ed.) Theorizing

citizenship. Albany : State University of New York Press.

Lister, R. (1997). Citizenship : Feminist perspectives. London :

Macmillan.

Macedo, S. (1990). Liberal virtues : citizenship, virtue, and

community. Oxford : Oxford University Press.

MacIntyre, A. (1984). After virtue：A study in moral theory. Notre

Dame, Indiana： University of Notre Dame Press.

MacIntyre, A. (1995). Is patriotism a virtue? In R.Beiner (Ed.)

(35)

Marshall, T. H.（ 1965） . Class, citizenship and social development.

New York： Anchor.

Mouffe, C. (1992) Dimensions of radical democracy : Pluralism,

citizenship and community. London : Routledge.

Moulton, J. (1983). A paradigm of philosophy : The adversary method.

In S. Harding & M. B. Hintikka (Eds.). Discovering reality :

Feminist perspectives on epistemology, metaphysics, methodology, and philosophy of science. Holland : Reidel Publishing Company.

Noddings, N. (1984). Caring : a feminine approach to ethics and

moral education. Berkeley : University of California Press.

Noddings, N. (1995). Philosophy of Education. Colorado : Westview

Press.

Noddings, N. (1996). On community. Educational Theory. 46, 3,

245-67.

Okin, S. M. (1989). Justice, gender, and the family. New York : Basic

Books.

Olssen, M. (1998). Educational policy, the cold war and the

liberal-communitarian debate. Journal of Education Policy. 13, 1,

63-89.

Pratte, R. (1988). The civic imperative : Examining the need for civic

education. N. T. : Teachers College Press.

Raz, J. (1986). The Marality of Freedom. Oxford : Clarendon Press.

Ruddick, S. (1989). Maternal thinking : Toward a politics of peace.

Boston : Beacon Press.

Sandel, M. J. (1998). Liberalism and the limits of justice. Cambridge :

Cambridge University Press.

Scheffler, I. (1973). Reason and teaching. London : Routledge and

Kegan Paul.

Sevenhuijsen, S. (1998). Citizenship and the ethics of care. London :

(36)

Siegel, H. (1988). Educating reason : Rationality, critical thinking,

and education. New York and London : Routledge.

Taylor, C. (1985) Philosophy and the human Sciences : Philosophical

papers 2. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.

Tronto, J. (1993). Moral boundaries : A political argument for an

ethic of care. New York and London : Routledge.

Waldron, J. (1996). Multiculturalism and mélange. In R. K.

Fullinwider (Ed.) Public education in a multicultural society :

policy , theory , critique. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.

White, J. P. (1973). Towards a compulsory curriculum. London :

Routledge and Kagan Paul.

White, J. P. (1990) Education and the good life : Beyond the national

curriculum. London : Kogan Page.

Young, I. M. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton,

(37)

Individual Autonomy, Sense of Community

and Caring as Virtue

---- A Critique of Liberal Notion of Citizenship

Cheng – Hsi Chien*

Abstract

Liberalism has been the main political stream since the beginning

of this century, and has now gained the status of maxims for people's

daily lives, at least in the West. However, criticisms have also been

made against it. Among others, one is that liberalism leads to the

alienation of individuals in relation to communities to which

individuals belong and that liberal approach brings out citizen's

apathetic attitudes towards public affairs. The aim of this essay is to

examine basic assumptions and main doctrines of liberalism in the

context of its challengs intimatied by communitarianism,

multiculturalism and feminism. Moreover, the author of this essay also

makes an initial inqury concerning the possible conflicts among ideas

of autonomy, sense of community and citizen virtues. The author

argues, however, that theorists who challenge liberalism are

themselves liberals, and the basic characteristic of their challenges is

actually a demand for a better form of liberalism. At the end of this

essay, the author pays his attention to the practical situation of Taiwan

and suggests that Taiwan is still not a full-grown liberal society. As

such, the author claims that it will be more sensible for Taiwan to go

(38)

along with liberal doctrines, bearing in mind its possible weakness

suggested by communitarianism and other doctrines. Concerning the

eduation of citizenship, the author maintains that liberal's rationist

model should be supplemented by an emphasis on the importance of

emotion and moral practicing.