|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
系統理論之交集與歧異 -- 重點比較 : 原則主義與非原則主義=The Similarities and Differences among the Systems of Theory : Main Point of Comparison : Principlism and Non-Principlism |
|
|
|
| Author |
釋昭慧 (著)=Shih, Chao-hwei (au.)
|
|---|
| Source |
玄奘佛學研究=Hsuan Chuang Journal of Buddhism Studies
|
|---|
| Volume | n.7 |
|---|
| Date | 2007.07.01 |
|---|
| Pages | 33 - 62 |
|---|
| Publisher | 玄奘大學 |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
http://ird.hcu.edu.tw/front/bin/home.phtml
|
|---|
| Location | 新竹市, 臺灣 [Hsinchu shih, Taiwan] |
|---|
| Content type | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| Language | 中文=Chinese |
|---|
| Note | 作者為玄奘大學宗教學研究所教授 |
|---|
| Keyword | 義務論=deontological theory; 目的論=teleological theory; 基本主義=foundationalism; 調和主義=coherentism; 建構實用主義=constructive pragmatism; 原則主義=principlism; 德行倫理學=virtue ethics; 關懷倫理=ethics of care, caring ethics; 女性特質=feminine; 情境倫理=situation ethics |
|---|
| Abstract | 本文回應倫理學界的以下思考：一、倫理學究竟是否必須建立「第一原則」？二、第一原則是否唯一不二，絕對優先？三、即使是原則主義，是否可兼顧「正義」與「效益」的兩項原則（乃至多項原則）？四、能否拋開原則主義，依其他方式來尋求倫理判斷的依據？「原則主義」，主張必須依於第一原則，作為倫理行為的判準。義務論與目的論以唯一的第一原則（效益原則或正義原則），作為絕對優
先的倫理判準，是為「基本主義」。「調和主義」有二：一、理查森的建構實用主義，認為效益原則或
正義原則均非絕對優先，應予交互修正，交互平衡。二、畢強樸與蔡德斯為生命醫學倫理歸納出四項中層原則：「自律原則」、「不傷害原則」、「仁愛原則」與「公正原則」。非屬原則主義的學派有二：一、麥金泰與斯特曼的德行倫理學，從行為「動機」以辨明「善、惡」。二、吉利根與諾丁的關懷倫理學，依於女性特質（feminine），主張關係是存在的基礎，關懷是道德的基礎。此外尚有重視倫理抉擇所需面對的情境差異之「情境倫理」，是基督宗教弗勒徹爾為主的自由派神學。本文依佛法觀點來考察倫理學的以上各家系統理論，並在討論關懷倫理學時，順帶評述反對可普遍化道德原則的關懷倫理。
This article aims to respond to the following thoughts in the ethical studies circle:
1. Is it necessary for the study of ethics to establish a first principle?
2. Is the first principle non-negotiable and must it be given absolute priority?
3. When one is upholding principlism, can one consider the principles of righteousness, benefits (utilitarianism), and other principles?
4. Is it possible to put aside principlism and use other means as the basis in making ethical judgment?
Principlism emphasises the use of a first principle as the yardstick in measuring ethical behaviour. Deontological Theory and Teleological Theory both advocate that first principle (utilitarianism or principle of righteousness) must be given absolute priority in ethical judgment. This is the fundamental principle (foundationalism).As with regards to coherentism, there are two points on this:
1. Constructive Pragmatism, which was proposed by Henry
Richardson. Richardson has the opinion that it is not necessary for utilitarianism or the principle of righteousness to be given absolute priority. They could be used to supplement each other and to achieve mutual balance.
2. The four middle level principles of Biomedical Ethics are summarised by Tom Beauchamp and James Childress. They are:
a. Principle of Autonomy
b. Principle of Non-maleficence
c. Principle of Beneficence
d. Principle of Justice
There are two schools of thoughts on Non-Principlism:
1. The Virtue Ethics of A. Macintyre and D. Statman. They justify wholesomeness and unwholesomeness according to the intention of one’s behaviour.
2. The Ethics of Care proposed by C. Gilligan and N. Nodding. Using feminity (feminine) as the base, they suggest that existence is founded upon relationship. Care is the foundation of ethics. Besides, there is also the Situation Ethic that emphasises on the differences in circumstances/situations when making moral judgments. This is the Liberal Theology of Christianity advocated by Joseph Fletcher. By using a Buddhist’s point of view, this article analyses the ethical studies of the various systems of theory mentioned above. While discussing the Ethics of Care, this article also comments on, and objects to, the possibility of generalising the Ethics of Care as the common ethics principle. |
|---|
| Table of contents | 一、前言 37
二、檢視原則主義的系統理論 40
（一）依佛法檢視效益主義
（二）依佛法檢視義務論
（三）依佛法檢視調和主義
1. 建構實用主義
2.四種中層原則
三、檢視德行倫理學 49
四、檢視情境倫理與關懷倫理 54
五、結語 58
|
|---|
| ISSN | 18133649 (P) |
|---|
| Hits | 677 |
|---|
| Created date | 2010.08.13 |
|---|
| Modified date | 2017.12.01 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
|
