臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

國內處理羅爾斯正義論與健康照護的議題，大多注重於Norman Daniels在公共衛生的發展。本文首先指出，羅爾斯的政治哲學，應用於公共衛生的領域，會間接影響政府判斷疾病概念以及資源分配的依據。在其中，所引起不同平等觀的關注，可視為政治自由主義內公民興趣與偏好的不同，但不能等同於公民彼此間善觀念的差異，即民主社會合理多元的事實，而屬公共理性處理的範圍。

Rawlsian以首要善清單論證的方式，使理論與健康照護制度在面對社會中的障礙者有經驗上困難。然而，本文發現健康照護權之預設，間接支持了羅爾斯首要善清單內的社會自尊，說明了理性契約論者由霍布斯式的自我保存至康德式自我尊重的進展，其中，「合理的」法權個人預設，是論證規範性的前提。

另一方面，由政治自由主義與健康照護的制度議題，推導出民主社會有著合理多元的事實，更有可能是自由平等公民，如何協調彼此經驗上差異的問題。本文認為，Rainer Forst以理由建構的論證權利，透過互為主體、在情境中以相互性、普遍性原則定義「好理由」，不倚賴善的預設，提供我們論證的另類思考方案。

John Rawls and the issue of health care often focus on Norman Daniels and the public health. This thesis would like to point that the background of Rawlsian and health care will raise different conceptions of equality. Otherwise, the criteria under Rawlsian will affect government’s power to classify disease and distribution of resources. I tried to point that we can discuss different conceptions of equality under variations in preferences and tastes are seen as our responsibility, but different conceptions of equality isn’t equivalent to variations in conceptions of good. According to Rawls, the fact of reasonable pluralism is the scope of public reason.

Rawls presupposed primary goods in his theory, this thesis would point that Rawlsian can’t actually solve the problem of disability. In context of justice, although the primary goods’ status have moved to service for political, not for originally moral person in Kantian sense, we can still found that self-respect is the most important primary goods. From Hobbes’ self-preservation to self-respect, this argument proved Liberalism is progressive and reasonable person is the conditions for legal person to justify legal norms.

In addition, the fact that variations in conceptions of good, is a history and empirical concept in a democracy society. Rainer Forst provides the right to justification is inherent in the principle of justification, which has to be recursively reconstructed, by means of argumentative threshold which are reciprocity and generality principles. What reason is a good reason can be definite and accepted intersubjectivity in every situation. This approach could be an alternative for our justification rather than presupposing a theory of goods.

第一章 導論 1
第一節 問題意識 1
第二節 研究進路與詮釋方法 2
第三節 正義脈絡論的初步介紹 3
一、倫理個人與法權個人 4
二、普遍性論證與承認特殊性 7
三、脈絡論與普世論 8
四、自主性：論證與承認 10
第四節 本文架構 18
第二章 羅爾斯模式的論證：機會、正常與疾病 20
第一節 合乎正義的健康照護：Norman Daniels的論證 20
第二節 首要善的規範性 28
一、政治自由主義與健康照護 28
二、平等觀與偏好選擇 32
第三節 爭議案件：以DSM-Ⅳ手冊為例 37
第四節 小結 43
第三章 正義的重構：公民、能力與個人 48
第一節 Martha Nussbaum的挑戰：能力途徑的正義觀 49
第二節 正義的脈絡(Ⅰ)：理想個人到平等公民 57
第三節 正義的脈絡(Ⅱ)：倫理個人與法權個人 64
一、倫理個人 66
二、法權個人 72
第四節 小結 75
第四章 論證的權利：法、道德與理由 80
第一節 哈伯瑪斯的批評：法治國危機 81
第二節 規範性與公共論證 86
第三節 理由與道德個人 95
一、理由論與道德性 95
二、道德個人與相互承認 105
第四節 小結 107
第五章 結論 109
參考文獻 112

林佳和
2015 〈社會正義、權力關係與法律形式自由－勞動派遣作為典型的艱難問題〉，發表於國立台灣大學法學院主辦，「社會正義之理論與制度實踐」學術研討會，2015年12月12-13日。

吳全峰
2009 〈健康照護資源分配之界線--兼論醫療科技發展下健康照護資源分配之變與不變〉，載：邱文聰主編，《2009科技發展與法律規範雙月刊》，臺北，中研院法律學研究所，頁299-367。

楊勝安
2013 《權利與承認：論Honneth 承認理論中的權利》，國立台灣大學法律學研究所碩士論文，未出版。

顏厥安
2004〈法體系的統一性與多元性〉，載：顏厥安，《規範、論證與行動: 法認識論論文集》，臺北，元照：頁173-211。
2005a〈溝通、制度與民主文化－由哈伯瑪斯的法理論初探社會立憲主義〉，載：顏厥安，《幕垂鴞翔：法理學與政治思想論文集》，臺北，元照：頁153-200。
2005b〈自由主義與憲政體制之建立〉，載：顏厥安，《幕垂鴞翔：法理學與政治思想論文集》，臺北，元照：頁231-270。

鄭志忠
2009 〈共感與超感性者：鑑賞判斷的規範性〉，載：國立國立臺灣大學哲學論評, 37期, 頁43 – 119。

Brink, David-Owen
1989 Moral Realism and the Foundations of Ethics. Cambridge University Press.

Buchanan, Allen/ Brock, Dan / Daniels, Norman
2004 《從機會到選擇：遺傳學與正義》，台北市 ，巨流出版 ，麗文文化。

Busfield, Joan
2006 Mental Disorder and Human Rights. In L. Morris (Ed.), Rights: Sociological Perspectives (p. 209). Routledge.

Daniels, Norman
1985 Just health care. Cambridge [U.K.] ; New York: Cambridge University Press.
1996 “Equality of What: Welfare, Resources, or Capabilities?in Daniels, Justice and justification: reflective equilibrium in theory and practice. Cambridge University Press：208-231
2008 Just health: meeting health needs fairly. Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press.

Daniels, Norman/ Sabin, James
1996 Determining “Medical Necessity” in Mental Health Practice, in Daniels, Justice and justification: reflective equilibrium in theory and practice. Cambridge University Press：232-250

Engelhardt, Hugo-Tristram
1996 The Foundations of Bioethics. Oxford University Press, USA.

Forst, Rainer
2002 Contexts of justice: political philosophy beyond liberalism and communitarianism. translated by John Farrell, Berkeley: University of California Press.
2011a "Practical Reason and Justifying Reasons: On the Foundation of Morality" in The right to justification elements of a constructivist theory of justice. New York: Columbia University Press：13-42
2011b "Political liberty: Integrating five conceptions of autonomy." in The right to justification elements of a constructivist theory of justice. New York: Columbia University Press：125-137
2011c “The basic right to justification：Toward a constructivist conception of human rightsin The right to justification elements of a constructivist theory of justice. New York: Columbia University Press：203-228
2011d “Social Justice, Justification and Powerin The right to justification elements of a constructivist theory of justice. New York: Columbia University Press：188-200


Frances, Allen
2015 《救救正常人：失控的精神醫學》，譯者：黃思瑜，新北市，左岸文化。

Jürgen Habermas
1996 Between facts and norms: contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. translated by William Rehg, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

Klein, Melanie
1963 “Some Reflections on ‘The Oresteia’in Envy and gratitude, and other works, 1946-1963 (Free Press ed). New York: Free Press.

Korsgaard, Christine
1993 “The Reasons we can Share: An Attack on the Distinction between Agent-Relative and Agent-Neutral Values.”Social Philosophy and Policy, 10(01), 24–51.

Nagel, Thomas
1987 “Moral Conflict and Political Legitimacy.”Philosophy & Public Affairs, 16(3), 215–240.

Nordenfelt, Lennart
1995 On the nature of health: an action-theoretic approach (2nd rev. and enl. ed). Dordrecht ; Boston: Kluwer

Nussbaum, Martha
2007 《逃避人性: 噁心、羞恥與法律》，譯者：方佳俊，臺北市: 商周出版。
2008 《正義的界限：殘障、全球正義與動物正義》，譯者：何景榮、徐子婷、楊雅婷，新北市，韋伯文化。.

Ralph C. S. Walker
2007 康德《道德形上學之基礎》中的敬重，李彥儀譯，政治大學哲學學報, (18期), 141–171.

Rawls, John
1997 The Idea of Public Reason Revisited. The University of Chicago Law Review, 64(3), 765–807.
1999 A Theory of Justice. Oxford University Press.
2001 Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Harvard University Press.
2005 Political Liberalism. Columbia University Press.

Scanlon, Thomas
1975 “Preference and UrgencyThe Journal of Philosophy, 72(19), 655–669.
1982 Contractualism and utilitarianism. Utilitarianism and beyond, 103, 110.

Sen, Amartya.
2013 《正義的理念》，譯者：林宏濤，臺北市，商周出版。