本文選題：時間觀 + 時間性��； 參考：《南京大學(xué)》2012年博士論文

【摘要】：循環(huán)時間觀和線性時間觀,是人類的兩種基本時間觀類型。它們分別契合于古代法律與現(xiàn)代法律。在社會秩序方面,循環(huán)時間觀具有現(xiàn)象化、整體化與永恒化的傾向,而線性時間觀則具有本質(zhì)化、個體化和即時化的傾向。這兩種傾向分別呈現(xiàn)于古代法律與現(xiàn)代法律中。另外,在古代法律中,有關(guān)時間的內(nèi)容是以循環(huán)時間觀作為預(yù)設(shè)的,而在現(xiàn)代法律中則為線性時間觀�，F(xiàn)代法律作為法治的制度規(guī)范,其線性時間觀預(yù)設(shè)也構(gòu)成了法治的時間觀預(yù)設(shè)。對法治的認(rèn)識,有必要從時間觀,特別是線性時間觀的角度予以展開。從法律內(nèi)容上看,無論是公有的權(quán)力和私有的權(quán)利,還是兼具公私屬性義務(wù),在面對過去、現(xiàn)在和將來這時間的三維時,都呈現(xiàn)出了其特殊而又具有一致性的面相。也就是說,它們的時間性結(jié)構(gòu)既有其特殊性,也有特定歷史階段的內(nèi)在一致性。在古代法律中,無論是權(quán)力、權(quán)利還是義務(wù),都具有崇拜過去的偏好;而在現(xiàn)代法律中,它們則將現(xiàn)在和有限的將來作為其時間性偏好。就權(quán)利的時間性而言,它是根源于人的時間性的。權(quán)利是呈現(xiàn)于現(xiàn)在、根源于過去并指涉于將來的。作為權(quán)利體系的兩大部類,財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)與自由平等權(quán)的時間性結(jié)構(gòu)存在著差異。財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)立基于對過去事實(shí)或狀態(tài)的繼承,并以連貫的方式指涉于將來。自由平等權(quán)則立基于對過去社會秩序的反叛,并永恒地指涉于將來。近代以來,財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)的永恒性特征逐漸被突破,而其通過時間獲得定義的特征更加明顯。財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)的這種變化源于人們對其功能的改造。自由平等權(quán)不可逆的將來指向,為人類一切權(quán)利的衍生指明了方向,并確立了準(zhǔn)則。權(quán)利的時間性說明,權(quán)利源于人與人之間的法律承認(rèn),而非一種刻意創(chuàng)設(shè)。從法律規(guī)范上看,規(guī)則與原則也都具有其相應(yīng)的時間性結(jié)構(gòu)。古代法律是一個規(guī)則發(fā)達(dá)而欠缺原則統(tǒng)攝的體系,其時間性結(jié)構(gòu)是封閉和基于過去偏好的;現(xiàn)代法律則是一個原則統(tǒng)攝規(guī)則的體系,其時間性結(jié)構(gòu)是開放和充滿現(xiàn)在而又謹(jǐn)慎偏好將來的。法律的時間性所反映出來的,乃是法律是時間中的存在。而時間的法律性所反映出來的,則是時間是法律中的存在。對國家來講,時間意味著一種秩序,是具有公法價(jià)值的。在很大程度上,國家權(quán)力的運(yùn)行是依附于時間秩序的。對個人來講,時間意味著一種資源,是具有私法價(jià)值的。從本質(zhì)層面看,個人權(quán)利的展開就是在利用時間資源。邁向法治理想,需要人們認(rèn)真對待時間。只有擺脫了對過去的迷思,以開放的態(tài)度看待將來,并將現(xiàn)在視為個人自由與權(quán)利實(shí)現(xiàn)的時間之所在,社會才能接近法治理想,繼而,人們才能享受一種現(xiàn)時性的生活。法治社會蘊(yùn)含著時間正義。在那些具有線性時間觀傳統(tǒng)的社會,法治中的時間正義是自然存在的;而在那些具有循環(huán)時間觀傳統(tǒng)的社會,法治中的時間正義則是一個異常緊迫的問題。
[Abstract]:The concept of cyclic time and linear time are two basic types of human time view. They fit in with ancient law and modern law respectively. In the aspect of social order, the concept of cyclic time has the tendency of phenomenon, integration and eternity, while the linear view of time has the tendency of essence, individualization and instant. These two tendencies appear in ancient law and modern law respectively. In addition, in ancient law, the content of time is based on the concept of cyclic time as a presupposition, but in modern law it is a linear view of time. As the system norm of the rule of law, the linear time presupposition of modern law also constitutes the presupposition of the time view of the rule of law. To understand the rule of law, it is necessary to start from the view of time, especially the view of linear time. In terms of legal content, both public power and private right, as well as the obligation of public and private attributes, have presented their special and consistent faces in the face of the past, present and future three dimensions of this time. In other words, their temporal structure has its own particularity as well as the inherent consistency of a particular historical stage. In ancient law, whether power, right or obligation, they had a preference for worshiping the past; in modern law, they regarded the present and the limited future as their temporal preferences. As far as the timing of rights is concerned, it is rooted in the temporal nature of human beings. Power is present in the present, rooted in the past and refers to the future. As two major categories of the right system, there are differences in the temporal structure between the right to property and the right to freedom and equality. Property rights are based on the inheritance of past facts or states and refer in a coherent manner to the future. The right to freedom and equality is based on rebellion against the social order of the past and permanently refers to the future. Since modern times, the permanent character of property right has been broken through, and the definition of property right through time is more obvious. This kind of change of property right originates from the transformation of people's function. The irrevocable future of the right of freedom and equality points out the direction for the derivation of all human rights and establishes the criterion. The time of right indicates that the right originates from the legal recognition between people, rather than from a deliberate creation. In terms of legal norms, both rules and principles have their corresponding temporal structure. Ancient law was a system in which the rules were developed but lacked the rule of principle, and its temporal structure was closed and based on past preferences, while modern law was a system of principle governing the rules. Its temporal structure is open and full of the present with a cautious preference for the future. What the timeliness of law reflects is that law is the existence of time. The legal nature of time reflects that time is the existence of law. To the country, time means a kind of order, it has the value of public law. To a large extent, the operation of state power is dependent on time order. To the individual, time means a kind of resource, it has private law value. In essence, the development of individual rights is the use of time resources. Moving towards the ideal of rule of law requires people to take time seriously. Only by getting rid of the myth of the past, looking at the future with an open mind, and viewing the present as the time for the realization of individual freedom and rights, can society approach the ideal of the rule of law, and then people can enjoy a kind of present life. The society of rule of law contains time justice. In those societies with the tradition of linear time view, time justice in the rule of law is natural, while in those societies with the traditional view of cyclic time, time justice in the rule of law is an extremely urgent problem.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：南京大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D90
，

本文編號：1838888