本文選題：動(dòng)物 + 民事主體��； 參考：《西南政法大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：什么是動(dòng)物?在自然世界中動(dòng)物所居地位何如?在社會(huì)中動(dòng)物所居地位又何如?這一連串的疑問并非憑空而來,人類所面臨的環(huán)境危機(jī)使飛速發(fā)展的經(jīng)濟(jì)文化與因循守舊的價(jià)值觀之間的沖突凸顯出來,成為催生環(huán)境危機(jī)的主要原因;人類對經(jīng)濟(jì)利益的無限追求使得動(dòng)物成為被利用的工具、被擁有的財(cái)富、被開發(fā)的資源;人類對精神空虛的恐懼使得動(dòng)物成為被虐待的對象、被殘殺的目標(biāo)。作為自然界的生物種群之一,人類本應(yīng)對其他生命報(bào)以尊重與關(guān)懷、理性與仁愛,而不是冷漠的心腸和暴戾的手段。人類對社會(huì)應(yīng)當(dāng)做到主而不宰,不做到對動(dòng)物的關(guān)愛和尊重又何以做到關(guān)懷與尊重人類自身? 國外最早對動(dòng)物進(jìn)行關(guān)懷的法律文件可追溯至1822年的《馬丁法案》,隨后各國陸續(xù)開始對動(dòng)物福利進(jìn)行立法的進(jìn)程。我國與動(dòng)物有關(guān)的相關(guān)立法并不多,相對而言較為完整的是《中華人民共和國野生動(dòng)物保護(hù)法》,同時(shí)也有一些與動(dòng)物有關(guān)的法律條文零星散見于其他法律之中。但無論是國外所積極倡導(dǎo)的動(dòng)物福利立法,還是國內(nèi)有針對性的對野生動(dòng)物保護(hù)的立法,均未能達(dá)到最佳效果,即有效的關(guān)懷與尊重動(dòng)物。究其原因,是因?yàn)閯?dòng)物具有十分特殊的性質(zhì),它們既不是物體,也不是人類,而是一類具有生命的生物體、是有感知能力與喜樂意識(shí)的生物體。若將其作為客體進(jìn)行保護(hù),無疑是將其視為物體一般的人類附屬品、利用對象;若將其作為主體進(jìn)行保護(hù),又會(huì)在道德倫理界掀起軒然大波。一時(shí)之間,難以定位。仔細(xì)思考,是因?yàn)闆]有正確把握如何對待動(dòng)物的原則與方針。傳統(tǒng)觀念是將對待動(dòng)物的方針定位為“保護(hù)”,而“保護(hù)”的隱含意義是側(cè)重于將其視為弱勢群體、視為人類的利益工具和資源財(cái)富,故一旦要對動(dòng)物賦予權(quán)利,勢必引起傳統(tǒng)價(jià)值領(lǐng)域的“地震”。而如果解放思想、實(shí)事求是,便應(yīng)當(dāng)將對待動(dòng)物的方針定位為“尊重和關(guān)懷”,“尊重”的隱含意義是側(cè)重于將其作為自然界與人類平等的生物體而對待,“關(guān)懷”的隱含意義是人類基于社會(huì)創(chuàng)造者的地位而言,此時(shí)要對動(dòng)物賦予權(quán)利,便是順理成章之事。 文章綜合運(yùn)用了文獻(xiàn)調(diào)查法、文獻(xiàn)分析法、統(tǒng)計(jì)法、歸納法、預(yù)測法、功能分析法、探索性研究法。正文分為四部分。以“發(fā)現(xiàn)問題——分析問題——解決問題”為主線,首先通過第一部分“我國民事主體制度概覽”對民事主體制度的相關(guān)定義、發(fā)展軌跡、制度內(nèi)部關(guān)系、判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)作總結(jié)分析;緊接著通過第二部分“國內(nèi)外相關(guān)理論實(shí)踐概覽”一方面從立法實(shí)踐上對英國、美國、新西蘭、中國香港地區(qū)的相關(guān)立法進(jìn)行總結(jié)歸納,另一方面從理論探討上就“動(dòng)物法律人格”的三種學(xué)說作簡要分析,同時(shí)輔之以國外經(jīng)典判例與對國內(nèi)動(dòng)物保護(hù)事件的圖標(biāo)說明,以佐證我國應(yīng)賦動(dòng)物以民事主體資格的觀點(diǎn);隨后在第三部分“我國動(dòng)物民事主體地位建立之必要性與可行性分析”中強(qiáng)調(diào)構(gòu)建動(dòng)物民事主體地位將有利于維持社會(huì)秩序、彌補(bǔ)道德關(guān)懷、提升國民素質(zhì)、弘揚(yáng)民族文化傳統(tǒng),并對反對賦予動(dòng)物民事主體地位的論點(diǎn)一一進(jìn)行駁斥;最后在第四部分“動(dòng)物民事主體地位構(gòu)建之具體方案”中提出了兩個(gè)解決途徑,其一為對生物格制度的創(chuàng)設(shè),其二為對類人格制度的承認(rèn)。
[Abstract]:What is an animal? What is the status of the animal in the natural world? What is the status of the animal in the society? This series of questions is not come out of the air. The environmental crisis facing mankind has made the rapid development of the economic culture and the clash between the old values and the main cause of the environmental crisis. The infinite pursuit of economic benefits makes animals become the tools used, the wealth they have, the resources they have been developed, the human fear of mental emptiness, the object of being abused and the target of being killed. As one of the biological species of nature, human beings should have respect and care for other lives, reason and love, It is not the heart of indifference and the violent means. Human beings should do the main and not kill the society, and do not care for and respect the animals, and how to care for and respect the human beings themselves?
The earliest legal documents for animal care in foreign countries can be traced back to the "Martin act" in 1822. Subsequently, countries began to legislate for animal welfare. There are few related legislation related to animals in our country. The relatively complete "People's Republic of China wildlife protection law" is relatively complete. At the same time, there are some with animals. The legal provisions of the customs are scattered in other laws. However, whether the animal welfare legislation actively advocated by foreign countries, or the domestic legislation on the protection of wild animals, has failed to achieve the best effect, that is, effective care and respect for animals. The reason is that they have very special nature for animals, they are neither. An object, not a human being, but a living organism, is an organism with a sense of perception and a sense of joy. If it is protected as an object, it will undoubtedly be regarded as an object of human appendage and use objects; if it is protected as a subject, it will set off a great wave in the moral and ethical circles. For a moment, it is difficult. It is because there is no correct understanding of the principles and principles of how to treat animals. The traditional idea is to place the policy of treating animals as "protection", while the implied meaning of "protection" is to focus on the disadvantaged group, as the tool of human interests and the wealth of resources, so once the animal is given the right to the animal, it is bound to be entitled. The "earthquake" in the traditional value field, and if the thought of emancipating the mind and seeking truth from facts, we should regard the policy of treating animals as "respect and care". The implied meaning of "respect" is to treat it as an organism equal to the nature and human beings. The implied meaning of "care" is the place where human beings are based on the social creators. At the moment, it is logical to endow animals with rights.
The article uses literature survey, literature analysis, statistics, induction, prediction, functional analysis and exploratory research. The text is divided into four parts. The main line is "finding problems - analyzing problems - solving problems". First, the first part of the "survey of the civil subject system of China" is related to the correlation of the civil subject system. The definition, the development track, the internal relationship of the system and the judgment standard are summarized and analyzed. The relevant legislation of Britain, the United States, New Zealand and Hongkong, on the one hand, is summarized through the second part of "the overview of relevant theories and practices at home and abroad" on the one hand, and on the other hand, on the other hand, the "animal legal personality" is discussed from the theoretical discussion. A brief analysis of the three doctrines is made, supplemented by the classic foreign jurisprudence and the icons of the domestic animal protection events, in order to testify the view that our country should be entitled to the subject of the civil subject, and then in the third part "the necessity and feasibility analysis of the establishment of animal civil subject status in China" emphasizes the construction of the civil subject status of the animal. It will help to maintain the social order, make up for the moral concern, improve the national quality, carry forward the national cultural tradition, and refute the arguments against the status of the animal's civil subject, and finally put forward two solutions in the fourth part of "the concrete plan for the establishment of animal civil subject status", one of which is the system of biologic system. It is created and the second is the recognition of the system of class personality.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D922.68;D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張艷麗;對我國民事主體資格理論的反思[J];北京理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2002年02期

2 胡安潮;對我國民法典中應(yīng)否設(shè)定第三類民事主體的思考[J];北京理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2003年05期

3 曹新明,夏傳勝;抽象人格論與我國民事主體制度[J];法商研究(中南政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2000年04期

4 趙萬一;喬楓;;我國民事主體結(jié)構(gòu)的重構(gòu)[J];法學(xué)家;2006年02期

5 李東慧;試論當(dāng)代民法的環(huán)境倫理觀[J];法學(xué);2001年06期

6 楊樂;;民事主體發(fā)展的人文主義思想解讀[J];法制與社會(huì);2007年01期

7 蔡敏;;試論動(dòng)物的民事主體資格[J];法制與社會(huì);2007年09期

8 楊麗施;陳志杰;;論動(dòng)物的民事主體[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年01期

9 徐文成;;試論民事主體與意志的關(guān)系[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年15期

10 劉凱;;我國開放式民事主體結(jié)構(gòu)體系的構(gòu)建[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年21期

，

本文編號(hào)：1886044