本文關(guān)鍵詞：“憲治”：基于政治哲學(xué)視角的解讀　出處：《河南大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文　論文類(lèi)型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 憲法 憲治 法治 民主

【摘要】：本文通過(guò)對(duì)政治哲學(xué)諸詞語(yǔ)的辨析和憲法學(xué)諸概念的梳理來(lái)澄澈出憲治存在的空間,從價(jià)值和功能上對(duì)憲治做出描述。在描述過(guò)程中,力求回避任何主觀形式的定義——無(wú)論國(guó)人慣常的抽象演繹還是西方的實(shí)證歸納,一概不予采用。這樣做主要基于以下考慮:首先,作者學(xué)問(wèn)淺薄,憲法學(xué)概念體系又龐雜繁復(fù),盲目深入,只恐力拙難支。其次,概念話語(yǔ)大而空泛,唯恐陷入文字游戲與概念沖突的泥潭不得脫身。最后,如果強(qiáng)為之定義,以某一學(xué)說(shuō)作為依據(jù),則難逃主觀,無(wú)論后期工作如何客觀精到,前提若錯(cuò),滿盤(pán)皆輸。 文章分為如下幾部分:首先是導(dǎo)論,主要包括寫(xiě)作初衷及選題辯護(hù),還有對(duì)寫(xiě)作方式的澄清。正文則從介紹憲治的出處和概念特征入手,通過(guò)對(duì)政治哲學(xué)詞匯的梳理和憲法學(xué)諸概念(包括憲法學(xué)相關(guān)概念)的探討,逐漸引入從功能上有補(bǔ)足作用,在價(jià)值上無(wú)可取代的憲治,并以其作為重點(diǎn),展開(kāi)接下去的討論。這些討論主要包括:憲治與法治,憲治與民主,民主、憲治與憲政。雖然全文貫穿憲治作為主線,然而作者既沒(méi)有直闡其意,也無(wú)欲深達(dá)其理,只迂回婉轉(zhuǎn),旁敲側(cè)擊:將憲治對(duì)法治道路的補(bǔ)充作用,追問(wèn)民主的對(duì)話功能以及平衡民主憲政的銜接效果一并做出注解,最終順理成章,導(dǎo)出它的終極意義:概念模型意義以及在此基礎(chǔ)上衍生出來(lái)的交涉意義! 為什么需要交涉,一部分原因在前文導(dǎo)論部分說(shuō)的清楚,然而有些心知肚明明知說(shuō)不得卻不得不說(shuō)的東西,如毦在喉,不吐不快。我們受到西方話語(yǔ)壓迫久矣,自由人權(quán)的大棒總能恰到好處地打擊中國(guó)人的自信,使我們不得不忍氣吞聲,好像做錯(cuò)事的孩子。憲治這個(gè)詞一如我把它譯成的英文,有著溫和內(nèi)斂的品性,符合中華民族的傳統(tǒng)美德,交涉是東西方學(xué)者共同的事業(yè),交涉的目的,是為了互致理解。如若不能,奈何西方人要咄咄益甚?作者以為,不能或者不敢下定義,雖未嘗不是全文的一大遺憾,文章顯得沒(méi)有底氣也好,缺乏說(shuō)服力也罷,卻仍有一致命的優(yōu)點(diǎn):憲治的基架完成了,就像一項(xiàng)浩大的工程備足了材料,預(yù)算已經(jīng)澄清,至于如何構(gòu)造,如何發(fā)展,則是后話。至于以后再作別處填充,海納百川,只要沒(méi)有確篤的定義,自然可以包容嶄新的價(jià)值。而且流水不腐,滾石無(wú)苔。常用常新豈不是更好,何必非要一了百了的萬(wàn)全定義來(lái)束縛手腳呢? 憲治說(shuō)白了就是“橡皮子彈”,對(duì)付那些認(rèn)為其他所有人都是妖怪其實(shí)自己才是妖怪的不要臉的大妖怪,我們的理論要預(yù)留一些旁白的空間,我們的概念和詞語(yǔ)也最好多一些韌勁兒和彈性。全文的最后,欲言又止而又隱藏至深的,大概就是這層意思。
[Abstract]:In this paper, through analysis of political philosophy and the various words of the carding to actions of the various concepts of the treatment of existing space, from its value and function made to the medium. In the process of describing, in order to avoid any subjective definition form -- whether Chinese or Western Abstract Interpretation of habitual empirical induction, shall not be used. This is mainly based on the following considerations: first, the author learned shallow, constitutional system and numerous and complicated, blind, lest forces difficult. Secondly, the concept of discourse and vague fear into words and concepts of conflict quagmire not get out. Finally, if the definition is, to a doctrine as a basis, it would be subjective, regardless of the later work objective subtlety, provided if wrong, loser.
The article is divided into several parts as follows: the first part is the introduction, mainly including the original purpose of the writing and topic defense, also writing clarified. The text is from the source and characteristic of the constitutional concept of various concepts through combing the vocabulary of political philosophy and the (including constitutional concepts) to gradually introduced from complement function, can not be replaced by the value, which is a key, started the next discussion. These discussions include: the rule of constitution and law, governance and democracy, democracy, constitution and constitutionalism. Although the thesis penetrates the constitution as the main line, however, the author has no direct interpretation of its meaning, but also no desire the deep, only circuitous mildly, insinuating: supplement will constitution on rule of law road, asked democratic dialogue function and balance of constitutional democracy convergence effect together to make a comment, and ultimately derived its final logical. Extreme significance: the meaning of the conceptual model and the meaning of negotiation derived on this basis!
Why do we need negotiations, part of the reason in the earlier part of introduction to clear, but some well knows that may not have had to say something, such as Er in the throat, to speak out. We have long oppression of the western discourse, always stick to just perfect freedom and human rights Chinese hit confidence, so we have to swallow, seems to be doing something wrong the children. Treating the word as I translate it into English, has a mild introverted character, consistent with the traditional virtues of the Chinese nation, the eastern and Western scholars representations are the common cause representations with the purpose is to understand. If they can not be exchanged, but Westerners to hurry? The author thinks, can not or dare not by definition, although a big regret is not the full text of the article is no energy or lack of convincing or still has a fatal of advantages: by the frame is complete, like a Project an ample supply of materials, the budget has been clarified, as for how to construct, how to develop, it is something. As for the filling, unless later at all rivers run into sea, as long as there is no definition of exact nature can, inclusion of new value. But water does not rot, a rolling stone gathers no moss. The commonly used is not better, why not to define the Wanquan One finished, all is finished. bound?
Constitutional rule is simply "rubber bullets" against those who think that everyone else is in fact the monster himself is the monster's shameless big monster, our theory to reserve space for some narration, our concepts and words are more reengineer and the best flexibility. Finally, about to speak, but saying nothing of the deep and hidden that is probably the meaning.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：河南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D911

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前4條

1 鄧聯(lián)繁;;憲法:從政治法到治政法[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2009年02期

2 趙鈞;;法治與憲治有關(guān)問(wèn)題闡釋[J];青海師范大學(xué)民族師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2006年01期

3 袁敏殊,魏恒榮,陳穎洲;論法治、憲治、人民主權(quán)及當(dāng)代中國(guó)應(yīng)解決的問(wèn)題[J];學(xué)術(shù)界;2003年01期

4 李水金;從法治到憲治:國(guó)家治理理念的重大轉(zhuǎn)變[J];新視野;2003年05期

，

本文編號(hào)：1402045