书籍介绍
这并非又一部《正义论》的通俗注脚，而是让人重新认识罗尔斯的入口。在这里，他暂且放下“原初状态”的精密装置，转而做一件更朴素也更见功力的事：把霍布斯、洛克、休谟、卢梭、密尔、马克思逐一请到讲台上，用他自己标志性的清晰去重述、重估、甚至“善意地”重构每一位的思想。读者记住的，往往不是罗尔斯给出了什么结论，而是他如何对待前人——不急于驳倒，而是设法把对方最有力的样子呈现出来。正因如此，书里既有独到洞见，也难免带着“罗尔斯式的缺憾”：他倾向于简化，也按自己的问题重新裁剪传统。它适合已对政治哲学有所耳闻、想借大师之手梳理脉络的读者，而不建议作为第一本入门书硬啃。
作者简介
约翰•罗尔斯（John Rawls,1921-2002），美国当代著名哲学家、伦理学家、政治学家、哈佛大学教授。1921年生于马里兰州，就学于普林斯顿大学，1950年在该校获哲学博士学位，以后相继在普林斯顿大学（1950—1952年）、康奈尔大学（1953—1959年）、麻省理工学院（1960—1962年）任教，1962年以后则一直在哈佛大学担任教授，1991年荣休，2002年11月24日去世。罗尔斯自50年代起便潜心于社会正义问题的研究，《正义论》（1971）是他集其论文之精粹并经过重新思考而形成的一部完整而一贯的理论著作。罗尔斯还出版了其他专著：《政治自由主义》（1993）、《万民法》（1999）、《道德哲学史讲义》（2000）以及《政治哲学史讲义》等。
AI导读
核心看点
- 罗尔斯逝世后首部专著，哈佛讲义整理
- 系统梳理霍布斯至马克思的政治哲学
- 展现罗尔斯独特的社会契约论视角
读者共识
- 逻辑清晰，是极佳的思想史补充
- 翻译质量参差，部分章节令人困惑
- 字里行间处处体现正义论的影子
精彩摘录
- "理性诡计（list der vernunft)"
- "2. A second question is this: In addressing this audience, what are the credentials of political philosophy? What are its claims to authority? I use the term “authority” here because some have said that writers in moral and political philosophy claim a certain authority, at least implicitly. It has "
- "Finally,as an aside,let me say that in looking at a text of this sort [referring to Hobbes's Leviathan], which is so large,and with so many elements in it,if you are to get as much out of it as you can,you must try to interpret it in the best and most interesting way.There is no point in trying to d"
- "The distinction between a Hypothetical Imperative and a Categorical Imperative lies in how the corresponding principle or directive is justified and not in its form or mode of expression. Thus suppose we always write a principle or directive as: To do so and so. Whether the directives: “To honor one"
- "It is not clear that Hobbes intends a regress argument here, but he apparently fails to make two distinctions that are crucial: (i) Between a supreme (or final) e.g. legislative power and an unlimited one. Thus Congress may be the supreme legislative authority for normal law making, but it is not un"
- "It is implicit in what we have said that Locke’s criterion for a legitimate regime is hypothetical. That is, we can tell whether a form of regime is legitimate by seeing whether it could have been contracted into in the course of ideal history. It need not actually have been contracted into; a regim"
- "How are we to assess Hume’s criticism of Locke? His critique is forceful and convincing, or at any rate highly plausible in many respects, but weaker in others. I think it may be said that Hume’s essay (and Bentham’s later essay, although Bentham says essentially the same thing that Hume does) was h"
- "What he may have in mind here is that each informed and conscientious vote can be seen as a sample of the truth with a considerably greater than 50/50 chance of being correct. Therefore, as the number of such samples increases (as more well-informed citizens vote conscientiously) the probability inc"
目录
用户评论
我个人还是倾向于列奥·施特劳斯对于政治哲学的定义。
（无论哪个章节字里行间都写着正义论三个字......
当然依然不妨碍是一本佳作，
日常柠檬别人家的讲义。
附录两个没看：不了解，看不明白。倒装句是在太烦人了
契约论
罗尔斯从霍布斯、洛克、修漠、卢梭、密尔、马克思、西季威克、到巴特勒的思想归纳和评述，见解颇具实质，评析贯穿前后，政治哲学思想的发展史，需要慢慢消化
“密尔讲座”已读（第一遍），日后再精读。
@2019-09-13 13:03:16
说实话，读完我感觉自己有点不认识“之”这个字了→_→
考研教材，翻译实在太差，增添了无数痛苦
@2020-01-15 16:01:46 @2021-07-02 06:49:23
下载
收藏