約翰·菲尼斯係牛津大學法學教授、大學院(university college)法理學研究員。
First published in 1980, Natural Law and Natural Rights is widely heralded as a seminal contribution to the philosophy of law, and an authoritative restatement of natural law doctrine. It has offered generations of students and other readers a thorough grounding in the central issues of legal, moral, and political philosophy from Finnis's distinctive perspective. This new edition includes a substantial postscript by the author, in which he responds to thirty years of discussion, criticism and further work in the field to develop and refine the original theory. The book closely integrates the philosophy of law with ethics, social theory and political philosophy. The author develops a sustained and substantive argument; it is not a review of other people's arguments but makes frequent illustrative and critical reference to classical, modern, and contemporary writers in ethics, social and political theory, and jurisprudence. The preliminary First Part reviews a century of analytical jurisprudence to illustrate the dependence of every descriptive social science upon evaluations by the theorist. A fully critical basis for such evaluations is a theory of natural law. Standard contemporary objections to natural law theory are reviewed and shown to rest on serious misunderstandings. The Second Part develops in ten carefully structured chapters an account of: basic human goods and basic requirements of practical reasonableness, community and 'the common good'; justice; the logical structure of rights-talk; the bases of human rights, their specification and their limits; authority, and the formation of authoritative rules by non-authoritative persons and procedures; law, the Rule of Law, and the derivation of laws from the principles of practical reasonableness; the complex relation between legal and moral obligation; and the practical and theoretical problems created by unjust laws. A final Part develops a vigorous argument about the relation between 'natural law', 'natural theology' and 'revelation' - between moral concern and other ultimate questions.
此書所犯下的錯誤同時也是其最深刻之處。 一、古代自然法的根基在於形而上學,在於對終極真理/終極善的把握;而現代自然法的根基在於實踐理性。但是,具體而言,究竟是實踐理性的純粹形式的自我立法,還是實踐理性對某些基礎價值的證認?作者在此反對康德,認肯後一個方案。這...
評分據說,《自然法與自然權利》是哈特給其弟子菲尼斯的命題作文,寫書邀約是哈特發的,書的題目是由哈特擬的,而菲尼斯一寫就是十五年,寫的自然法都轉瞭嚮,寫的他自己也功成名就。 對於一個陰謀論愛好者而言,我深深懷疑這是哈特做的一個局,是分析法學逐步吞噬在...
評分據說,《自然法與自然權利》是哈特給其弟子菲尼斯的命題作文,寫書邀約是哈特發的,書的題目是由哈特擬的,而菲尼斯一寫就是十五年,寫的自然法都轉瞭嚮,寫的他自己也功成名就。 對於一個陰謀論愛好者而言,我深深懷疑這是哈特做的一個局,是分析法學逐步吞噬在...
評分假定我會打網球,你們其中的一個人看見我在打網球並說,“噢,你打得相當糟糕”,假定我迴答說,“我知道,我現在打得是很糟糕,但我不想打得更好些”,那人也隻能說,“哦,那也行吧”。但假定我告訴你們中間的某個人一個荒謬的謊話,他見到我後對我說“你的行為就像個野獸”...
評分此書所犯下的錯誤同時也是其最深刻之處。 一、古代自然法的根基在於形而上學,在於對終極真理/終極善的把握;而現代自然法的根基在於實踐理性。但是,具體而言,究竟是實踐理性的純粹形式的自我立法,還是實踐理性對某些基礎價值的證認?作者在此反對康德,認肯後一個方案。這...
贊同對實踐理性的基本判斷,但很難同意自然法第一原則來自self evidence而非推演,也無法同意自然法(內容)與自然法理論(體係)可以分離。權威一章很齣彩。提齣討論法律的focal meaning和肖爾的typical meaning可謂同道。
评分很棒的書,文字很簡單,閱讀難度說高不高,說低不低,但就是要花許多時間,去閱讀他提到的原典,纔能讀懂他那簡單幾句描述的判斷,這本書的分析非常美,很多地方頗有慧見。 例如〈正義〉一章的前兩節,短短幾頁,要理解他對Plato、Ariostotle的摘取,或是Rawls和Hart的批評,需要一點時間,但很好玩。 閱讀前,如果有先掃過《法律的概念》的話,對於Finnis如何將自然法給法實證主義化(或如Hart在《法理學與哲學論文集》的評論一般)會很有幫助。 基本上,還是很法實證主義的分析路綫。大部分的段落,都寫得很簡明,定義很清楚,但需要一點背景知識纔容易理解。不然就很容易誤以為他非常像傳統的自然法主義者。
评分Do not do evil in the hope that good may come after it.
评分還有什麼可以說的呢?最近三十年最重要的自然法理論著作有兩本,一本是Natural Law and Natural Rights另一本是Natural Law and Natural Rights的第二版。正如中國最好的法學院是中國政法大學法學院,第二好的是中國政法大學其他法學院。
评分贊同對實踐理性的基本判斷,但很難同意自然法第一原則來自self evidence而非推演,也無法同意自然法(內容)與自然法理論(體係)可以分離。權威一章很齣彩。提齣討論法律的focal meaning和肖爾的typical meaning可謂同道。
本站所有內容均為互聯網搜索引擎提供的公開搜索信息,本站不存儲任何數據與內容,任何內容與數據均與本站無關,如有需要請聯繫相關搜索引擎包括但不限於百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 onlinetoolsland.com All Rights Reserved. 本本书屋 版权所有