非公理化的兩種道德實踐智慧：等差性關懷倫理學與道德個別主義

Two Varieties of Unprincipled Virtue: Partiality-based Care Ethics and Particularity-based Moral Particularism

10.29732/SJPS.200702.0001

吳秀瑾(Shiu-Ching Wu)

關懷倫理 ； 道德個別主義 ； 等差性 ； 道德理由 ； 道德性質 ； partiality ； particularity ； care ethics ； moral particularism ； moral reasons

東吳哲學學報

15期（2007 / 02 / 01）

1 - 46

繁體中文

本文將以性騷擾案件為例，透過關懷的父母和個別主義的法官的對比，藉以說明父母關懷之情與法官審度之理，父母本於關懷情境中對親疏遠近的差別對待，後者是就事論事，個案處理的個別性。兩種倫理學的差別也顯示於個別主義探討道德性質、道德理由與道德法則等相關概念；相對的，關懷的父母從等差性、道德敏感性與同情心來說明關懷倫理的主要特質。 雖然兩種道德理論明顯有別，亦不可相互化約，但是是否就意味著彼此不能相容？本文將立論兩者在某種程度上仍然可以互相補充，從而顯現兩種理論各自都無法企及的情理兼具的道德完備性與理想道德人格，進而成為兩理論應該師法的道德榜樣。

The concept of particularity is generally confounded with the concept of partiality, by which it means the priority of moral concern to those near and dear. Look closely, the concept of particularity is ambiguous. If understood as particulars of a situation, particularity means exactly the same as partiality. However, if understood as sensitivity to the details and complexity of particular cases without the guidance of moral principles, particularity is different from partiality. The aim of this paper is to discuss partiality-based ethics and particularity-based ethics as two distinct and different moral theories. While the former is closely connected to care ethics which focuses on ethical notions of partiality, caring sensitivity and sympathy to the loved ones, the latter is known as moral particularism which, to use Dancy's expression, looks hard at the details of the case before one with salient moral features. In order to demonstrate that the two moral theories belong to distinct and separate moral domains, a sexual harassment case is thoroughly discussed through the contrast between caring parents and competent (particularist) judge. Although care ethics and moral particularism are distinct and irreducible to each other, they are not incompatible. The paper argues the possibility of a complement through mutual enhancement. Although loving parents are as important in securing the well-being of the loved ones as competent judges in making right judgments in the moral court, they have much to learn from the other. In becoming the caring judge and being a reason-discerning parent, we learn how to care with good reasons and judge with sympathetic concern. After all, partiality and particularity should go hand in hand.

1. (2002)。劍橋哲學辭典。台北:城邦。
2. Blum, Lawrence A.(1991).Moral perception and particularity.Ethics,101,710-725.
3. Blum, Lawrence A.(1994).Moral Perception and Particularity.New York:Cambridge University Press.
4. Blum, Lawrence A.(1988).Gilligan and Kohlberg: Implications for moral theory.Ethics,98,472-491.
5. Blum, Lawrence A.,Hooker,Little (Eds.)(2000).Moral particularism.New York:Oxford University Press.
6. Crisp, Roger,Hooker,Little (Eds.)(2000).Moral Particularism.New York:Oxford University Press.
7. Dancy, Jonathan(1983).Ethical particularism and morally relevant properties.Mind,92,530-547.
8. Dancy, Jonathan(2004).Ethics without principles.New York:Oxford UP.
9. Dancy, Jonathan(1999).Defending particularism.Metaphilosophy,30,25-32.
10. Dancy, Jonathan,Hooker,Little (Eds.)(2000).Moral Particularism.New York:Oxford University Press.
11. Darwall, Stephen(2002).Welfare and rational care.Oxford:Princeton University Press.
12. Garfield, Jay L.,Hooker,Little (Eds.)(2000).Moral Particularism.New York:Oxford University Press.
13. Hooker, Brad,Margaret Little (Eds.)(2000).Moral particularism.New York:Oxford University Press.
14. McKeever Sean,Michael Ridge(2005).What does holism have to do with moral particularism?.Ratio,18,93-103.
15. Nussbaum, Martha,Hooker,Little (Eds.)(2000).Moral particularism.New York:Oxford University Press.
16. O`neill, Onora(1996).Towards justice and virtue: A Reconstructive account of practical reasoning.Cambridge:Cambridge UP.
17. Raja, Halwani(2003).Care ethics and virtue ethics.Hypatia,18,161-192.
18. Roberts, Robert C.(1991).Virtues and rules.Philosophy and Phenomenological Research,51,325-343.
19. Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter(1999).Some varities of particularism.Metaphilosophy,30,1-12.

1. 方志華(2010)。關懷取向女性主義者之課程藍圖探究—Nel Noddings和Riane Eisler。課程與教學，13(2)，1-22。
2. 吳秀瑾(2010)。關懷倫理學的規範性。生命教育研究，2(1)，109-134。
3. 吳秀瑾(2013)。關懷立場論的知識優勢：背負關懷價值的強客觀性。科技、醫療與社會，17，9-58。
4. 鍾成鴻,廖紀華,林燕卿(2021)。台灣性騷擾研究發展與展望：文獻回顧報告。性學研究，12(1)，87-103。
5. 周鴻騰(2021)。「孝親安康學習旅遊」在地實踐之成效分析。發展與前瞻學報，33，3-39。
6. 莊慶信(2009)。宗教倫理與關懷倫理：基督宗教的愛與關懷倫理的關懷之對話。哲學與文化，36(2)，23-46。
7. (2009)。論Darwall理性關懷福祉理論：關懷倫理學的評論。國立政治大學哲學學報，21，85-127。
8. (2024)。孔子的成人之教與諾丁斯的道德教育之比較。哲學與文化，51(7)，3-18。