論反抗權在康德法政哲學思想中的合法性與正當性問題－另一種解讀的可能性

On Legality and Legitimacy of the Right of Resistance in Kant's Legal and Political Philosophy -A Heterodox Reading

陳欣白(Hsin-Pai Chen)

康德 ； 反抗權 ； 合法性 ； 正當性 ； 言論自由 ； Immanuel Kant ； right of resistance ； legality ； legitimacy ； freedom of speech

人文及社會科學集刊

31卷4期（2019 / 12 / 01）

641 - 671

繁體中文

本文嘗試為「反抗權」在康德法政哲學思想中的「合法性」與「正當性」問題提出不同以往的解讀方式，說明在「法權的普遍原則」下，康德雖未肯認反抗的「正當性」，但他依據同樣原則對「言論自由」作爲一項「消極的反抗」的強調，卻說明了「理性立法」相較於「實定立法」在「證立上的優位性」，以致人民的反抗作爲即使難以受到實定法律的保障，也應當被視爲一項「超越實定法的、道德上的權利」。

Kant defined the ＂right to resist＂ as a ＂coercive power＂ against the head of state. Therefore, under the requirement of the ＂principle of separation of powers ＂, people's rebellion is no doubt illegal. However, Kant also emphasized that in addition to revolution and rebellion, there is also a ＂passive resistance＂. It is not a kind of ＂coercive power＂ per se, but ＂a right that cannot be abandoned or given up of an individual who lives in any society. This article attempts to make a different reading on the legality and legitimacy problem of the right of resistance in Kant's legal and political philosophy, and to discuss in which sense Kant's emphasis on the freedom of speech did suggest the idea to which the right of resistance should be regarded as an over-positive right of people.

1. Beck, Lewis W.(1971).Kant and the Right of Revolution.Journal of the History of Ideas,32(3),411-422.
2. Dreier, Ralf(1991).Recht-Staat-Vernunft. Studien zur Rechtstheorie 2.Frankfurt am Main:Suhrkamp.
3. Friedrich, Rudolf(1980).Gibt es in der Demokratie ein Widerstandsrecht?.Neue Zürcher Zeitung,13./14. Sep.,37.
4. Glotz, Peter(ed.)(1983).Ziviler Ungehorsam im Rechtsstaat.Frankfurt am Main:Suhrkamp.
5. Hoerster, Norbert(2006).Was ist Recht? Grundfragen der Rechtsphilosophie.München:Verlag C. H. Beck.
6. Höffe, Otfried(1995).Kategorische Rechtsprinzipien. Ein Kontrapunkt der Moderne.Frankfurt am Main:Suhrkamp.
7. Höffe, Otfried 2015 “Immanuel Kant: Die Trennung von Mein und Dein,” Frankfurter Allgemein, Retrieved March 7, 2015, from http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/immanuel-kant-die-trennung-von-mein-und-dein–13456237.html
8. Höffe, Otfried(2001).Königliche Völker. Zu Kants kosmopolitischer Rechts- und Friedenstheorie.Frankfurt am Main:Suhrkamp.
9. Höffe, Otfried(1981).Sittlich-politische Diskurse. Politische Grundlagen, politische Ethik, biomedizinische Ethik.Frankfurt am Main:Suhrkamp.
10. Höffe, Otfried(2004).Immanuel Kant.München:Verlag C. H. Beck.
11. Kant, Immanuel,Gregor, Mary J.(ed. trans.).(1996).Kant: The Metaphysics of Morals.New York:Cambridge University Press.
12. Korsgaard, Christine M.(2008).The Constitution of Agency: Essays on Practical Reason and Moral Philosophy.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
13. Malibabo, Balimbanga(2000).Kants Konzept einer kritischen Metaphysik der Sitten.Würzburg:Königshausen & Neumann.
14. Pablo Muchnik (ed.)(2008).Rethinking Kant: Volume 1.Newcastle:Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
15. Radbruch, Gustav(2003).Rechtsphilosophie.Heidelberg:C. F. Müller Verlag.
16. Rawls, John(2003).A Theory of Justice.MA:Harvard University Press.
17. Reiss, Hans Siegbert(1956).Kant and the Right of Rebellion.Journal of the History of Ideas,17(2),179-192.
18. Sánchez-Seco, Fernando Centenera(2016).Kurt Huber against the Third Reich. A Kantian Analysis.Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie,102(4),532-550.
19. 康德, Immanuel,李明輝（譯注）, Ming-huei(trans.)(2015).道德底形上學.臺北=Taipei:聯經=Linking Publishing.
20. 康德, Immanuel,李明輝（譯注）, Ming-huei(trans.)(1990).道德底形上學之基礎.臺北=Taipei:聯經=Linking Publishing.
21. 康德, Immanuel,李明輝（譯注）, Ming-huei(trans.)(2002).康德歷史哲學論文集.臺北=Taipei:聯經=Linking Publishing.
22. 薛智仁, Chih-Jen(2015)。刑法觀點下的公民不服從。中研院法學期刊，17，131-204。