官僚組織殺人嗎？從理性化的弔詭看官僚組織的矛盾與衝突

Is the Bureaucracy a Killer? Viewing the Positive and Negative Terrains of Bureaucracy from the Paradox of Rationality

10.6788/JNTNUPS.200702.0001

王光旭(Guang-Xu Wang)

實質理性 ； 工具理性 ； 理性弔詭 ； 官僚殺人 ； Max Weber ； formal rationality ； substantive rationality ； Weber ； the paradox of rationality ； bureaucracy is a killer

師大政治論叢

7&8期（2007 / 02 / 01）

1 - 33

繁體中文

「官僚殺人嗎」？是一種對西方理性化思想與科學主義的過渡膨脹帶來負面效應的反動，其全然彰顯在官僚組織理性型模、非人情化的無情、僵化的機械結構，以及權威宰制等特質上。在近代西方文明的發展的過程中，工具理性和形式理性取得了壓倒性的優勢，形成了所謂社會的理性化(the rationalization of society)。而理性官僚制的擴張，便是由於工具理性的特質，和理性化社會趨向工具理性之社會能相互配合，使其如魚得水般的恣意擴張。 Max Weber對於理性官僚制的擴張，是懷著戒慎恐懼的不信任態度。原本在意義上為中性的官僚體系(bureaucratic system)，現今常被使用當作「政治性的咒罵語」(political cussword)，亦被視為是代表政治職能的代罪羔羊。本文認為，工具理性與實質理性的弔詭在社會科學的辯論中幾不可能有一個合適的解決方法，唯一可以引領我們的是，在現世的生活中，有太多需要涉及到價值判斷的事務，需要我們以有效率的手段來達成，即便如執行國家意志的官僚也不例外。 據此，本文嘗試透過公共選擇理論、社會學制度論及行政哲學中的「理性觀點」與Weber的對話，並藉此來檢視官僚組織中理性概念的衝突與矛盾。此外，本文更冀望進一步在行政理論中找出融合工具理性與實質理性互斥的秩序的因子，希望能為官僚組織的理性設計找到一個能適應現代社會需求的平衡點。

Is bureaucracy a killer? The over-expansion of the rational thought and scientific doctrines initiate a negative effect to our daily life that express on the dysfunctional characteristics of the model of rationality, bureaucratic personality, and phenomenon of mechanism etc.... The dysfunctions of bureaucratic organization always become more expansive by following the interaction process of the over-inflation of both formal rationality and the trend of rationalization in the modern society. The originally positive and functional aspect of bureaucratic organization has become a kind of political cussword nowadays. The paradox between the instrumental rationality and essential rationality, as we can see in the arguments above, will never been settled down by one or more capable approaches. In fact, the only and most enlightened behavior we should take in common life is that there are so many affairs involved in the value judgment, which enforce us to resolve by using efficient tactics. Obeying the same logic, the similar attitude should be also executed by the bureaucracy enacting the national will. Though there is no answer in the reconciliation between the positive and negative terrains of bureaucracy. In view of the above, we also attempt to analyze the logical paradox of the bureaucratic rationality and find a way to reconcile formal and substantive rationality by inspecting and comparing the concept of rationality of rational choice theorem, sociological institutionalism and the philosophy of Public Administration in this research.

1. Crozier, M.(1964).The Bureaucracy Phenomenon.The University of Chicago Press.
2. Denhart, R. B.(1984).Theories of Public Organization.Monterey:Books/Cole.
3. DiMaggio, P.(eds.),W. W. Powell(1991).The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis.Chicago:the Chicago University Press.
4. Durant, Will、幼獅編譯部主編(1979)。世界文明史(19)宗教改革。台北:幼獅。
5. Ferejohn, J.,Kristen Monroe (ed.)(1991).The Economic Approach to Politics.New York:Harper Collins.
6. Golembiewski, R. T.(1977).Public Administration as A Developing Discipline: Part I, Perspectives on Past and Present.New York:Marcel Dekker.
7. Goodnow, F.(2003).Politics and Administration: a Study in Government.New Brunswick N.J.:Transaction.
8. Green, Donald P.、Ian Shapiro、徐湘林、袁瑞軍譯(2000)。理性選擇的病變。香港:牛津大學出版社。
9. Harmon, M. M.,R. T. Mayer(1986).Organizational Theory for Public Administration.Boston:Little, Brown and Company.
10. Herring, E. P.,Jay M. Shafritz,Albert C. Hyde (eds.)(1992).Classics of Public Administration.Pacific Grove, CA:Brooks/Cob Publishing Company.
11. Jun, Jong S.、黃曙曜譯(1997)。公共行政：設計與問題解決。台北:五南。
12. Levine, C. H.,B. G. Peters,F J. Thompson(1990).Public Administration: Challenges, Choice, Consequences.Glenview IL:Scott, Foresman.
13. Lipsky, M.,Jay M. Shafritz,Albert C. Hyde (eds.)(1992).Classics of Public Administration.Pacific Grove, CA:Brooks/Cob Publishing Company.
14. Mannheim, K.(1951).Man and Society in an Age of Reconstruction.New York:Harcount Brace Jovanovich.
15. Marcuse, Herbert、劉繼譯(1987)。單向度的人。上海:上海譯文出版社。
16. Meyer, J. W.,B. Rowan,Walter W. Powell,Paul J. DiMaggio (eds.)(1991).The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis.Chicago:the University of Chicago Press.
17. Moe, T.(1984).The New Economics of Organization.American Journal of Political Science,28,739-777.
18. Niskanen, W. A.(1994).Bureaucracy and Public Economy.England:Aldershop, Hants.
19. Niskanen, W. A.(1971).Bureaucracy and Representative Government.Chicago:Aldine, Atherton.
20. Ostrom, V.(1989).The Intellectual Crisis in American Public Administration.Tuscaloosa:University of Alabama Press.
21. Riker, W. H.,James E. Alt,Kenneth A. Shepsle. (eds.)(1990).Perspectiveson Positive Political Economy.New York:Cambridge University Press.
22. Schluchter, Wolfgang、顧忠華譯(1986)。理性化與官僚化－對韋伯研究的詮釋。台北:聯經。
23. Schmidtz, D.(1995).Rational Choice and Moral Agency.New Jersey:Princeton University Press.
24. Taylor, M.,Michael Taylor (ed.)(1988).Rationality and Revolution.Cambridge:the University of Cambridge Press.
25. Turner, B. S.(1990).Theory of Modernity and Postmodemity.London:Sage.
26. Waldo, D.(1985).The Enterprise of Public Administration.New York:Candler & Sharp Inc.
27. Waldo, D.(1952).Development of Theory of Democratic Administration.American Political Science Review,46(1),81-103.
28. Wamsely, G. L.,Gary I. Wamsely(1990).Refounding Public Administration.Newbury Park:SAGE.
29. Weber, M.(1947).The Theory of Social and Economic Organization.New York:Oxford University Press.
30. Weber, M.(1977).Economy and Society.Berkeley:University of Canfornia Press.
31. Weber, M.,H. H. Gerth,C. W. Mills(eds./trs.)(1946).From Max Weber.Oxford University Press.
32. Weber, Max、于曉、陳維綱譯(1991)。新教倫理與資本主義精神。台北:唐山。
33. Weber, Max、林榮遠譯(1997)。經濟與社會。北京:商務印書館。
34. Weber, Max、康樂、簡惠美譯(1990)。宗教與世界－韋伯選集Ⅱ。台北:遠流。
35. Wilson, W.,J. M. Shafritz,A. C. Hyde(1992).Classics of Public Administration, Harcourt Brace.Pacific Grove, CA:Brooks/Cob Publishing Company.
36. 王婉芬(1994)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台灣大學社會研究所。
37. 吳英明(1994)。公共行政的民主原則與效率原則。中國行政評論，2(2)，130-150。
38. 吳瓊恩、劉慧娥(1998)。官僚組織異化問題：理論與方法背景初探。公共行政學報，3，277-299。
39. 中央日報(2000/07/25)
40. 陳曉林(1987)。學術巨人與理性困境－韋伯、巴柏、哈伯瑪斯。台北:時報出版社。
41. 中央日報(2003/09/25)
42. 鄭國泰(1997)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。政治大學公共行政研究所。
43. 聯合報(1994/10/08)
44. 顏良恭(1998)。公共行政中的典範問題。台北:五南。
45. 顧忠華(1992)。韋伯學說新探。台北:唐山。

1. 倪鳴香、王瑞邦(2017)。生命證成專業：一位教育行政人員的教育學傳記研究。生命敘說與心理傳記學，5，75-105。