论文部分内容阅读
哈贝马斯试图让民主商谈程序发挥语言交流中的语法那样的主体间进行沟通的基本规则的功能。建制化的民主商谈程序仅仅具有部分“语法”功能,作为一种形式正义,它并不能保证商谈结果为正义,从而实现作为普遍同意之充分条件的实质正义。因此,单纯依靠民主商谈程序并不能保证消除异议。使用多数原则终结异议这一做法如果不能摆脱策略性形象,就无法祛除异议而博得真正的同意。可供选择的补救措施为,将立法的道德论证贯彻到底,为多数原则设计道德论证,把现在只能定位为一种策略的多数原则在观念中改造为一种具有道德意义的决断。
Habermas tries to make the procedure of democratic negotiation function as a basic rule of communication between subjects who exert the grammar in language exchange. A proceduralized democratic process of negotiation has only a partial “grammatical” function. As a formal justice, it does not guarantee that the outcome of the negotiations will be just so as to achieve substantive justice as a sufficient condition for universal consent. Therefore, relying solely on democratic process of negotiation can not guarantee the elimination of objections. If the principle of ending the objection by using the majority principle can not get rid of objections and win true consent without being able to get rid of the strategic image, The alternative remedy is to carry through to the end the moral argument of legislation, to devise a moral argument for the majority principle and to transform the majority principle, which now can only be regarded as a tactic, into a moral decision in the notion.