| Abstract: | 自G. E. M. Anscombe省思康德道德義務論與道德效益論對倫理學的影響，試圖檢視古希臘倫理學對當代哲學的啟發，此倫理學理上之翻轉，亦推動法理學思考法律與道德在義務論與效益論之外的其他可能性。Lawrence B. Solum教授以德行法理學標示溯源自古希臘哲學，以人為本的理論基礎。德行法理學嘗試藉由對古希臘哲學的梳理，提煉人、法律、道德間的相互關係。在國外對德行法理學的研究仍處於初始的階段，文獻或為對裁判者德行的探討，或為對憲法理論、國家公權力介入行為的論述，以公法為重。
本文認為，德行法理學需面對的挑戰來自三個方向：一為對既有義務論與效益論的檢討；二為德行法理學理論之建構，即使係回溯自古希臘哲學，相距幾千年的思想何以適用於現代？以古希臘哲學建構而成的德行法理學，與古希臘哲學間的差異性何在？三為德行法理學在司法實務中的實踐，其對法律中的道德又將如何詮釋。德行法理學的理論仍有待建構，此三個問題亦為本論文思考的內涵。
在臺灣對法理學的研究以德沃金與哈特的理論與辯論為主，德行法理學仍屬於新興的領域。而德行法理學的發端為對既有理論的批判，因此本論文首先檢視康德義務論與效益論的侷限，並導引至古希臘哲學對法律、正義等的思考；進而論述法律與道德間之關聯性，藉由德沃金與哈特對原則和規則的闡述，使其與德行法理學有所對話。
另，本文認為德行法理學所言之「德」，來自於生活中之實踐，此社會中的共識形塑法律內在的核心價值。臺灣民法第148條第2項即以權利義務之行使應本於誠實信用之方法，「誠實信用」或稱「誠信原則」為民法中之帝王條款，兼具有道德與法律的雙重特質。本論文以買賣契約為觀察的主體，誠實信用為交易時應秉持的德行。誠信原則的內涵，在交易當事人間之互動，以及法院的裁判中，其具體內涵不斷的補充、詮釋、再創造。在一般的商務契約，法院對當事人間交易的介入，立於被動的狀態；惟在定型化契約，契約條款既由一方當事人預先擬定，雙方或有立於不平等地位之虞，基於公平與誠信，立法者制定消費者保護法以規範之，法院對誠信原則之解釋，或亦有所不同。
Since G. E. M. Anscombe thought about how the moral deontological theory of Immanuel Kant and the moral utilitarianism have influenced Ethics, trying to find the possibility of ancient Greek philosophy to inspire contemporary philosophy. It is the overturn of Ethic theory, and is also the promotion for jurisprudence to think the other possibility except deontological theory and utilitarianism. Professor Lawrence B. Solum labeled virtue jurisprudence which was tracing back to ancient Greek philosophy, and was basing on human. The study of virtue jurisprudence was trying to find the interrelation between human, law and virtue by arranging ancient Greek philosophy. In foreign, the study of virtue jurisprudence still in preliminary, the papers might study about the virtue of judicator, and might reaserch the constitutional theory, national power, focusing on public law.
I think there are three challenges in virtue jurisprudence: the first one is the criticism about deontological theory and utilitarianism; the second one is about structuring the theory of virtue jurisprudence, even though tracing back to ancient Greek philosophy, which in thousand years apart how to fit contemporary? Virtue jurisprudence was built on ancient Greek philosophy, and what is the difference between them? Thirdly, when virtue jurisprudence practice in judiciary, how it interpret morality in law. The theory of virtue jurisprudence still need to be built, and the three questions would be deliberated in my thesis.
In Taiwan, the study of jurisprudence focuses on the theories and debates between Ronald Dworkin and H. L. A. Hart, virtue jurisprudence is still a new area. Virtue jurisprudence begins with critique of the original theories, hence, I will examine the limitation of Kant’s deontological theory and utilitarianism in my thesis at first, and will lead to the deliberation of law, justice and so on in ancient Greek philosophy; moreover, I will discuss the relation between law and moral. By expounding principles and rules of Ronald Dworkin and H. L. A. Hart, they will have a conversation with virtue jurisprudence.
Furthermore, I think the word “virtue” in virtue jurisprudence comes from the practice of life, the social consensus built the core value of law. In Taiwan Civil Law §148II is that performing right and duty should base on honesty and credit methods, “honesty and credit” or “good faith principle” is the emperor clause in civil law, the double characteristic of moral and law in it. My thesis focuses on purchasing contract, honesty and credit will be the virtue in transaction. The content of good faith is continuing supplement, annotation, and recreation in the interaction between contract parties and in the judicial judgement. In normal commercial contract, the court interposes the parties’ transaction passive state; however, in standard form contract, the contract terms were draw up by one party in advance, both sides might in inequality, basing on fair and good faith, the legislator made Consumer protection law to rule it, and the court interpreted good faith might be different. |
