政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/53527
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 114396/145431 (79%)
造訪人次 : 53062985      線上人數 : 739
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧：
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料
    •  進階搜尋
    政大機構典藏 > 文學院 > 哲學系 > 期刊論文 >  Item 140.119/53527


    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/53527


    題名: 「一次決定論」或「全有全無論」？藍騰與格林論臣屬與噤聲,
    Once-and-for-all-ism Or All-or-none-ism? Langton and Green on Subordination and Silencing
    作者: 鄭光明
    Cheng, Kuang-Ming
    貢獻者: 政大哲學系
    關鍵詞: 言論自由;言論檢查;藍騰;格林;一次決定論;全有全無論
    Freedom of speech;Censorship;Rae Langton;Leslie Green;Once-and-for-all-ism;All-or-none-ism
    日期: 2011-08
    上傳時間: 2012-09-04 10:57:49 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 言論檢查 (censorship) 背後的充分理由究竟為何？本文將以色情刊物為例探討此一問題。對此，女性主義者藍騰 (Rae Langton) 曾主張：只要色情刊物在此時此地(here and now)使得婦女遭到了噤聲或使得婦女臣屬於男性，這就足以使我們有充分理由查禁色情刊物了。本文將稱此一主張為「一次決定論」(once-and-for-all-ism)。然而格林 (Leslie Green) 卻不同意藍騰的主張，並認為：色情刊物無法隨時隨地使得婦女遭到噤聲或使得婦女臣屬於男性，因此我們並沒有充分理由查禁色情刊物。本文稱此一主張為「全有全無論」(all-or-none-ism)。本文將反對藍騰的「一次決定論」，並認為格林的「全有全無論」較為合理。本文將主張：藍騰的「一次決定論」由於無法避免「侵害思想自由」問題，因此並不能為言論檢查提供充分理由。 An anti-pornography feminist, Rae Langton argues that pornography may subordinate and silence women. Langton thinks that the fact that women are not subordinated or silenced by pornography, everywhere and every time, does not undermine the apparent fact that they are subordinated and silenced, here and now. To demand otherwise comes close to demanding that no women are subordinated and silenced by pornography unless all women are subordinated and silenced by pornography. Let’s call it Langton’s once-and-for-all-ism. On the other hand, Leslie Green argues that the mere fact that women might be subordinated-in-pornography or silenced-in-pornography will not suffice to bring them within the jurisdiction of pornography. Therefore, Green thinks that Langton does not show that women are subordinated or silenced by pornography. Let’s call it Green’s all-or-none-ism. In what follows I will argue that Green is right in thinking that we should not restrict pornography merely on the ground that pornography does subordinate or silence some women, here and now. Therefore, there are some powerful liberal reasons for thinking that Langton’s once-and-for-all-ism is not a good argument for censoring pornography.
    關聯: 東吳哲學學報, 24, 47-97
    資料類型: article
    顯示於類別:[哲學系] 期刊論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 描述 大小格式瀏覽次數
    no.24Kuang-Ming%20Cheng.pdf693KbAdobe PDF21680檢視/開啟


    檢視Licence

    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋