首页> 外文OA文献 >Political legitimacy, representation, and confucian Virtue
【2h】

Political legitimacy, representation, and confucian Virtue

机译:政治合法性,代表性和儒家美德

摘要

This thesis first examines the compatibility of political development and Confucian traditional thought in East Asia, and South Korea in particular, and then suggests an alternative methodology for the study of political theory in regards to culture. In order to accomplish these goals, this research focuses on three concepts: legitimacy, representation, and Confucian virtue. This research proposes political legitimacy as the most fundamental basis in the study of the relationship between political development and culture. Legitimacy is essential in every government and cannot be borrowed externally. Rather, it must be established through the practices and customs of the people and thus, involves culture. From this view, Confucian traditional thought should be considered the foundation of political development in Confucian East Asia. In most cases in modern politics, representation is the only legitimate form of democratic governments. While in principle, representation seems to conflict with democracy, in the sense that not all people participate in the decision-making procedure and representatives are required to have some level of competence, in modern representative democracy, it has been accepted as reasonable by the people. This is possible through an epistemic understanding of democracy whereby democracy is regarded as a system in which people pursue better decisions. Although the concepts of representation and democracy conflict, and the linking of the two in representative democracy shows the double-sided characteristics of representation, this double-sidedness emerges from the conceptual nature of representation in politics—the representation of the people’s interest and will. While representation of will seems to be the intrinsic element in the democratic principle of equality, the epistemic understanding of modern representative democracy implies that the representation of the people’s interest is also important. Based on this view of representative democracy, this thesis argues that Confucian representative theory, that only good people make good representatives, is not in conflict with modern representative democracy. It is often alleged that Confucian virtues do not coincide with the virtues required for modern democracy, even though representative democracy also demands competence in its representatives. However, Confucian virtue is based on the theory of conditional government founded on the Mandate of Heaven. This idea of limited government requires rulers to hear and to respect the people because Heaven only speaks and hears through the people. Therefore, the concepts that are regarded as essential in representative democracy - responsibility, responsiveness, and cooperation - are also important elements in Confucian representative theory, both in principle and practice. The coherence of virtue, one of the characteristics of Confucianism, is not unique to Confucian East Asia. The concept that integrated virtue is necessary in a good representative can also be found in western tradition. Some western theorists have been interested in this topic in regards to whether the good representative in reference to virtue is relevant in modern democracy. For this reason, there seems to be no reason to deny the Confucian view of the virtue of a representative in regards to the coherence of virtue. Although this thesis mainly discusses democratic legitimacy and Confucian virtue, one of the most important implications of this research is the existing methodology used in the comparative research of political theory. This thesis suggests the concept of legitimacy as the foundation of comparative political theory study. Second, this research argues that in comparative political theory research, it is necessary to focus on practice as the accumulation of the people’s behaviours in belief-systems, rather than formal institutions. Third, this thesis proposes that there is a need to find and use more neutral concepts for comparative study, such as representation, which is common in both modern western democracy and Confucian traditional thought. In such neutral categories, an interactive understanding is conceivable in any political system. First, this thesis argues that comparative research of political theory, particularly of different cultures, should start from an understanding of the nature of political legitimacy. This suggests that there should be relative conceptions in political theory and that they should be distinguished from others. For example, while the framework of legitimacy as a belief-system may be common to every government, the contents of the belief-systems are varied, insofar as the way of life is different in different societies. In the same way, though democracy is the only legitimate system of politics, there are varied forms of electoral systems, party systems, and government systems. Second, this thesis suggests that if politics are to be understood in the relationship between legitimacy and culture at a radical level, the practice and custom of the people in each belief-system must also be examined, since legitimacy cannot directly or automatically be established through institutions, nor can it be borrowed from institutions. Although institutions can be established by cultural aliens, a procedure of legitimation created through the practices of the people themselves is necessary. Without practice, the institution cannot be a foundation of political legitimacy. If we focus on institutional aspects, especially those based on the standards of modern values, the comparison may become an unfair one since modern values must be conceptualized in the West first. For this reason, it is necessary to examine the contextual understanding of practice and custom within the belief-system. Third, existing research on different systems of political thought frequently seem to compare different theories on the basis of certain values and ideologies, such as democracy, liberal democracy, or human rights. Based on these standards, theories were compared by statistical indexes in empirical studies, or by institutional or conceptual differences in normative research. Some theorists have tried to clarify whether there is a common idea of equality, liberty, or rights. Some have been interested in institutional similarity and differences. However, since much of the concepts are conceptualized in the context of the modern West, such research easily succumbs to misunderstanding or misjudging non-western theories. Even though we must also be conscious of the prejudice of non-western concepts or ideas, the continued use of western originated standards can lead to unfair comparisons. For this reason, neutral concepts are useful for fair comparison. Along this vein, this thesis offers the concept of representation, a necessary element for legitimate government in both the West and Confucian East. In this case, the main task is to examine the ways in which each tradition is compatible with modern standards of political legitimacy, such as democracy.
机译:本文首先考察了政治发展与儒家传统思想在东亚尤其是韩国的相容性,然后提出了一种研究文化政治理论的替代方法。为了实现这些目标,本研究着重于三个概念:合法性,代表性和儒家美德。这项研究提出政治合法性是研究政治发展与文化之间关系的最基本基础。合法性在每个政府中都是必不可少的,不能从外部借用。相反,它必须通过人民的习惯和习惯来建立,并因此涉及文化。因此,儒家传统思想应被视为儒家东亚政治发展的基础。在现代政治的大多数情况下,代表制是民主政府的唯一合法形式。虽然原则上代表制似乎与民主制冲突,但在某种意义上,并非所有人都参与决策程序,并且要求代表必须具有一定水平的能力,在现代代议制民主制中,人民已经接受了这种代表制是合理的。 。这是通过对民主的认识理解而实现的,民主被视为人们追求更好决策的系统。尽管代表制和民主制的概念发生冲突,并且代表民主制中的两者之间的联系显示了代表制的双重特征,但这种双重性却是从政治中代表制的概念性质-人民利益和意愿的代表制中产生的。尽管意志的体现似乎是平等的民主原则的内在要素,但对现代代议制民主的认识理解意味着,代表人民的利益也很重要。本文基于代议制民主的观点,认为儒家代议制理论只有善良的人才能成为好的代议制,与现代代议制民主制没有冲突。人们常常认为,孔子的美德与现代民主所要求的美德并不一致,即使代议制民主也要求其代表具有能力。但是,儒家美德是建立在建立在天命之上的有条件政府理论的基础上的。这种有限政府的思想要求统治者听到并尊重人民,因为天堂只通过人民讲话和聆听。因此,无论是从原则上还是从实践上来说,代议制民主中必不可少的概念-责任,回应和合作-都是儒家代议制理论的重要组成部分。美德的连贯性是儒家的特征之一,并不是儒家东亚独有的。在西方传统中也可以找到一个概念,即在一个好的代表中必须有综合的美德。一些西方理论家对该主题感兴趣,即关于美德的好代表是否与现代民主有关。因此,似乎没有理由否认儒家关于代表人的美德的关于美德连贯性的观点。尽管本文主要讨论民主合法性和儒家美德,但本研究最重要的意义之一是用于政治理论比较研究的现有方法论。本文提出合法性概念作为比较政治理论研究的基础。其次,这项研究认为,在比较政治理论研究中,有必要把重点放在实践上,因为实践是人们在信仰体系而不是正式制度中行为的积累。第三,本文提出有必要寻找和使用比较中立的概念来进行比较研究,例如代表性,这在现代西方民主和儒家传统思想中都是很普遍的。在这种中立的类别中,在任何政治系统中都可以想到一种互动的理解。首先,本论文认为,政治理论的比较研究,特别是不同文化的比较,应从对政治合法性本质的理解开始。这表明政治理论中应该有相对的概念,并且应该与其他概念区分开。例如,尽管合法性作为一种信仰体系的框架对于每个政府来说都是共同的,但只要不同社会的生活方式不同,信仰体系的内容就各不相同。同样,尽管民主是唯一合法的政治制度,但选举制度,政党制度和政府制度却有多种形式。第二,该论文表明,如果要从根本上理解合法性与文化之间的关系中的政治,则还必须检查每个信仰体系中人们的实践和习惯,因为不能通过制度直接或自动建立合法性,也不能从机构借来。尽管文化外星人可以建立机构,但是通过人民自己的实践建立的合法化程序是必要的。没有实践,该机构就不能成为政治合法性的基础。如果我们关注制度方面,尤其是那些基于现代价值标准的方面,那么比较可能会变得不公平,因为现代价值必须首先在西方被概念化。因此,有必要检查信仰体系内对实践和习俗的上下文理解。第三,现有的关于不同政治思想体系的研究似乎经常在某些价值观和意识形态(例如民主,自由民主或人权)的基础上比较不同的理论。基于这些标准,可以通过实证研究中的统计指标或规范研究中的制度或概念差异来对理论进行比较。一些理论家试图澄清是否存在平等,自由或权利的共同观念。有些人对机构的相似性和差异感兴趣。但是,由于许多概念是在现代西方的背景下概念化的,因此此类研究很容易屈服于对非西方理论的误解或误判。即使我们也必须意识到非西方概念或观念的偏见,但继续使用西方起源的标准可能会导致不公平的比较。因此,中立的概念对于公平比较很有用。沿着这种脉络,本文提供了代表的概念,这是西方和儒家东方的合法政府的必要要素。在这种情况下,主要任务是研究每种传统与现代政治合法性标准(例如民主)兼容的方式。

著录项

  • 作者

    Lee KH;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2014
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 入库时间 2022-08-20 20:23:06

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号