日前,連岳先生的言論「抽不抽煙,是個(gè)人自由選擇。讓不讓客人抽煙,是店主自由選擇。支持政府干涉這些自由的人,都是優(yōu)秀的少先隊(duì)員。去你媽的」甫一發(fā)布,旋即引起熱議。
竊以為,連岳先生的言論,也許包含了基于對(duì)Paternalism(「家長主義」,又作「父愛主義」)以及paternalistic legislation(家長式立法)所引發(fā)的權(quán)利焦慮——這份焦慮的理性程度和價(jià)值,其實(shí)遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)高于其表達(dá)這份焦慮的語言形式。
根據(jù)《法律哲學(xué):百科全書》所載,Parentalism來自拉丁語pater,意思是指像父親那樣行為,或?qū)Υ讼駥?duì)待孩子一樣。該書又特別指出,Parentalism是家長主義在性別上的中性的表達(dá)方式。
參考文章見: Paternalism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)):
Paternalism is the interference of a state or an individual with another person, against their will, and defended or motivated by a claim that the person interfered with will be better off or protected from harm. The issue of paternalism arises with respect to restrictions by the law such as anti-drug legislation, the compulsory wearing of seatbelts, and in medical contexts by the withholding of relevant information concerning a patient's condition by physicians. At the theoretical level it raises questions of how persons should be treated when they are less than fully rational.
即,「家長主義」宣稱,為了防止公民受到傷害或更好地增進(jìn)他們的福祉,治理者可以想家長般對(duì)他們的行為進(jìn)行限制,哪怕這樣做違反了他們的意志。
「家長主義」支持者的常見辯護(hù),通?;谶@樣幾個(gè)前提:
第一,治理者知悉公民對(duì)于利益和福祉的所有偏好;
第二,這類偏好是大體穩(wěn)定的;
第三,治理者基于前述兩點(diǎn)制定的規(guī)則,在總體上有助于增進(jìn)公民的福祉或降低傷害,故而可以獲得道德辯護(hù)。
但是,密爾對(duì)此深表懷疑。反駁的大意是:
第一,政客很容易通過「家長主義」來為其限制公民自由、權(quán)利的行為進(jìn)行道德辯護(hù)。(對(duì)此,在下深表同意。畢竟,什么是「為了你好」的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)是極其模糊的,非常容易被用于混淆視聽)
第二,即使治理者確實(shí)是出于為公民謀求福祉或降低傷害而制定規(guī)則,但只有我們「自己」是最了解自身利益的,任何治理者在這一點(diǎn)上都不會(huì)比我們「自己」做得更好。
參考文章見 Mill's Moral and Political Philosophy (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
First, state power is liable to abuse. Politicians are self-interested and corruptible and will use a paternalistic license to limit the freedom of citizens in ways that promote their own interests and not those of the citizens whose liberty they restrict (V 20–3).
Second, even well intentioned rulers will misidentify the good of citizens. Because an agent is a more reliable judge of his own good, even well intentioned rulers will promote the good of the citizens less well than would the citizens themselves (IV 4, 12).
在下相信,「家長主義」恐怕意味著,治理者「總是」比公民更清楚其最為核心的利益關(guān)切,或偏好——而這一點(diǎn),恐怕需要更進(jìn)一步的辯護(hù),方能令人信服。
個(gè)人傾向于同意:意思自治具有基本的道德基礎(chǔ),即使個(gè)人自治并不一定會(huì)提高自己的利益,但他卻能夠最大限度地預(yù)防(公權(quán)力通過援引「家長主義」謀求供道德辯護(hù)的前提下)對(duì)私權(quán)利進(jìn)行侵蝕的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)——從這個(gè)角度而言,意思自治比個(gè)人福利更為重要。
面對(duì)「家長式立法」時(shí),也許我們的思考和討論,不宜止步于「為了你好」,而宜更多地去討論不同權(quán)利間的價(jià)值沖突是怎么發(fā)生的,有沒有更低成本的解決策略去平衡這些沖突。
【備注】
本人不贊同連岳先生的表達(dá)方式。