論少數服從多數的合理性基礎 中西之別及其成因

The Rationality of 'The Minority is Subordinate to the Majority' The Difference Between Chinese and Western and Their Causes

“少數服從多數”廣泛運用於立法、司法以及政治決策和日常生活中，其合理性看似“當然”，實則非也。該機制可溯源至古希臘，脫生於依賴神意的抽籤與決鬥，至古希臘晚期與人本化相伴生，是為人神之爭過程中人之勝出的表徵。殆至啟蒙──大革命時代更是徹底擺脫神意，將合理性建立在“公意”之上。但其背後實為力能主義左右，故理性主義路徑的合理性解釋始終難以圓融，只得轉而以效用反證其正當。中國傳統文化不曾孕育出此機制，而始終認“獨斷”為常態，並輔之以參考“眾意”和“眾議”。這一則與中國古代強調“理一分殊”和聖王賢者較民更為明理有關；二則意在強化決策者與決策責任之間的關聯。這較之西方民主理論更適合證成“民主集中制”的合理性。

The minority is subordinate to the majority is widely used in legislative, judicial, political decisions and daily life. Its rationality seems unquestionable. But this 'consensus' is doubtful. The mechanism of 'the minority is subordinate to the majority' can be traced back to ancient Greece. It was born in the activities of lottery and duel and concomitant with the humanistic in late Ancient Greece, which could be labeled as a flag of human's victory in the process of its struggle with god. To the age of Enlightenment and European Revolution, it completely rose out of god, and its rationality appeared to be founded on 'public will'. However, the true basis was actually on 'force'. Therefore, the explanation of rationalism is not self-consistent and have to base its rationality on effects. On the other hand, chinese traditional culture never raises the 'the minority is subordinate to the majority', but recognizes' dictatorship' as the norm. While 'dictatorship' is supplemented with 'the majority opinion' and 'the majority comment'. On one side, the chinese mechanism is related to the emphasis on 'Li Yi Fen Shu' and Sage -King; and on the other side, it is based on the stress of decision-makers' responsibility. The chinese understanding is more approprite to approve the rationality of 'the minority is subordinate to the majority' than western democratic theory.