「修正共和主義」與「新共和主義」的理論困境及其成因

The Theoretical Dilemma of “Revising Republicanism” and “Neo-Republicanism” and Its Causes

Skinner的「修正共和主義」與Pettit的「新共和主義」同為當代共和理論的新典範，它們都是以西塞羅的res publica理論作為主要參照而建構的共和理論。一方面，Skinner為了使共和主義調和於消極自由，採取權利中心詮釋建構了「修正共和主義」。另一方面，Pettit為了使共和主義適用於當代多元民主，採取無支配自由中心詮釋建構了「新共和主義」。然而這兩種近代共和理論都出現了理路矛盾與理論困難。本文將採用觀念圖式的分析方式，說明Skinner與Pettit在參照西塞羅圖式的同時，是如何更動了西塞羅圖式中的詞彙使用傾向與聯結關係，最終導致兩組理論的理路矛盾與理論問題。

Skinner’s “revisionist republicanism” and Pettit’s “neo-republicanism” are the new emerging paradigms of contemporary republican theory. They both use Cicero’s “theory of res publica” as the main source to construct republican theory. On the one hand, Skinner adopted juristic discourse to construct “revisionist republicanism” in order to reconcile republicanism with negative freedom. On the other hand, Pettit adopted freedom as non-domination discourse to construct “neo-republicanism” in order to make republicanism applicable to contemporary pluralist democracy. However, the two kinds of republican theories suffer from the problem of internal logical contradiction and the theoretical confusion. This paper will use the method of scheme analysis to explain how Skinner and Pettit refer to and change the scheme of Cicero at the same time, which finally leads to two paradigm contradictions and theoretical problems.