本文關(guān)鍵詞：集體主義視野下的道德沖突研究　出處：《太原理工大學》2013年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 道德沖突 道德困惑 多元集體主義 優(yōu)化方法 解決方案

【摘要】：改革開放和社會主義市場經(jīng)濟把中國帶向了一個價值多元化的時代,道德沖突現(xiàn)象成了我們必須要去思考的問題。西方倫理學中,功利主義在用來解決道德沖突時,把一切價值都還原為快樂和痛苦,忽視了產(chǎn)生行動的動機和道德規(guī)則的價值；義務(wù)論的解決之道過分強調(diào)了道德規(guī)則的價值,把道德原則價值進行絕對化的排序,沒有考慮到人類社會的現(xiàn)實的后果,而且忽視了美德和情感的道德價值；羅斯的多元義務(wù)論解決之道是對顯見義務(wù)進行排序,即更強烈的顯見義務(wù)總是最大的顯見的善,照此行動就可以解決道德沖突,但是很難實踐；價值澄清學派提出價值中立原則,將道德沖突帶來的困惑重新拋給人們自身,要求人們重新澄清自己的價值觀并認識自己,從而幫助人們從道德沖突的困惑中走出來,但是很容易滑進相對主義的深淵。盡管這些解決的方案沒能很好的解決道德沖突,甚至在指導(dǎo)道德實踐時會產(chǎn)生新的原則沖突,但是通過對西方這些解決之道的詳細分析和比較,能發(fā)現(xiàn)了倫理學多元化的趨勢。這種趨勢主要體現(xiàn)在價值主體多元和價值多元,正是基于這樣的趨勢和我國自身集體主義的文化背景,本文提出了多元集體主義解決道德沖突的方案。 多元集體主義的兩大特點就是價值主體多元和價值多元,基于這兩大特點提出了解決道德沖突的兩條基本原則：一是將優(yōu)化這種科學的比較方法引入了道德哲學,形成了科學的判斷方法原則；二是重新確定了集體利益的內(nèi)涵并進行了分層,把這種新的集體利益最大化作為道德行為抉擇的原則。根據(jù)這兩條原則本文提出了具體的科學解決程序,即第一,對被擇方案搜索并列舉全部方案；第二,對多元主體進行分析并列出主體的利益；第三,對涉及的多元價值分析；第四,將被擇方案的集體利益計算出來并進行比較；第五,從中選取對集體利益最大的被擇方案。通過這五步不僅能全面分析出道德沖突的原因、相關(guān)利益主體、相關(guān)價值,更能通過集體利益最優(yōu)化的方法對他們進行比較排序,從而形成唯一的解決方案來破解道德沖突給人帶來的困惑。 本文不僅從理論上提出了對道德沖突解決方案,并且引入了一個實際生活中發(fā)生的例子,對其中的道德沖突現(xiàn)象進行了分析,并用多元集體主義對其提出了相應(yīng)的解決方案,這些解決方案不僅能作為對事件中行為和結(jié)果進行評價,還能為以后人們的道德行為進行指導(dǎo),通過這個實例分析可以看到多元集體主義的道德沖突解決方案更符合人們的日常道德判斷,因此其對行為的指導(dǎo)性也更強,不僅可以作為完善集體主義倫理學的一種嘗試,還可以促進社會主義精神文明建設(shè)。
[Abstract]:The reform and opening up and the socialist market economy have brought China to an era of value pluralism, and the phenomenon of moral conflict has become a problem that we must think about. When utilitarianism is used to solve moral conflicts, it restores all values into pleasure and pain, neglecting the values of motives and moral rules that produce actions. The solution of the theory of obligation overemphasizes the value of moral rules and puts the value of moral principles in an absolute order without considering the realistic consequences of human society and neglecting the moral values of virtue and emotion. The solution of Ross's theory of multivariate obligation is to sort out the obligation of manifest, that is, the stronger duty of opinion is always the greatest obvious good, according to which the moral conflict can be solved, but it is difficult to practice. The school of value clarification puts forward the principle of value neutrality, throws back the confusion brought by moral conflict to people, and requires people to clarify their own values and understand themselves. It helps people get out of the confusion of moral conflict, but it is easy to slide into the abyss of relativism. Even in guiding moral practice, there will be new conflicts of principles, but through the detailed analysis and comparison of these solutions in the West. This trend is mainly reflected in the pluralism of value subject and value, which is based on this trend and the cultural background of our own collectivism. This paper puts forward a solution to the moral conflict of pluralistic collectivism. The two characteristics of pluralistic collectivism are value subject pluralism and value pluralism. Based on these two characteristics, this paper puts forward two basic principles for resolving moral conflicts: first, the comparative method of optimizing this kind of science is introduced into moral philosophy and the principle of scientific judgment method is formed; Second, the connotation of collective interests is redefined and stratified, and the maximization of this new collective interest is regarded as the principle of moral behavior choice. According to these two principles, this paper puts forward the concrete scientific solution procedure. That is, first, search the selected scheme and enumerate all the schemes; Second, analyze the multiple subjects and list the interests of the main body; Third, the multi-value analysis involved; 4th, to calculate and compare the collective interests of the selected scheme; Through these five steps, we can not only analyze the causes of moral conflict, relevant stakeholders, relevant value. They can be compared and sorted by the method of collective interest optimization, so as to form a unique solution to solve the confusion caused by moral conflict. This paper not only puts forward a solution to moral conflict theoretically, but also introduces an example in real life and analyzes the phenomenon of moral conflict. And multiple collectivism to put forward the corresponding solutions, these solutions can not only be used to conduct the event and the results of evaluation, but also for the future moral behavior of people to guide. Through the analysis of this example, we can see that the multi-collectivist moral conflict solution is more in line with people's daily moral judgment, so it is more instructive to the behavior. It can not only be an attempt to perfect collectivism ethics, but also promote the construction of socialist spiritual civilization.
【學位授予單位】：太原理工大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D648

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 陳新平;;消息源匿名的道德沖突與化解路徑[J];安徽師范大學學報(人文社會科學版);2011年03期

2 薛桂波;;全球化中的倫理認同與倫理沖突[J];道德與文明;2011年01期

3 張愿堅;;道德發(fā)展的階段性及道德沖突[J];太原師范學院學報(社會科學版);2008年02期

4 滑麗蓉;;網(wǎng)絡(luò)環(huán)境下的道德規(guī)范[J];江蘇警官學院學報;2010年03期

5 秦初生;;試析社會轉(zhuǎn)型期道德沖突研究的必要性[J];桂林師范高等�？茖W校學報;2008年04期

6 何玉芳;;新聞傳播活動中的道德沖突與倫理救治[J];河北師范大學學報(哲學社會科學版);2009年03期

7 李培超;;道德沖突論綱[J];湖南師范大學社會科學學報;1993年02期

8 姚軒鴿;;全球化背景中的倫理沖突與重建策略[J];陜西理工學院學報(社會科學版);2009年03期

9 袁明華;;論道德沖突[J];江蘇社會科學;1992年02期

10 錢滿素;價值中立的兩難[J];江蘇社會科學;2004年01期

，

本文編號：1410775