例外状态与自然正当--论施特劳斯与施密特的一次交锋

The State of Exception and Natural Right——On a Confrontation of Leo Strauss and Carl Schmitt

自卡尔·施密特慷慨激昂的辩护之后,对"例外状态"的探讨日益成为政治哲学与法学的热点问题。,晚近以来,声誉日隆的吉奥乔·阿甘本甚至忧心忡忡地表示,"例外状态"已经是现代政治的常态。^([1])然而,例外状态作为一桩事实,并不新鲜,古今中外的政治生活都不能避免。,将例外状态当作一个严肃的政治哲学或法学问题来对待,不过是20世纪以来才逐渐形成的"时髦"。假如"例外状态"果真如施密特、阿甘本等人所主张的那么不容忽视,何以前现代的政治哲人几乎予理会?要彻底搞清楚今人围绕"例外状态"的种种主张,离不开一个"古今之争"的视野,施特劳斯的政治哲学因此尤其值得注意。从古典自然正当学说的角度来看,"例外状态"并不值得如此大惊小怪,施密特等人的激烈反应只是因为他们依然没有摆脱现代政治哲学的狭隘视野。现代政治哲学从马基雅维里开始就是一种特别关注例外状态的政治哲学,施密特的论说不过是这一现代精神的继承和延续。

Primarily due to the furious defense by German jurist and political theorist, Carl Schmitt, the study of the state of exception has increasingly become a hot issue in the fields of political philosophy and law. Recently, Giorgio Agamben, a well-known contemporary Italian scholar, even warns that the state of exception has been normalized in modern politics. However, it is beyond any doubt that the state of exception as a fact is nothing new but a common element of both ancient and modern political life, Its being treated as a serious philosophical or legal issue is only a fashion formed gradually in 20th century. If the state of exception is indeed theoretically unignorable as argued by Schmitt and Agamben, why is it hardly touched by pre-modern political philosophers？ To clarify all the assumptions and implications of the current discussion around it, a horizon that covers the quarrel between ancients and moderns is necessary, which makes Leo Strauss＇s political philosophy especially noteworthy. From the perspective of classical natural right doctrine as elaborated by Leo Strauss, the state of exception does not deserve such a fuss. The overreaction of contemporary scholars such as Carl Schmidt is probably because that they are still under the spell of the narrower horizon of modern political philosophy.