人性善恶与民主、专制关系的再认识

2015年5月初,《文史哲》编辑部举办了"‘性本善’还是‘性本恶’:儒学与自由主义的对话"人文高端论坛,这组笔谈就是在当时发言基础上撰写的。萧功秦批评儒家过于乐观的人性论预设强化了道德建构主义思维,而当代中国自由主义与新左派学人仍在继承这种"道德理想国"的乌托邦传统。方朝晖则指出,以性善论为儒家人性论的主流,并不符合历史事实;此外,西方历史上主张君主专制的学者多主张人性恶,而主张自由民主制度的学者则倾向于人性善。高全喜认为,就政治事务(即如何构建一个正义的社会制度)而言,性恶预设要比性善预设更有助于限制公权力私用;儒家有必要从人性论(特别是性善论)的一竿子到底的逻辑定式中走出来,自由主义则应当更加包容中国传统。这是儒学现代转型与自由主义进一步扎根当代中国的必由之路。谢文郁则提出权利政治(西方宪政)与责任政治(儒家仁政)的区分,指出:前者诉诸宪法和法律规定并保护公民基本权利,其瓶颈在于难以驾驭不计社会后果的权利意识;后者强调社会成员责任意识的培养,但不明文规定哪怕已经得到公认的基本权利,权利难免以责任的名义遭到践踏。未来中国政治必须拥有充分而平衡的责任意识和权利意识。

In the beginning of May 2015,the Editorial Department of Wen Shi Zhe held a forum on'Good Nature or Evil:a Dialogue between Confucianism and Liberalism,'and this group of written conversations are based on the talks presented at the forum.Xiao Gongqin criticizes the over-optimistic Confucian presupposition on human nature,which strengthened the thinking of moral constructivists,so that liberal and New Left scholars in today's China are still inheriting the Utopian tradition of the'moral ideal.'Fang Zhaohui points out that the opinion which regards good human nature as the mainstream of Confucian theory does not accord with the historical facts.Besides,in Western history,most scholars who advocated autocratic monarchy advocated a theory of evil nature,and most scholars who advocate liberal democracy advocate the theory of a good nature.Gao Quanxi considers that,for political affairs,i.e.how to construct a righteous social system,the presupposition of an evil nature will be more helpful in restricting private use of public rights than one of a good nature;furthermore,it is necessary both for Confucianism to step out of the total focus on human nature(especially agood human nature),and for liberalism to be more inclusive of the Chinese tradition.Those are the inevitable routes for Confucianism's modern transition as well as for liberalism taking deeper root in today's China.Xie Wenyu raises the distinction between a politics of rights(i.e.,Western constitutionalism)and a responsible politics(i.e.,Confucian benevolent government),pointing out that the former resorts to the constitution and legal provisions for protecting the fundamental rights of citizens,yet has difficulty controlling consciousness of right regardless of social consequences;the latter emphasizes cultivation of people's consciousness of responsibility,but does not explicitly stipulate fundamental rights even if they are generally accepted,so rights are inevitably stomped out in the name of responsibility.In the future,Chinese politics must possess a sufficient and balanced consciousness of both responsibility and right.