论“数字人权”的三重异化——对龚向和教授“三重否定”的回应

On the Triple Alienation of“Digital Human Rights”——Response to Professor Gong Xianghe's Triple Negation

“数字人权”理论存在三重异化。一是本原异化。“数字属性”不是人之本性,脱离人的自然属性,取代人的社会属性,宰制人的精神属性,使得人权主体溢出自然人范畴,形成蔑视人性的“拜数字教”。二是形态异化。“数字形态”不是人权的道德形态,无法为社会的道德奠基;亦非人权的法定形态,欠缺民主立法和规范逻辑的承认。作为实有形态的新样貌,须接受人权伦理和法理的反思。三是概念异化。“数字权利”滥用“未列举权利”,将传统人权与民事权利混成“新”人权,泛化了人权的义务主体,不利于当代中国人权观的法治实践。“数字人权”泛化表象的根源是人权被异化,通过“否定之否定”来建构超越代际论范式的人权话语,可以促进人权对“数字化”思潮的引领作用。

There is a threefold alienation in the theory of“digital human rights”.First,the original alienation.The“digital attributes”are not the nature of human beings;they are detached from the natural attributes of human beings,replace the social attributes of human beings,and dominate the spiritual attributes of human beings,so that the subject of human rights overflows from the category of natural human beings,and forms the“digital religion”that scorns human nature.The second is the alienation of form.The“digital form”is not the moral form of human rights,and cannot lay the foundation for the morality of society;nor is it the legal form of human rights,lacking the recognition of democratic legislation and normative logic.As a new form of the real form,it is subject to reflection of human rights ethics and jurisprudence.Third,conceptual alienation.The abuse of“unenumerated rights”by“numerical rights”mixes traditional human rights and civil rights into“new”human rights,generalizes the subject of human rights obligations,and is not conducive to the rule of law practice of the concept of human rights in contemporary China.This is not conducive to the practice of the rule of law in contemporary China's view of human rights.The root cause of the generalization of“digital human rights”is the alienation of human rights,and the construction of a human rights discourse that transcends the paradigm of intergenerationalism through“negation of negation”can promote the leading role of human rights in the“digital”trend.The role of human rights in leading“digital”thinking can be enhanced by constructing a human rights discourse that transcends the paradigm of intergenerationalism through“negative negation”.