风险社会中的正义问题：对“风险”与“风险社会”之批判

The Inquiry of the Justice in the Risk Society-A Critique of Risk and the Risk Society Theory

本文的目的在关注「风险」这个概念是否可以如马克思的阶级观一般建构一个社会理论。当「风险」是当代社会最基础的社会构成原则时，我们才能同意贝克用「风险分配」的逻辑取代「财富分配」的老式社会正义概念。本文的结构则分为四个部份：第一部份描绘贝克迄今为止的「风险社会」理论与其中的社会正义问题。其次，利用纪登士(Anthony Giddens)、卢曼(Niklas Luhmann)的观点补充、以及深入检讨所谓的「风险」概念。。第三部份则引介结构功能论学者Richard Münch对「风险社会」与「第二现代」理论的批评。第四部份则从理性观念的角度观察贝克的理论。从这个角度，贝克的理论一方面可视为自韦伯(Max Weber)以来，德国社会学传统的「工具理性」问题之解决的尝试之一。同时，理性的问题也使得「第二现代」的理论立场介於「现代」与「後现代」之间。

This article concerns about whether the concept of risk can beused to construct a social theory just like the concept of class of the Marxism does. Only when the ”risk” has become the most basically principle of the social construction in the modern society, then we can agree with Ulrich Beck to substitute the conventional social justice idea of the wealth distribution for the new logic of ”risk distribution”. Thestudy contains four parts. Firstly, it describes Beck's discussion about the Risk Society Theory and the social justice problems within it. Secondly, the perspectives of Anthony Giddens and Niklas Luhmann would behelpful to complement the deficiency in Beck's theory. Thirdly, the critique of the Risk Society and the Second Modern Theory from the structural-functionalist sociologist Richard Münch would be introduced. Finally, the Beck's theory would be observed from the aspect of the rationality. From this point of view we can conclude that, on the on eh and, Beck's theory belongs to the tradition of Germen sociology whichtries to solve the problems of the instrumental rationality since Max Weber; on the another hand, the approach the ”Second Modern” deals with the reason problems makes it stand between the ”Modern” and the ”Postmodern” theories.