国家治理生态：以法治为主导的“德法合治”——兼与戴茂堂、余达淮两位教授商榷

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (13)

Download: PDF (511 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Concepts such as “rule of morality”, “rule of law” , “rule by law”, and “rule the country by morality” should be clarified. “Rule of morality” can be interpreted in broad and narrow sense, and there are traditional and modern “rule of morality”. “Rule of law” is not equal to the legal system. It is a concept opposite to the rule of men, referring to political methods rather than ruling methods (ruling operation). Rule of law is after all the product of modern society. It is a kind of ideal and political mode of democracy, a political ideal and system opposite to autocracy and dictatorship. The relationship between morality and law cannot simply be translated into the relationship between rule of morality and the rule of law. Legalization of morality and moralization of law both have limitations as there are deviation both in logic and theory in these two propositions and they are risky in practice. The proposition that morality and law interact and support each other covers reasonable elements in the two propositions of “legalization of morality” and “moralization of law”. Social transformation and the major conflicts in the modernization of China’s state governance determines the leading position of rule of law. Legalization of state governance is the landmark in state governance modernization. Only when we adhere to integration of rule of morality with rule of law dominated by rule of law under the leadership of CPC can we actually create a healthy ecological environment for current China’s state governance.

Key words： national governance ecology modernization of national governance rule of morality rule of law combination rule of morality and law

Received: 25 November 2017

B820.051

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	ZOU Hai-gui

Cite this article:

ZOU Hai-gui. State Governance Ecology: Combination Rule of Morality and Law Dominated by Rule of Law: Consulting with Prof. DAI Mao-tang and Prof.YU Da-huai[J]. , 2018, 35(2): 73-81.

URL:

https://xb.szu.edu.cn/EN/ OR https://xb.szu.edu.cn/EN/Y2018/V35/I2/73

[1] 郁建兴. 法治与德治衡论[J].哲学研究,2001,(4):11-18.
[2] 李建华. 现代德治论:国家治理中的法治与德治关系[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2015.
[3] 王淑芹,刘畅.德治与法治:何种关系[J].伦理学研究,2014,(5):64-68.
[4] 张中秋. 法治及其与德治关系论[J].南京大学学报,2002,(3):237-244.
[5] 朱贻庭. 伦理学大辞典[M].上海:上海辞书出版社,2002.
[6] 罗国杰.德治与法治:相辅相成相互促进[N].人民日报,2001-02-22(9).
[7] 戴茂堂,左辉.法律道德化,抑或道德法律化[J].道德与文明,2016,(2):8-13.
[8] (英)戴维·M·沃克.牛津法律大辞典[M].北京:光明日报出版社,1988.151.
[9] (美)博登海默.法理学——法哲学及其方法[M].邓正来,姬敬武译.北京:华夏出版社,1987.361.
[10] 罗国杰,夏伟东.论“以德治国”[J].求是,2001,(15):45-48.
[11] 范进学. 论道德法律化与法律道德化[J].法学评论,1998,(2):34-41.
[12] (德)康德.法的形而上学原理——权利科学[M].沈淑平译.北京:商务印书馆,1991.10.
[13] (德)黑格尔.法哲学原理[M].范扬,张企泰译.北京:商务印书馆,1982.222.
[14] 唐凯麟,曹刚.论道德的法律支持及其限度[J].哲学研究,2000,(4):61-67.
[15] (美)富勒.法律的道德性[M].郑弋译.北京:商务印书馆,2005.7-19.
[16] 张晓燕. 德法互济中的乐观与审慎——道德法律化的权利维度反思[J].道德与文明,2016,(2):19-24.
[17] (美)罗斯科·庞德.通过法律的社会控制[M].沈宗灵译.北京:商务印书馆,2010.
[18] 罗金远,戴茂堂.伦理学讲座[M].北京:人民出版社,2012.51-52.
[19] 唐凯麟,龙兴海.个体道德论[M].北京:中国青年出版社,1993.65,111.
[20] (古希腊)亚里士多德.政治学[M].吴寿彭译.北京:商务印书馆,1995.199.
[21] 余达淮,陈光洁.“法治”与“德治”关系三题[J].道德与文明,2016,(2):14-18.
[22] (英)梅因.古代法[M].沈景一译.北京:商务印书馆,1984.97.
[23] 崔宜明. 道德哲学引论[M].上海:上海人民出版社,2006.
[24] 张文显. 法治与国家治理现代化[J].中国法学,2014,(4):5-27.
[25] 邓小平. 邓小平文选(第三卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,1993.177.
[26] 陈金钊. “法治中国”所能解决的基本矛盾分析[J].学术月刊,2016,(4):71-83.
[27] 习近平. 习近平谈治国理政(第二卷)[M].北京:外文出版社,2017.