| 摘要: | 在 1980 年代以來認同政治、差異政治、多元文化主義的脈絡下，美國批判理論家Nancy Fraser 在1990 中期以認可與重分配為正義的兩個基本面向，企圖接合左派工運與諸如同性戀運動的理論與實踐，並提倡解構（酷兒與社會主義）而非改良路線。在經過多人的批判與辯論後，Fraser 發展出更複雜的理論。為了因應全球化（後民族國家）的新局面，Fraser 認為認可、重分配、政治是鼎足而三的正義面向，正義則被界定為平等或對等參與社會生活，對等參與同時也要求民主的對話審議過程。不過Fraser 這個民主正義的思想體系也面對多方的挑戰與質疑（對Fraser 理論的闡釋整理是本計畫第一年的工作）。其中主要來自兩類挑戰，一類是像Charles Taylor 與Axel Honneth 的社群主義的挑戰，後者則將認可當作最基本的正義範疇，重分配也隸屬於認可。另一類則是對Fraser 的認可概念（以及背後所涉及的政治與重分配）進行檢討（以Nikolas Kompridis, James Tully, Rainer Forst 等為代表），例如其中的一種檢討則是認為Fraser 的認可正義概念只談對等參與，要對各個社群所認為的「善」保持中立，故而往往不涉及主體情感；例如認可或能挑戰污名身分，卻無法挑戰羞恥，以致於同性戀運動趨向掩飾自身的性羞恥行為而自我呈現為健康陽光與驕傲。這裡所涉及的情感政治也是本計畫所屬的總計畫之焦點（闡釋這些不同的認可哲學與理論則是本計畫第二年的工作）。認可與重分配和政治這三個正義面向，也有彼此矛盾衝突之處，本計畫第三年試圖以變性者處境為例來探究認可政治及其不滿（包括與其他正義面向衝突之處）。例如，變性者的重分配要求表現於對變性手術的健保給付，然而這意味著變性者必須自承有精神疾病，可是變性的認可要求卻恰好是去病理化，否認有精神疾病；Judith Butler 認為這是兩難，可是這還涉及了變性者在政治過程中的受支配地位（病人角色）。本計畫企圖顯示Fraser 理論的相關辯論或可以對這個認可困境有所啟發。 In a response to the gay movement of the identity politics that has diverged from the traditional left, and to the theoretical issues surrounding multiculturalism and the politics of difference, American critical theorist Nancy Fraser first proposed a two-dimensional model of justice of recognition and redistribution, irreducible to each other and complimentary in both theory and practice. After debate with many others, Fraser has reconstructed her model as three-dimensional, by adding the dimension of politics, especially in view of the dynamics of globalization and the post-Westfalia condition. Informed by the theories of justice, Fraser defines justice as the parity of participation, which leads to ideas such as deliberative democracy. However, there are challenges at least from two directions. One is represented by communitarian theorists such as Alex Honneth, who does not separate the right from the good, and sees recognition as mainly self-identity formation, in the spheres of intimate relation, the equal treatment of law, and the meritocratic (or other fair) principle of achievement. For Honneth, recognition is the motivation behind all societal conflicts including redistribution. The other direction comes from various theorists with different preoccupations. I will especially pay attention to the charge that Fraser’s view of recognition leaves out the important role of emotion or affect. For example, recognition can redress sexual stigma, by giving equal status institutionally to the stigmatized identity (e.g. homosexual), but cannot redress the shame that is associate with the sex acts (e.g. sadomy). Finally, or the last year of this project will try to use the above theoretical apparatus to deal with a dilemma in transsexualism; that is, the justice of redistribution demands the cost of SRS should be covered by medical insurance for those who suffer GID, but the justice of recognition demands the de-pathologization of transsexuals, that is, condemning GID as a constructed stigma. 研究期間：10008 ~ 10107 |
