{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"ab07c774-3ed2-48d8-8672-5c17d147d9d8","title":"哈贝马斯著作集 包容他者","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787208153554","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"ab07c774-3ed2-48d8-8672-5c17d147d9d8","id":"ab07c774-3ed2-48d8-8672-5c17d147d9d8","uuid":"ab07c774-3ed2-48d8-8672-5c17d147d9d8","title":"哈贝马斯著作集 包容他者","normalized_title":"哈贝马斯著作集包容他者","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787208153554","isbns":["9787208153554"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":389,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/ab07c774-3ed2-48d8-8672-5c17d147d9d8","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/%E5%93%88%E8%B4%9D%E9%A9%AC%E6%96%AF%E8%91%97%E4%BD%9C%E9%9B%86%20%E5%8C%85%E5%AE%B9%E4%BB%96%E8%80%85","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/ab07c774-3ed2-48d8-8672-5c17d147d9d8/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/ab07c774-3ed2-48d8-8672-5c17d147d9d8/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/ab07c774-3ed2-48d8-8672-5c17d147d9d8","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/ab07c774-3ed2-48d8-8672-5c17d147d9d8/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/ab07c774-3ed2-48d8-8672-5c17d147d9d8/search"},"page":{"printed_page":130,"pdf_page":139,"physical_index":139,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"3ae2b79884f81fb6f937b61eeb0aedbe2d7beb54c4c97030e18031d8fac89d1d"},"chapter":"包容他者","content":"只有从各自的解释系统出发，公民们才会相信一种适用于所有人的正义概念具有真实性。这种正义概念能够证明自己是公开论证宪法原则的公共平台，具体途径在于，它赢得了所有参与者的赞同，而且无须公开论证。具有不同动机的非公共理由在结果上竟然取得了一致，这种巧合具有公共的有效性，也就是说，结果就是，所有人都接受的“重叠共识”的内涵具有“合理性”。各种观点的前提不同，但结果是一致的。罗尔斯理论当中的决定性因素在于，参与者只能看到这种一致性是社会事实：\n\n在公开论证过程中，这些学说的具体内容并没有什么规范的作用。12\n\n也就是说，在这个阶段，罗尔斯不承认观察者视角和参与者视角之外还有第三种视角。在获得“重叠共识”之前，没有任何主体间共有的视角，能够使公民可以说从一开始就形成一种不偏不倚的判断。正如我们可能会认为的那样，没有“道德视角”能够让公民在共同的商谈之中形成和论证一种政治概念。罗尔斯所说的“理性的公用”，前提是要有一个公共平台，也就是已经取得的政治共识。而只有在把他们各自不同的基本信念重叠起来之后，公民才能进入这个公共平台：\n\n130\n\n包容他者","previous_page":129,"next_page":131}