{"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":331,"pdf_page":340,"physical_index":340,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"8a636735c6b583d92babed1048101488bb147d27a647da29d473ff490be9cd1b"},"chapter":"包容他者","content":"当然，法律的这种具体化(Materialisierung)，同时又产生了意想不到的社会福利国家温情主义(sozialstaatlicherPaternalismus)的副作用。很明显，补救实际生活条件和权利地位差别的努力，不应该导致这样的“标准化”干预，即假定的受益者在他的自主生活空间里反过来又受到了限制。法律自由和事实自由之间的辩证关系不断发展，这就说明，这两种法律范式同等地诉诸工业资本主义经济社会的生产主义（Produktivismus）世界观。资本主义经济社会必须这样来运作，即社会公正的期望能够通过保证每个人自主追求自己的好生活观念而获得满足。两种法律范式之间的唯一冲突在于：私人自主能否直接由自由权利来加以保障；或相反，私人自主的形成是否必须通过提供劳动来加以保障。而在这两种情况下，私人自主与公共自主的内在联系都没有得到应有的重视。\n\n5.实例：女权主义的平等政治\n\n在结语部分，我想以女权主义的平等政治为例来说明：只要我们的目光还仅仅局限于维护私人自主，并漠视私人的主体权利与参与立法的公民的公共自主之间的内在联系，那么，法律政策就会在惯常的范式之间无望地摇摆。因为，归根到底，假如私人法律主体不共同运用其公民的自主性，来搞清楚正当的利益和标准，并且在关键问题上达成一致，那么，他们根本就无法享有平等的主体自由。只有在关键问题上取得一致，才能分清楚平等与不平等。\n\n第五部分何谓“话语政治”？\n\n331","previous_page":330,"next_page":332}