 |
当前位置：首页 >> 个人服务 >> 预览个人简历信息 提醒：任何一种简历保密设置，都不会影响您在线投递简历。 |
|
| 个人信息 |
| 姓 名： |
李译员 [编号]:2928 |
性 别： |
女 |
|
| 擅长专业： |
电子，机械，互联网，环保，能源 |
出生年月： |
1988/3/1 |
|
| 民 族： |
汉族 |
所在地区： |
北京 北京 |
|
| 文化程度： |
本科 |
所学专业： |
英语 |
|
| 毕业时间： |
2010 |
毕业学校： |
北外 |
|
| 第一外语： |
英语 |
等级水平： |
八级 |
|
|
| 口译等级： |
同传 |
工作经历： |
1 年 |
|
|
| 翻译库信息 |
| 可翻译语种： |
英语 |
|
|
| 目前所在地： |
北京 北京 |
| 可提供服务类型： |
笔译、口译、家教 |
| 每周可提供服务时间： |
任何时间都口译 |
| 证书信息 |
| 证书名称： |
北外口译二级证书/专八证书 |
|
| 获证时间： |
2009/6/1 |
|
| 获得分数： |
6070 |
|
|
| 工作经历 |
| 工作时期： |
2008/1/1--2010/8/1 |
|
| 公司名称： |
自由译者 |
|
| 公司性质： |
其它 |
| 所属行业： |
自由职业者 |
| 所在部门： |
自由译者 |
|
| 职位： |
翻译 |
| 自我评价： |
勤奋，上进 |
|
|
| 笔译案例信息 |
| 案例标题： |
人权 |
|
| 原文： |
理想与现实的关系是人权研究具体化的学术起点
The Relationship between Ideal and Reality---the academic starting point of Human Rights Research Concreteness
中国社会科学院哲学研究所 哲学与文化研究室 霍桂桓 北京 100732
Philosophy and Cultural Research Office under the Institute of Philosophy of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences Huo Guihuan BeiJing 100732
内容提要：人权研究的具体化是科学发展人权事业的必要学术前提，而对理想与现实的关系进行深入研究则是人权研究具体化的学术起点；之所以如此，是因为人权观念本身具有极其鲜明的、超越现实的理想特征，这种特征既可以发挥引导人类社会日益走向尊重人权的积极作用，但也有可能因为使人权观念变成"观念的王国"的组成部分而流于空想、甚至进而使之发挥各种不良的现实作用。因此，要想使人权研究具体化真正落到实处并通过这样的研究推动人权事业的发展，必须对理想与现实的相互关系进行具体深入的研究，通过真正突破"观念的王国"而使这样的研究真正具有现实针对性和理论说服力。
Abstract: the concreteness of human rights research is the academic prerequisite for scientific development of the cause of human rights, while an in-depth research on the relationship between ideal and reality is the academic starting point of Human Rights Research Concreteness; the reason for justifying it is that the notion of "human rights" itself features clearly-defined and hype-real ideal. The very feature can play a positive role in guiding human society to respect human rights, but as the feature may transform the human rights notion into the "kingdom of ideas", it may also lead to fantasy and even has negative impacts. For that reason, if we want to substantially make human rights research more concrete and push the course of human rights development forward through such research, we must undertake an in-depth research on the relationship between Ideal and Reality and break the "kingdom of ideas" to make the research more relevant and more convincing theoretically.
关键词： 人权 具体化 理想 现实 观念的王国
Human rights concreteness ideal reality the kingdom of ideas
在举国倡导科学发展的今天，究竟如何才能使我们的人权事业得到进一步发展、从而使我国尊重和保障人权的国际形象得到进一步提升呢？显然，只停留于抽象地讨论人权概念及其诸方面的层次上是没有意义的，因为这样做的结果往往是所得出的结论既没有鲜明的现实针对性、同时也缺乏相应的理论解释力。因此，只有使人权研究走向具体化 、逐步增强其研究结论的现实针对性和理论解释力，才有可能达到上述目的。那么，从严格的学术研究的角度来说，究竟如何才能使人权研究具体化呢？
How can we move forward our course of human rights so that we can earn respect and further enhance the international image of human right protector when scientific development is encouraged across the country today? Obviously, only abstractly discussing the notion of human rights and all other levels does not make any sense, for it will only come to a conclusion that is less clearly-defined, less relevant and less convincing. For that matter, only by making the Human Rights Research more concrete1 and making the research conclusions more relevant and convincing theoretically can we reach the above goal. In that case, from the perspective of rigid academic research, how can we make human rights research more concrete?
本文认为，要想真正从严格意义上的学术研究角度出发使人权研究具体化，就必须清楚地认识到这种具体化面临的关键性学术问题是什么。我们认为，有史以来，实践领域之中的人权问题之所以一方面难以实现具体化、另一方面又因此而使人权问题变成了国际关系之中一国用于攻击他国的手段，其在学理方面的根本原因即在于，无论人权理论的研究者、还是力求维护人权运动的参与者，基本上都是把尊重、维护和保障人权，当成了具有法律规范意义的、崇高而美好的理想目标，因此，在大多数情况下，这些人并没有认真考虑这样的目标与自己置身于其中的社会现实究竟是什么关系，以及究竟如何才能使这样的目标真正得到实现--这样一来，究竟如何才能使"维护人权"具体化的问题便凸显了出来。因此，尊重、维护和保障人权的首要任务就是使人权研究具体化，把这样的理想目标与社会现实真正结合起来。
This article holds the view that if we want to make human rights research more academically concrete, we must be fully aware of the critical academic problem facing concreteness process. We believe that throughout history the theoretical reason why it is hard to achieve concrete human rights research and human rights issue was used to attack the other countries in terms of international relation is that researchers of human rights theory, human rights activists and alike all deem respect and protection of human rights as legal-binding and lofty vision. In most cases, some people have not thought over the relation between such vision and social reality and they do not know how to achieve that vision---the problem of how to make human rights research more concrete surfaces. Therefore, if we want to respect, protect and ensure human rights, we must give top priority to the concreteness of human rights and work to put together ideal and reality.
我们认为，要想使人权研究具体化，就需要把理想与现实的关系作为其学术起点，进行更加深入的探讨和研究。因此，本文将分以下三个部分对此进行概略阐述：第一，人权是一种理想吗？第二，从理想与现实的关系看人权研究的具体化；第三，突破"观念的王国"是人文研究具体化的根本出路。
We hold that, if we want to specify human rights research, we must start academically form the relationship between ideal and reality and undertake an in-depth research and study. In this connection, I will elaborate on this issue from 3 parts; first, are human rights an ideal? Second, we must view concreteness of human right from the perspective of ideal and reality; third, breaking the "kingdom of ideas" is the fundamental solution of concrete humanistic studies.
一， 人权是一种理想吗？
First, are human rights an ideal?
要想表明理想与现实的关系就是人权研究具体化的学术出发点，首先需要表明人权观念本身是一种理想。那么，什么是理想呢？通览相关文献可知，对此，包括哲学界和心理学界在内的国内学术界并没有得出比一般的百科辞书的定义更恰当的定义，因此，我们可以看一看《辞海》的相关定义：
If we want to show that an in-depth research on the relationship between ideal and reality is the academic starting point of Human Rights Research Concreteness, we must make it clear that the notion of human rights itself is an ideal. Then what is ideal? After going through relevant documentations we come to a conclusion that the China's academia including philosophy community and psychology community haven't got a more appropriate definition, so let's look at the definition given by Ci Hai (a Chinese word dictionary):
"（1）同奋斗目标相联系的有实现可能性的想象；（2）符合希望的；使人满意的。"
而我们通常认为的人权则是："人权是人依其自然属性和社会属性所应享有的权利，其核心是使每个人的人性、人格、精神、道德和能力获得最充分地发展；任何人都在一定的社会中生活，他所享有的权利不是抽象的，是由国家宪法加以规定和保障的。"
"(1) An achievable vision associated with goal; (2) as expected; satisfying."1
Our common belief is that "according to natural attribute and social attribute, human rights are rights people entitled to enjoy. The core of human rights is to empower people's humanity, personality, spirit, ethics, capability to fully develop; anyone is living in a certain society, so one's right must not be abstract, it must be stipulated and protected by the country's constitution."2
可见，初看起来，这样的人权观念与理想并无多少一致之处；不过，只要我们稍加认真的审视，这样的印象就会彻底改变--就这里的人权观念而言，无论是"……所应享有的权利"，还是"使……获得最充分地发展"，难道不都清楚地表现出了非常突出的"想象"色彩、"符合希望"色彩、"使人满意"色彩、"奋斗目标"色彩、因而与现实情况判然有别的"应然"色彩，并且因此而体现了上述理想定义所具有的两个基本方面吗？因此，理想观念与人权观念绝对不是"风马牛不相及"的，而是本质上具有一致性的！因此，我们可以毫不夸张地说，无论就人权观念的产生背景和自出现以来的发展历史来看，还是就我们当今面对的、通过进一步推动保障人权事业的发展来促进我国现代化事业的科学发展的任务而言，它本身都是一种需要我们通过不断的努力而逐步加以实现的美好目标、都是一种理想！既然如此，我们显然有理由从理想与现实的相互关系的角度出发，来探讨和研究人权观念的具体化究竟为什么难以进行和如何进行了。
At first glance, there is not much in common between human rights notion and ideal; but if we think it over, things will be completely different---in terms of the notion of human rights, be it "rights people entitled to enjoy" or "empowering … to develop", do not they demonstrate prominent elements of "ideal", "as expected", "satisfying" , "goal" ? Do not they showcase element of "obligation" (which is considered different from reality) and embody the two basic aspects of the definitions of ideal mentioned above? In this regard, ideal and human rights are by no means irrelevant, they have similarities in nature! It is no exaggeration to say that from the perspective of the origin of the notion and its development history, the notion of human rights itself is a wonderful vision that requires constant efforts to realize---it is an ideal! Clearly enough, we are fully justified to start from the relationship between ideal and reality to research and study what hinders the concreteness of the notion of human rights and what must be done to address this issue.
当然，毋庸赘言，这里充分强调人权观念是一种"理想"，目的并不是通过忽视它的独特特征而把它混同于通常意义上的理想--实际上，综观人权观念的历史发展和现状，我们可以很清楚地看到，它虽然经历了近500年的历史发展而已经社会化、制度化、国际化、半法律化 、政治化了，因而表现出与通常意义上的"理想"较大的区别，但是，这样的发展
和变化只是通过各种越来越富有操作性的形式表现出来的，既没有改变其本质内容，也由于其迄今为止仍然作为人类尚未彻底实现的目标而存在、因而没有改变其"理想"特征。所以，我们通过探讨和研究理想与现实的辩证关系来探索人权研究具体化的路径，并不是毫无根据的。
Obviously, needless to say, the aim to fully underscore the notion of human rights as an "ideal" is not to overlook its feature and mix up ideal with its usual sense---in fact, throughout the history and status quo of human rights development, we can be fully aware of the fact that through 5 centuries' historical development it has now been socialized, institutionalized, internationalized, semi-legalized and politicized and hence it is vastly different from its usual sense. But development and change of this kind can only be showcased in the form of increasingly high operability; it neither changed its essential content nor feature of "ideal" due to the existence of remaining goals that haven not been met so far.
二， 从理想与现实的关系看人权研究的具体化
Second， approach concreteness of human rights from the perspective of the relationship between ideal and reality
正如理想观念一直没有得到学术界的充分重视和系统研究那样，理想与现实的关系也同样是如此--在绝多数人看来，既然理想本身是"有实现可能性的想象"、是"符合希望的和使人满意的"，那么，只要在现实的社会实践过程中努力将它付诸实现也就是了，因而没有必要深入探讨这两者究竟是什么关系。这实质上是一种常识意义上的、在没有进行任何严格哲学反思的情况下存在的观点；然而不幸的是，无论就存在于日常生活之中的各种各样理想而言，还是就基于人权观念而进行的维护和保障人权的具体行动而论，人们实际上都是这样做的。因此，很多人并没有意识到人权研究有必要具体化，更不用说自觉地探讨和研究究竟如何才能把这种研究具体化了。那么，立足于比常识更加深刻的哲学反思的层次，我们应当如何看待这两者之间的关系？这样的探讨和研究有助于我们研究人权具体化问题吗？答案是肯定的。
As the academia has not attached great importance to ideal and without any systematic research, the same is true for the relationship between ideal and reality---for most people, as ideal it self is "a potentially achievable ideal", "as expected and satisfying "，so we must do whatever we can to put it into practice in reality, it does not make any sense to probe into their relationship. Substantially, it is kind of view that exists when there is no rigid philosophical reflection and it is common sense in nature; unfortunately, no matter all kinds of ideals in people's daily life or concrete actions based on the notion of human rights to protect and ensure human rights, people all follow the same road. In this regard, not many people have realized the need to achieve concreteness of human rights research, let alone deliberately discuss and research the way to achieve concreteness of human rights research. By so doing, seeing from the level of philosophic reflection which is more profound than common sense, how should we approach the relationship between the two sides? Whether discussion and research like this will help us achieve the concreteness of human rights research? The answer is yes.
概略说来，从哲学上来看的理想与现实的关系主要包括两个方面：第一，理想究竟是来源于现实、还是现实来源于理想？亦即有关起源的问题；第二，这两者之间的相互作用关系是什么、究竟是不是决定与被决定的关系？
Generally speaking, in terms of philosophy, the relationship between ideal and reality covers two aspects: first, whether ideal originates from reality, or reality comes from ideal? To sum up, it is a problem related to its origin; second, what on earth is the interaction between ideal and reality, is it the relation of one-sided decision or the relation that is decided?
第一个问题的答案是比较清楚的--理想来源于现实而不是相反。但第二个问题的答案就不这么简单了：尽管人们通常都认为要想使理想得到实现就必须脚踏实地，但其关注的焦点却往往是理想本身对现实的超越性、引导性、甚至规范性，而很少注意现实对理想的决定性和制约性。实际上，理想虽然因为具有对特定现实的超越性而高于这样的现实，并且因此作为目标而对后者有一定范围和程度上的引导和规范作用，但是，现实对理想的决定作用却是全局性和根本性的--现实不仅在过去的理想产生之际便决定了其具体针对对象、基本内容和特定的表现形式，在当前的现实环境中决定了理想究竟是不是依然能够成立、是否发挥作用和发挥作用的范围与程度，而且，现实还通过不断丰富和充实理想的内容、不断完善其具体表现形式而决定了它未来的发展方向。
The answer to the first question is clear-cut---ideal originates from reality not otherwise. While the answer to the second question is not as simple as that: Although people have common belief that if we want to realize certain ideal we must be down-to-earth, our focuses are always on ideal that can play a role in guiding and regulating reality with superiority and we seldom notice that reality can serve as a deciding, and binding power to ideal. As a matter of fact, ideal runs far ahead of reality due to it superiority to certain reality and it can be set as a goal to play a guiding and regulatory role in reality to some extent and scope, but the deciding role of reality is holistic and fundamental---reality not only is deciding its concrete target, basic content, form of expression when the past ideal is in the making, but also decides whether ideal still holds water, whether it is brought into full play and how is the scope and intensity of the role against the backdrop of current situation. Among others, reality can also decide ideal's future development trend by constantly enriching the content of ideal and improving its form of expression.
一言以蔽之，理想的崇高、美好和相应的规范和引导作用，都只有在由过去、现在和未来共同构成的现实框架之中，才能产生、存在、发展并具体表现出来！因此，如果只集中关注理想本身而忽视相应的现实条件，理想不仅难以得到实现、不可能发挥应有的作用，还有可能流于不切实际的幻想、空想，从而在变成"观念的王国"（the kingdom of ideas）的一个组成部分的同时，对实际存在的社会实践活动产生这样那样的不良影响。而要想避免这样的趋势和后果，唯一的出路就是使理想具体化，亦即把"胸怀理想"与"脚踏实地"真正有机地结合起来！显然，就具有作为一种自身独特性的理想的人权观念而言，情况也同样是如此。
In a word, only when being put into the reality framework composed by the past, the present and the future, the lofty and glorious ideal and its relative significance in regulation and instruction can exist and be generated, developed and carried out! Therefore, if we only focus on our ideal and ignore the reality, it is hard for us to realize ideal and to bring its assumed importance into full play. What's worse, it may develop into caprice or wild fancy and become one part of "the kingdom of ideas", which will further do harm to social practice activities in this way or another. To avoid such tendency or consequence, the only remedy is to specify ideals. That is to say, we must combine "hold high the ideal banner" and "in a down-to-earth manner" systematically. Obviously, the same is true for the notion of human rights, which can be considered as a kind of ideal with unique features.
正因为如此，我们认为，要想使人权研究通过具体化而具有明确的现实针对性和尽可能充分的理论解释力，我们就必须充分重视上述理想与现实之间的相互关系、特别是充分重视现实对理想的决定性制约作用，并且由此出发而通过突破"观念的王国"，使人权研究的具体化真正落到实处。
Just because of this, we hold that if we want to make the research on human rights embrace reality-oriented and strong theoretical explanation through concreteness, we must pay full attention to the correlation between ideal and reality, especially the crucial restrictive role of reality playing on ideal. Hence, in this way we can truly achieve concreteness of research on human rights.
三，突破"观念的王国"是人文研究具体化的根本出路
Third, breaking the "Kingdom of Ideas" is the Fundamental Solution of Concrete Humanistic Studies.
顾名思义，所谓"观念的王国"也就是由各种观念构成的、存在于人的思想之中并对现实发挥决定性作用"王国"。它的具体表现形式是，以"绝对普遍有效的客观真理"的面目凌驾于现实之上并对现实发挥指导、衡量、评判和支配作用，并且由于自身具有的抽象化、形式化、逻辑化、简洁性、可重复性和客观有效性等基本特征，得到了人们的信赖乃至信仰。因此，它导致的后果是，人们不再把现实、把活生生的社会实践活动当作学术研究结论的判断标准，而是与此相反，用这种"观念的王国"之中的某个观念抑或某些观念作为衡量现实活动的标准、判断社会行动的标尺，因而往往导致"削足适履"的不良后果--就当今国际关系之中的人权观念所发挥的作用而言，则往往表现为一国用来攻击他国的手段和武器。就这里的后者而言，其在国际政治层次上采取这种举措、发挥如此影响的"学理依据"，就是把人权观念当作这种"观念的王国"之中的一个部分来加以运用了。
As the name suggests, "the kingdom of ideas" means a kingdom consisted of various notions, existing in people's ideas and playing a crucial role. The concrete manifestation is that the "absolutely universal valid objective truth outmatches the reality; it plays a role of guidance, measurement, evaluation and domination on the reality; basically featured with abstract, formalization, logicalization, conciseness, repeatability and objective validity, etc, it has got people's trust or even belief. Therefore, the result is that people no longer regard the social practice activities as the criteria for the conclusions of academic researches, on the contrary, some adverse consequences of "cutting one's feet to fit one's shoes" will come along when certain notion or some notions of the "kingdom of ideas" are taken as the standard for the reality activities and the criterion of judging social activities. For the later, the "academic basis" taking this measure and playing such role in international political area is to put human rights as part of the idea of "the kingdom of ideas" into practice.
毋庸赘言，我们强调指出这一点，根本不是为这种蛮横无理的做法寻求理论依据--实际上恰恰相反，只有真正认识到了这种做法在学理上的上述错误依据，我们才有可能真正行之有效地做到"针锋相对"，在强调指出这种做法即使在学理上也根本站不住脚的同时，通过反其道而行之的人权研究具体化，使我们自己的维护和保障人权的事业得到更加健康的发展。正因为如此，我们认为，只有通过自己的切实努力、在人权研究过程中突破上述"观念的王国"，我们才有可能把人权研究与我们的具体社会实际有机结合起来。那么，怎样才能真正做到这一点呢？
Needless to say, we emphasized and pointed this out not for looking for the theoretical evidence for this rude and unreasonable behavior. In fact on the contrary, only after realizing this behavior is wrong theoretically, can we oppose it effectively. While pointing out the mistake of this behavior even in the theory, we study the human rights in an opposite way, to guarantee the healthy development of the human rights-safeguarding career. So we have the opinion that only breaking through the "kingdom of ideals" with own efforts, can we organically combine the research on human rights and the concrete social reality. But how can we really achieve this?
在我看来，要想使我们的人权研究通过突破"观念的王国"而真正实现具体化，我们需要认真做到以下三点：
In my opinion, we must do the following three things so as to empower the research on human rights to break through "the kingdom of ideas" to truly achieve concreteness.
第一，从上述理想与现实的相互关系出发，通过进行严格的、系统深入的哲学批判反思，清楚而充分地认识作为一种特定理想的人权观念具体发挥作用所面临的现实环境和条件，为人权研究具体化奠定坚实的学理基础、确立正确的学术研究态度；
First, proceeding from the above correlation between ideal and reality, we should, via a systematic and insightful philosophical critical reflection, see clearly and comprehensively the external reality and conditions faced by the notion of human rights as a specific ideal be put into practice. This approach can lay a solid theoretic basis and establish the right attitude for academic study, benefiting the application of the concreteness of the research on human rights;
第二，不断拓展人权研究的学术视野，通过进行哲学、社会学、法学、政治学、人类学、文化学等诸学科的跨学科综合性研究，真正使这种研究走出抽象的"观念的王国"、走向"社会世界"，从而为内容丰富而卓有成效的具体研究做尽可能充分的学术准备；
Second, we should expand the academic vision of research on human rights. Expanded comprehensive and interdisciplinary researches covering disciplines such as philosophy, sociology, law, politics, anthropology and science of culture can truly break out of "the kingdom of ideas" into the real "social world". Such a cross-disciplinary practice is aimed to make the best academic preparation for the rich and fruitful concrete researches;
第三，集中关注和系统研究我国基于30年改革开放成果而快速发展的人权事业，通过扎扎实实的探讨和研究发现问题、抓住关键、找出规律，进而得出既具有鲜明的现实针对性、又具有充分的理论解释力的研究结论，从而创立并发展富有中国特色的人权理论，为我国的人权发展事业的进一步健康发展做出应有的学术贡献。
Third, we should concentrate on and carry out a systematic research on the rapid developing human rights course based on the achievements made in the reform and opening-up process in China over the last 30 years. Such focused probing and research can spot problems, grasp key links and find uniform patterns, so that we can make research conclusion, which are reality-oriented and backed by strong theoretical explanation. These conclusions, in turn, can enable us to come up with and develop a human rights theory with Chinese characteristics, thus making the due academic contribution for the further healthy development of human rights course in our country.
|
|
| 译文： |
理想与现实的关系是人权研究具体化的学术起点
The Relationship between Ideal and Reality---the academic starting point of Human Rights Research Concreteness
中国社会科学院哲学研究所 哲学与文化研究室 霍桂桓 北京 100732
Philosophy and Cultural Research Office under the Institute of Philosophy of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences Huo Guihuan BeiJing 100732
内容提要：人权研究的具体化是科学发展人权事业的必要学术前提，而对理想与现实的关系进行深入研究则是人权研究具体化的学术起点；之所以如此，是因为人权观念本身具有极其鲜明的、超越现实的理想特征，这种特征既可以发挥引导人类社会日益走向尊重人权的积极作用，但也有可能因为使人权观念变成"观念的王国"的组成部分而流于空想、甚至进而使之发挥各种不良的现实作用。因此，要想使人权研究具体化真正落到实处并通过这样的研究推动人权事业的发展，必须对理想与现实的相互关系进行具体深入的研究，通过真正突破"观念的王国"而使这样的研究真正具有现实针对性和理论说服力。
Abstract: the concreteness of human rights research is the academic prerequisite for scientific development of the cause of human rights, while an in-depth research on the relationship between ideal and reality is the academic starting point of Human Rights Research Concreteness; the reason for justifying it is that the notion of "human rights" itself features clearly-defined and hype-real ideal. The very feature can play a positive role in guiding human society to respect human rights, but as the feature may transform the human rights notion into the "kingdom of ideas", it may also lead to fantasy and even has negative impacts. For that reason, if we want to substantially make human rights research more concrete and push the course of human rights development forward through such research, we must undertake an in-depth research on the relationship between Ideal and Reality and break the "kingdom of ideas" to make the research more relevant and more convincing theoretically.
关键词： 人权 具体化 理想 现实 观念的王国
Human rights concreteness ideal reality the kingdom of ideas
在举国倡导科学发展的今天，究竟如何才能使我们的人权事业得到进一步发展、从而使我国尊重和保障人权的国际形象得到进一步提升呢？显然，只停留于抽象地讨论人权概念及其诸方面的层次上是没有意义的，因为这样做的结果往往是所得出的结论既没有鲜明的现实针对性、同时也缺乏相应的理论解释力。因此，只有使人权研究走向具体化 、逐步增强其研究结论的现实针对性和理论解释力，才有可能达到上述目的。那么，从严格的学术研究的角度来说，究竟如何才能使人权研究具体化呢？
How can we move forward our course of human rights so that we can earn respect and further enhance the international image of human right protector when scientific development is encouraged across the country today? Obviously, only abstractly discussing the notion of human rights and all other levels does not make any sense, for it will only come to a conclusion that is less clearly-defined, less relevant and less convincing. For that matter, only by making the Human Rights Research more concrete1 and making the research conclusions more relevant and convincing theoretically can we reach the above goal. In that case, from the perspective of rigid academic research, how can we make human rights research more concrete?
本文认为，要想真正从严格意义上的学术研究角度出发使人权研究具体化，就必须清楚地认识到这种具体化面临的关键性学术问题是什么。我们认为，有史以来，实践领域之中的人权问题之所以一方面难以实现具体化、另一方面又因此而使人权问题变成了国际关系之中一国用于攻击他国的手段，其在学理方面的根本原因即在于，无论人权理论的研究者、还是力求维护人权运动的参与者，基本上都是把尊重、维护和保障人权，当成了具有法律规范意义的、崇高而美好的理想目标，因此，在大多数情况下，这些人并没有认真考虑这样的目标与自己置身于其中的社会现实究竟是什么关系，以及究竟如何才能使这样的目标真正得到实现--这样一来，究竟如何才能使"维护人权"具体化的问题便凸显了出来。因此，尊重、维护和保障人权的首要任务就是使人权研究具体化，把这样的理想目标与社会现实真正结合起来。
This article holds the view that if we want to make human rights research more academically concrete, we must be fully aware of the critical academic problem facing concreteness process. We believe that throughout history the theoretical reason why it is hard to achieve concrete human rights research and human rights issue was used to attack the other countries in terms of international relation is that researchers of human rights theory, human rights activists and alike all deem respect and protection of human rights as legal-binding and lofty vision. In most cases, some people have not thought over the relation between such vision and social reality and they do not know how to achieve that vision---the problem of how to make human rights research more concrete surfaces. Therefore, if we want to respect, protect and ensure human rights, we must give top priority to the concreteness of human rights and work to put together ideal and reality.
我们认为，要想使人权研究具体化，就需要把理想与现实的关系作为其学术起点，进行更加深入的探讨和研究。因此，本文将分以下三个部分对此进行概略阐述：第一，人权是一种理想吗？第二，从理想与现实的关系看人权研究的具体化；第三，突破"观念的王国"是人文研究具体化的根本出路。
We hold that, if we want to specify human rights research, we must start academically form the relationship between ideal and reality and undertake an in-depth research and study. In this connection, I will elaborate on this issue from 3 parts; first, are human rights an ideal? Second, we must view concreteness of human right from the perspective of ideal and reality; third, breaking the "kingdom of ideas" is the fundamental solution of concrete humanistic studies.
一， 人权是一种理想吗？
First, are human rights an ideal?
要想表明理想与现实的关系就是人权研究具体化的学术出发点，首先需要表明人权观念本身是一种理想。那么，什么是理想呢？通览相关文献可知，对此，包括哲学界和心理学界在内的国内学术界并没有得出比一般的百科辞书的定义更恰当的定义，因此，我们可以看一看《辞海》的相关定义：
If we want to show that an in-depth research on the relationship between ideal and reality is the academic starting point of Human Rights Research Concreteness, we must make it clear that the notion of human rights itself is an ideal. Then what is ideal? After going through relevant documentations we come to a conclusion that the China's academia including philosophy community and psychology community haven't got a more appropriate definition, so let's look at the definition given by Ci Hai (a Chinese word dictionary):
"（1）同奋斗目标相联系的有实现可能性的想象；（2）符合希望的；使人满意的。"
而我们通常认为的人权则是："人权是人依其自然属性和社会属性所应享有的权利，其核心是使每个人的人性、人格、精神、道德和能力获得最充分地发展；任何人都在一定的社会中生活，他所享有的权利不是抽象的，是由国家宪法加以规定和保障的。"
"(1) An achievable vision associated with goal; (2) as expected; satisfying."1
Our common belief is that "according to natural attribute and social attribute, human rights are rights people entitled to enjoy. The core of human rights is to empower people's humanity, personality, spirit, ethics, capability to fully develop; anyone is living in a certain society, so one's right must not be abstract, it must be stipulated and protected by the country's constitution."2
可见，初看起来，这样的人权观念与理想并无多少一致之处；不过，只要我们稍加认真的审视，这样的印象就会彻底改变--就这里的人权观念而言，无论是"……所应享有的权利"，还是"使……获得最充分地发展"，难道不都清楚地表现出了非常突出的"想象"色彩、"符合希望"色彩、"使人满意"色彩、"奋斗目标"色彩、因而与现实情况判然有别的"应然"色彩，并且因此而体现了上述理想定义所具有的两个基本方面吗？因此，理想观念与人权观念绝对不是"风马牛不相及"的，而是本质上具有一致性的！因此，我们可以毫不夸张地说，无论就人权观念的产生背景和自出现以来的发展历史来看，还是就我们当今面对的、通过进一步推动保障人权事业的发展来促进我国现代化事业的科学发展的任务而言，它本身都是一种需要我们通过不断的努力而逐步加以实现的美好目标、都是一种理想！既然如此，我们显然有理由从理想与现实的相互关系的角度出发，来探讨和研究人权观念的具体化究竟为什么难以进行和如何进行了。
At first glance, there is not much in common between human rights notion and ideal; but if we think it over, things will be completely different---in terms of the notion of human rights, be it "rights people entitled to enjoy" or "empowering … to develop", do not they demonstrate prominent elements of "ideal", "as expected", "satisfying" , "goal" ? Do not they showcase element of "obligation" (which is considered different from reality) and embody the two basic aspects of the definitions of ideal mentioned above? In this regard, ideal and human rights are by no means irrelevant, they have similarities in nature! It is no exaggeration to say that from the perspective of the origin of the notion and its development history, the notion of human rights itself is a wonderful vision that requires constant efforts to realize---it is an ideal! Clearly enough, we are fully justified to start from the relationship between ideal and reality to research and study what hinders the concreteness of the notion of human rights and what must be done to address this issue.
当然，毋庸赘言，这里充分强调人权观念是一种"理想"，目的并不是通过忽视它的独特特征而把它混同于通常意义上的理想--实际上，综观人权观念的历史发展和现状，我们可以很清楚地看到，它虽然经历了近500年的历史发展而已经社会化、制度化、国际化、半法律化 、政治化了，因而表现出与通常意义上的"理想"较大的区别，但是，这样的发展
和变化只是通过各种越来越富有操作性的形式表现出来的，既没有改变其本质内容，也由于其迄今为止仍然作为人类尚未彻底实现的目标而存在、因而没有改变其"理想"特征。所以，我们通过探讨和研究理想与现实的辩证关系来探索人权研究具体化的路径，并不是毫无根据的。
Obviously, needless to say, the aim to fully underscore the notion of human rights as an "ideal" is not to overlook its feature and mix up ideal with its usual sense---in fact, throughout the history and status quo of human rights development, we can be fully aware of the fact that through 5 centuries' historical development it has now been socialized, institutionalized, internationalized, semi-legalized and politicized and hence it is vastly different from its usual sense. But development and change of this kind can only be showcased in the form of increasingly high operability; it neither changed its essential content nor feature of "ideal" due to the existence of remaining goals that haven not been met so far.
二， 从理想与现实的关系看人权研究的具体化
Second， approach concreteness of human rights from the perspective of the relationship between ideal and reality
正如理想观念一直没有得到学术界的充分重视和系统研究那样，理想与现实的关系也同样是如此--在绝多数人看来，既然理想本身是"有实现可能性的想象"、是"符合希望的和使人满意的"，那么，只要在现实的社会实践过程中努力将它付诸实现也就是了，因而没有必要深入探讨这两者究竟是什么关系。这实质上是一种常识意义上的、在没有进行任何严格哲学反思的情况下存在的观点；然而不幸的是，无论就存在于日常生活之中的各种各样理想而言，还是就基于人权观念而进行的维护和保障人权的具体行动而论，人们实际上都是这样做的。因此，很多人并没有意识到人权研究有必要具体化，更不用说自觉地探讨和研究究竟如何才能把这种研究具体化了。那么，立足于比常识更加深刻的哲学反思的层次，我们应当如何看待这两者之间的关系？这样的探讨和研究有助于我们研究人权具体化问题吗？答案是肯定的。
As the academia has not attached great importance to ideal and without any systematic research, the same is true for the relationship between ideal and reality---for most people, as ideal it self is "a potentially achievable ideal", "as expected and satisfying "，so we must do whatever we can to put it into practice in reality, it does not make any sense to probe into their relationship. Substantially, it is kind of view that exists when there is no rigid philosophical reflection and it is common sense in nature; unfortunately, no matter all kinds of ideals in people's daily life or concrete actions based on the notion of human rights to protect and ensure human rights, people all follow the same road. In this regard, not many people have realized the need to achieve concreteness of human rights research, let alone deliberately discuss and research the way to achieve concreteness of human rights research. By so doing, seeing from the level of philosophic reflection which is more profound than common sense, how should we approach the relationship between the two sides? Whether discussion and research like this will help us achieve the concreteness of human rights research? The answer is yes.
概略说来，从哲学上来看的理想与现实的关系主要包括两个方面：第一，理想究竟是来源于现实、还是现实来源于理想？亦即有关起源的问题；第二，这两者之间的相互作用关系是什么、究竟是不是决定与被决定的关系？
Generally speaking, in terms of philosophy, the relationship between ideal and reality covers two aspects: first, whether ideal originates from reality, or reality comes from ideal? To sum up, it is a problem related to its origin; second, what on earth is the interaction between ideal and reality, is it the relation of one-sided decision or the relation that is decided?
第一个问题的答案是比较清楚的--理想来源于现实而不是相反。但第二个问题的答案就不这么简单了：尽管人们通常都认为要想使理想得到实现就必须脚踏实地，但其关注的焦点却往往是理想本身对现实的超越性、引导性、甚至规范性，而很少注意现实对理想的决定性和制约性。实际上，理想虽然因为具有对特定现实的超越性而高于这样的现实，并且因此作为目标而对后者有一定范围和程度上的引导和规范作用，但是，现实对理想的决定作用却是全局性和根本性的--现实不仅在过去的理想产生之际便决定了其具体针对对象、基本内容和特定的表现形式，在当前的现实环境中决定了理想究竟是不是依然能够成立、是否发挥作用和发挥作用的范围与程度，而且，现实还通过不断丰富和充实理想的内容、不断完善其具体表现形式而决定了它未来的发展方向。
The answer to the first question is clear-cut---ideal originates from reality not otherwise. While the answer to the second question is not as simple as that: Although people have common belief that if we want to realize certain ideal we must be down-to-earth, our focuses are always on ideal that can play a role in guiding and regulating reality with superiority and we seldom notice that reality can serve as a deciding, and binding power to ideal. As a matter of fact, ideal runs far ahead of reality due to it superiority to certain reality and it can be set as a goal to play a guiding and regulatory role in reality to some extent and scope, but the deciding role of reality is holistic and fundamental---reality not only is deciding its concrete target, basic content, form of expression when the past ideal is in the making, but also decides whether ideal still holds water, whether it is brought into full play and how is the scope and intensity of the role against the backdrop of current situation. Among others, reality can also decide ideal's future development trend by constantly enriching the content of ideal and improving its form of expression.
一言以蔽之，理想的崇高、美好和相应的规范和引导作用，都只有在由过去、现在和未来共同构成的现实框架之中，才能产生、存在、发展并具体表现出来！因此，如果只集中关注理想本身而忽视相应的现实条件，理想不仅难以得到实现、不可能发挥应有的作用，还有可能流于不切实际的幻想、空想，从而在变成"观念的王国"（the kingdom of ideas）的一个组成部分的同时，对实际存在的社会实践活动产生这样那样的不良影响。而要想避免这样的趋势和后果，唯一的出路就是使理想具体化，亦即把"胸怀理想"与"脚踏实地"真正有机地结合起来！显然，就具有作为一种自身独特性的理想的人权观念而言，情况也同样是如此。
In a word, only when being put into the reality framework composed by the past, the present and the future, the lofty and glorious ideal and its relative significance in regulation and instruction can exist and be generated, developed and carried out! Therefore, if we only focus on our ideal and ignore the reality, it is hard for us to realize ideal and to bring its assumed importance into full play. What's worse, it may develop into caprice or wild fancy and become one part of "the kingdom of ideas", which will further do harm to social practice activities in this way or another. To avoid such tendency or consequence, the only remedy is to specify ideals. That is to say, we must combine "hold high the ideal banner" and "in a down-to-earth manner" systematically. Obviously, the same is true for the notion of human rights, which can be considered as a kind of ideal with unique features.
正因为如此，我们认为，要想使人权研究通过具体化而具有明确的现实针对性和尽可能充分的理论解释力，我们就必须充分重视上述理想与现实之间的相互关系、特别是充分重视现实对理想的决定性制约作用，并且由此出发而通过突破"观念的王国"，使人权研究的具体化真正落到实处。
Just because of this, we hold that if we want to make the research on human rights embrace reality-oriented and strong theoretical explanation through concreteness, we must pay full attention to the correlation between ideal and reality, especially the crucial restrictive role of reality playing on ideal. Hence, in this way we can truly achieve concreteness of research on human rights.
三，突破"观念的王国"是人文研究具体化的根本出路
Third, breaking the "Kingdom of Ideas" is the Fundamental Solution of Concrete Humanistic Studies.
顾名思义，所谓"观念的王国"也就是由各种观念构成的、存在于人的思想之中并对现实发挥决定性作用"王国"。它的具体表现形式是，以"绝对普遍有效的客观真理"的面目凌驾于现实之上并对现实发挥指导、衡量、评判和支配作用，并且由于自身具有的抽象化、形式化、逻辑化、简洁性、可重复性和客观有效性等基本特征，得到了人们的信赖乃至信仰。因此，它导致的后果是，人们不再把现实、把活生生的社会实践活动当作学术研究结论的判断标准，而是与此相反，用这种"观念的王国"之中的某个观念抑或某些观念作为衡量现实活动的标准、判断社会行动的标尺，因而往往导致"削足适履"的不良后果--就当今国际关系之中的人权观念所发挥的作用而言，则往往表现为一国用来攻击他国的手段和武器。就这里的后者而言，其在国际政治层次上采取这种举措、发挥如此影响的"学理依据"，就是把人权观念当作这种"观念的王国"之中的一个部分来加以运用了。
As the name suggests, "the kingdom of ideas" means a kingdom consisted of various notions, existing in people's ideas and playing a crucial role. The concrete manifestation is that the "absolutely universal valid objective truth outmatches the reality; it plays a role of guidance, measurement, evaluation and domination on the reality; basically featured with abstract, formalization, logicalization, conciseness, repeatability and objective validity, etc, it has got people's trust or even belief. Therefore, the result is that people no longer regard the social practice activities as the criteria for the conclusions of academic researches, on the contrary, some adverse consequences of "cutting one's feet to fit one's shoes" will come along when certain notion or some notions of the "kingdom of ideas" are taken as the standard for the reality activities and the criterion of judging social activities. For the later, the "academic basis" taking this measure and playing such role in international political area is to put human rights as part of the idea of "the kingdom of ideas" into practice.
毋庸赘言，我们强调指出这一点，根本不是为这种蛮横无理的做法寻求理论依据--实际上恰恰相反，只有真正认识到了这种做法在学理上的上述错误依据，我们才有可能真正行之有效地做到"针锋相对"，在强调指出这种做法即使在学理上也根本站不住脚的同时，通过反其道而行之的人权研究具体化，使我们自己的维护和保障人权的事业得到更加健康的发展。正因为如此，我们认为，只有通过自己的切实努力、在人权研究过程中突破上述"观念的王国"，我们才有可能把人权研究与我们的具体社会实际有机结合起来。那么，怎样才能真正做到这一点呢？
Needless to say, we emphasized and pointed this out not for looking for the theoretical evidence for this rude and unreasonable behavior. In fact on the contrary, only after realizing this behavior is wrong theoretically, can we oppose it effectively. While pointing out the mistake of this behavior even in the theory, we study the human rights in an opposite way, to guarantee the healthy development of the human rights-safeguarding career. So we have the opinion that only breaking through the "kingdom of ideals" with own efforts, can we organically combine the research on human rights and the concrete social reality. But how can we really achieve this?
在我看来，要想使我们的人权研究通过突破"观念的王国"而真正实现具体化，我们需要认真做到以下三点：
In my opinion, we must do the following three things so as to empower the research on human rights to break through "the kingdom of ideas" to truly achieve concreteness.
第一，从上述理想与现实的相互关系出发，通过进行严格的、系统深入的哲学批判反思，清楚而充分地认识作为一种特定理想的人权观念具体发挥作用所面临的现实环境和条件，为人权研究具体化奠定坚实的学理基础、确立正确的学术研究态度；
First, proceeding from the above correlation between ideal and reality, we should, via a systematic and insightful philosophical critical reflection, see clearly and comprehensively the external reality and conditions faced by the notion of human rights as a specific ideal be put into practice. This approach can lay a solid theoretic basis and establish the right attitude for academic study, benefiting the application of the concreteness of the research on human rights;
第二，不断拓展人权研究的学术视野，通过进行哲学、社会学、法学、政治学、人类学、文化学等诸学科的跨学科综合性研究，真正使这种研究走出抽象的"观念的王国"、走向"社会世界"，从而为内容丰富而卓有成效的具体研究做尽可能充分的学术准备；
Second, we should expand the academic vision of research on human rights. Expanded comprehensive and interdisciplinary researches covering disciplines such as philosophy, sociology, law, politics, anthropology and science of culture can truly break out of "the kingdom of ideas" into the real "social world". Such a cross-disciplinary practice is aimed to make the best academic preparation for the rich and fruitful concrete researches;
第三，集中关注和系统研究我国基于30年改革开放成果而快速发展的人权事业，通过扎扎实实的探讨和研究发现问题、抓住关键、找出规律，进而得出既具有鲜明的现实针对性、又具有充分的理论解释力的研究结论，从而创立并发展富有中国特色的人权理论，为我国的人权发展事业的进一步健康发展做出应有的学术贡献。
Third, we should concentrate on and carry out a systematic research on the rapid developing human rights course based on the achievements made in the reform and opening-up process in China over the last 30 years. Such focused probing and research can spot problems, grasp key links and find uniform patterns, so that we can make research conclusion, which are reality-oriented and backed by strong theoretical explanation. These conclusions, in turn, can enable us to come up with and develop a human rights theory with Chinese characteristics, thus making the due academic contribution for the further healthy development of human rights course in our country.
|
|
|
|
|
