國立臺灣大學政治學系Department of Political Science, National Taiwan University陳志賢Chen, S.S.S.S.Chen2017-09-082018-06-282017-09-082018-06-281991-05http://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw//handle/246246/281776本文嘗試以一組對比的概念一理(Logos)與法(Nomos)─來詮釋柏拉圖與奧古斯丁二位政治哲學家在思考政體建構問題時所遭遇的困難及他們所提出的解決方法。這一組概念在古希臘哲人派時期即已存在並引起爭辯，它可以說是社會哲學所圍繞的一個核心議題。柏拉圖用此問題連結了他的形上學及政治學，並把政治生活視為此一組概念交互運作的過程，人治與法治的政治型態在此呈現對比，而其優缺點也受到檢討。而對奧古斯可言，這一組概念所引介出的是二個截然不同的範疇─宗教與俗世政治，但亦唯有透過神學的視野才能呈現出以往的政治理論討論上的盲點，並解決「追求現世秩序」所面對的基本困難：墮落的人性。因而哲學與神學在不同的理由是被導引入政治理論之中，柏拉圖與奧古斯丁成功地將「政治」賦予革命性的新義，而這一組對比概念正好為其媒介。也正由此，如何取捨「道德秩序」與「法律秩序」的討論便成為橫跨紀元前後數世紀的一支政治語言的範例。This passage deals with a species of political language adopted in the discussion of the nature of politics and, accordingly, the most ideal polity during Greek and late Roman ages. Plato and St. Augustine have been selected and the representative thinkers who used the antithesis of Logos and Nomos to expound the human dilemma in conducting the political life. Logos appears as the source of the moral order from which man completes himself and realizes his nature as a social being, and Nomos comes to stand for sets of rules, conventions and enactments with which humans regulate their social interactions with each other and maintain a legal order. It is argued that Plato, as a moral philosopher, envisages a radical transformation of social fabric in such a way that every man’s social functions are predestined in order to partake of a part of the total picture, harmonious and well-designed, which he calls justice. In so doing, his plan of social engineering amounts to “philosophizing politics”, i.e., political space is somewhat eliminated and the political process becomes the “ordering of the world.” Augustine, as a theologian whose major concern is absolute peace and the salvation the soul, conceptually distinguishes the world into two: civitas Dei and civitas terrene; and it is his goal to persuade people that Nomos stands for no more than human gloria, but Logos is to be found in the union with God. Therefore faith, rather than human intellect, should be on the front stage of human politics, in which abound, nonetheless, eternal struggles rather than eternal peace. The antithesis of Logos and Nomos hence provided itself as a paradigm for theorists who were confronted with the choice between a moral order and a legal one before the early Medieval time. And a lesson is perhaps in sight that in human politics neither order is conceivable without leaving room for the other.journal article