主題：Occupancy Rights, Property Rights and the Kantian Theory of Territory
主講：朱佳峰（EON4思勉人文高等研究院）
評論/主持：徐峰（EON4馬克思主義學院）
時間：2017年5月8日（星期一）11：30
地點：EON4閔行校區人文樓5303學術報告廳
主辦：EON4思勉人文高等研究院
內容簡介：
【報告語言為中文】How can a state legitimately acquire a territory on which it exercises exclusive and supreme jurisdictional authority? According to the Lockean theories of territory, legitimate territorial rights arise from the consent of individual land owners. Critics, however, have challenged the Lockean theories by rejecting private property in land as a proper ground to derive territorial rights, and landowners’ consent as a proper mechanism to legitimatize territorial rights. These critiques are exemplified in Anna Stilz’s recent articles on territorial justice. On the one hand, Stilz develops the concept of occupancy rights, and argues that occupancy rights actually precede property rights as the former is the most we can justify in the absence of social conventions and political institutions. On the other hand, Stilz defends a Kantian theory of territory, which bases the state’s general claim to territorial rights on the state’s effective realization of justice, and also incorporates subjects’ occupancy rights in order to particularize the state’s general claim to territory. But I believe it is a mistake for a Kantian theory of territory to discard the concept of property rights. As a part of my effort to show how property rights can be incorporated into a Kantian theory of territory, this paper has two aims: discrediting the concept of occupancy rights (and therefore arguing in favor of property rights), and showing how property rights can play the role of territorial particularization in a Kantian theory of territory.
主講簡介：
朱佳峰，男🚵🏿♀️🦮，香港大學博士（2014），現為EON4思勉人文高等研究院青年研究員，主要研究興趣為分析進路的政治哲學🤵🏼♀️，學術論文見於Diametros、Journal of Moral Philosophy (SSCI, A&HCI)🤟🏻、Pacific Philosophical Quarterly (A&HCI) 以及其他中文期刊。
高研院為參加
