36 0 0 0 OA 主体と制度

日比野 勤
法社会学 (ISSN:04376161)
vol.2006, no.64, pp.43-59,275, 2006-03-30 (Released:2012-06-20)

Human entities are of a psychic existence. They are of a pathos-like, passive existence and as such, need to act towards the outside world. The autonomous existence of an entity emerges when it actively engages the world, and through a common actual engagement with the world emerges the autonomy of an organisational entity. However, as a mechanistic way of thinking develops, the actual psychic existence of the entities comes to be replaced by a physical psychic existence. In such circumstances, although entities are still autonomous and make decisions on their own, they are unable actively to engage with the outside world. They are merely elements in an operational sequence, and the autonomous existence of not only the individual entities, but also of organisational entities is denied in such a situation. In recent years, with the growing influence of spiritualism, people increasingly become a virtual psychic existence. Here, the distinction between reality and the virtual world becomes blurred, and occasionally, a forceful, possibly even violent, realisation of the virtual world is attempted, although this does not mean that there is any actual commitment to the world.Law cannot be immune from such transformation of entities, but the legal system has, however, so far been unable to cope with such entities in transformation. Problems such as the appropriateness of using brain-death as a criterion for medical death, refusal of blood transfusions by Jehovah's witnesses, and the control imposed on Aum-Shinrikyo as an organisation should be understood in this context.


外部データベース (DOI)

はてなブックマーク (1 users, 1 posts)

Twitter (35 users, 39 posts, 39 favorites)

@doramaus 以前、下記論文の著者から「ドイツ語でVirtualität とはいうが、英語でvirtualityとはいわないようなので困った」という話を伺ったことがあります。Virtual worldとはいうようですね。 https://t.co/JQJXfiBePE
@daocabage この報告(https://t.co/tEt4uI9W89)に関連する話なのですが、患者と医者が共通の根拠関係で協働していることの具体的例証として、Präcoxgefühlの話が出てきました。つまり、診療関係を「契約」と見ることへの異議になりますね。
「憲法解釈学の理論的基礎」第2回の聴講を終えた。概ね「主体と制度」『法社会学』64(2006年)、43−59頁(特に43−50頁)に依拠した講義だったので、理解しやすかった。なお、当該論文の内容はインターネット上で読む事ができる: https://t.co/tEt4uI9W89

収集済み URL リスト