ABSTRACT In liberal ethics, it is generally assumed that adults are autonomous and independent, whereas children are non-autonomous, dependent and vulnerable. It has been pointed out, however, that all persons are vulnerable. This view seems to blur the distinction between childhood and adulthood. In this essay, I discuss whether introducing a notion of universal vulnerability really undermines the common liberal view on childhood and adulthood. My main claim is that this is not the case: even if all persons are vulnerable, children must still be seen as specially vulnerable. I make clear that the attempt to elucidate the special vulnerability of children leads back to a distinction between children and adults that is based on the concepts of autonomy and independence. For the purpose of this argument, I develop a two-level notion of vulnerability. Against this background, I further argue that while the classical distinction between childhood and adulthood should be maintained, there is reason to reconsider what it means to be an adult or a child. I also claim that some forms of vulnerability in children are worth being cultivated.

中文翻译：

---

脆弱性和自治权–儿童和成人

摘要在自由主义伦理学中，通常假设成年人是自治的和独立的，而孩子是非自治的，依赖的和脆弱的。但是，已经指出，所有人都是脆弱的。这种观点似乎模糊了童年与成年之间的区别。在本文中，我将讨论引入普遍脆弱性的概念是否真的破坏了关于童年和成年的普遍自由主义观点。我的主要主张是事实并非如此：即使所有人都是弱势群体，仍必须将儿童视为特别脆弱的群体。我明确指出，试图阐明儿童的特殊脆弱性的努力导致了基于自治和独立概念的儿童与成人之间的区别。为此，我提出了两级脆弱性概念。在这种背景下，我进一步提出，虽然应该保留儿童与成人之间的经典区别，但仍有理由重新考虑成人或儿童的含义。我还声称，儿童的某种形式的脆弱性值得培养。