本文選題：絕對主權(quán)　切入點：正當性　出處：《華東師范大學》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：說明人如何從自然狀態(tài)進入人類社會,建立國家來確保人的生存與安全,是霍布斯的《利維坦》關(guān)注的重點所在。在《利維坦》一書中,霍布斯基于其機械唯物主義的立場,對人性進行分析,推理出了自然狀態(tài)、自然法、社會契約、主權(quán)者的權(quán)利與職責、公民的義務與自由,由此構(gòu)建出一個完整的理論體系,力圖為其絕對主權(quán)學說提供一種理性辯護。 本文以霍布斯《利維坦》一書中關(guān)于“絕對主權(quán)”的論證過程為立足點,通過勾勒古希臘至近代時期對正當性問題所作探討,從近代理性辯護的立場來審視霍布斯對“絕對主權(quán)”正當性的論證。原因有二：首先,霍布斯作為西方學說發(fā)展史中的重鎮(zhèn),將國家視作為出自人手的機器,主張從國家內(nèi)部探討政治正當性問題,對近代政治哲學產(chǎn)生了重大影響；其次,針對霍布斯為絕對主權(quán)所做論證是否足以說明其絕對主權(quán)的正當性這一問題仍然是可懷疑的。 全文共分為三章： 本文第一章立足于《利維坦》一書,通過對相關(guān)文本的分析,力圖清晰勾勒出霍布斯關(guān)于“絕對主權(quán)”的論證過程。 本文第二章簡要勾勒自古希臘至近代期間西方政治正當性問題研究脈絡。本章旨在說明對政治正當性問題的探討經(jīng)由自然正當、自然法,直至近代已發(fā)展成為對國家政治統(tǒng)治的理性辯護,正當性成為了一個需要證成的概念。 本文第三章旨在反思霍布斯的絕對主權(quán)論證。本章分為兩部分：首先,從現(xiàn)代政治哲學發(fā)展的角度來看,霍布斯在《利維坦》中構(gòu)建了一個完整、系統(tǒng)的理論框架來論證其絕對主權(quán)。他在歷史上首次提出主權(quán)者來自于個人的同意和授權(quán),為主權(quán)在民(個人)的現(xiàn)代民主思想奠定了基礎,為探尋政治正當性提供了一種新思路。其次,霍布斯為絕對主權(quán)所做論證仍然是可懷疑的。其原因就在于霍布斯將人視作欲望與自我保存的主體,進而推理出作為聯(lián)合意志代表的主權(quán)者必須是絕對的。其結(jié)果是對作為其來源的個人意志的強制,有可能帶來個人意志的屈從。個人在擺脫了自然的暴力恐怖狀態(tài)后,隨即被拋入了一個人為的暴力恐怖狀態(tài)。因此,在為絕對主權(quán)提供理性辯護的過程中,霍布斯難以自圓其說。
[Abstract]:It is the focus of Hobbes' Leviathan to explain how people enter human society from their natural state to establish a state to ensure their survival and security. In Leviathan, Hobbes is based on his position of mechanical materialism. By analyzing human nature, we infer the state of nature, natural law, social contract, the rights and duties of the sovereign, the duties and freedoms of the citizen, and thus construct a complete theoretical system. Try to provide a rational justification for his doctrine of absolute sovereignty. Based on the demonstration process of absolute sovereignty in Hobbes' Leviathan, this paper discusses the legitimacy of ancient Greece to modern times. To examine Hobbes' justification of "absolute sovereignty" from the standpoint of modern rational defense. There are two reasons. First, Hobbes, as an important place in the history of the development of Western doctrine, regards the state as a machine of human hands. It is doubtful whether Hobbes' argument for absolute sovereignty is sufficient to explain the legitimacy of absolute sovereignty. The full text is divided into three chapters:. The first chapter of this paper is based on Leviathan, through the analysis of relevant texts, trying to clearly outline Hobbes' argumentation process of "absolute sovereignty". The second chapter briefly outlines the research context of political legitimacy in the West from ancient Greece to modern times. This chapter aims to explain the discussion of political legitimacy through natural legitimacy and natural law. Until modern times, it has developed into a rational defense of national political rule, and legitimacy has become a concept in need of proof. The third chapter aims to reflect on Hobbes' absolute sovereignty argument. This chapter is divided into two parts: first, from the perspective of the development of modern political philosophy, Hobbes constructs a whole in Leviathan. He proposed for the first time in history that the sovereign came from the consent and authorization of the individual, which laid the foundation for the modern democratic thought of sovereignty in the people. This provides a new way of thinking about political legitimacy. Secondly, Hobbes' argument for absolute sovereignty is still doubtful. The reason is that Hobbes sees man as the subject of desire and self-preservation. And then infer that the sovereign, as the representative of the United will, must be absolute. The result is the compulsion of the individual will as its source, which may lead to the submission of the individual will. The individual, after being freed from the natural state of violence and terror, It was then thrown into a state of man-made violence and terror, so Hobbes could hardly justify himself in providing a rational defence of absolute sovereignty.
【學位授予單位】：華東師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D091

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前4條

1 郭為桂;人民同意:現(xiàn)代政治正當性的道德基石[J];湖北行政學院學報;2004年03期

2 毛興貴;;政治合法性、政治正當性與政治義務[J];馬克思主義與現(xiàn)實;2010年04期

3 戴木才;政治的正當性及其形態(tài)演化[J];中共中央黨校學報;2004年03期

4 周濂;;合乎自然的秩序與合乎權(quán)利的秩序[J];哲學研究;2009年12期

相關(guān)碩士學位論文 前1條

1 何海濤;霍布斯《利維坦》的主權(quán)思想研究[D];重慶大學;2011年

，

本文編號：1686405