English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 109948/140897 (78%)
Visitors : 46073180      Online Users : 646
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
    •  Adv. Search
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/121268


    Title: 史特勞斯論洛克
    Leo Strauss on John Locke
    Authors: 周家瑜
    Chou, Chia-yu
    Contributors: 政治系
    Keywords: John Locke;Thomas Hobbes;Leo Strauss;Laws of Nature;Natural Right
    洛克;霍布斯;史特勞斯;自然法;自然權利
    Date: 2017-06
    Issue Date: 2018-12-07 17:16:04 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: In his Natural Right and History, Leo Strauss argued that rather than being a traditional natural law theorist as usually thought, John Locke “deviated considerably from the traditional natural law teaching and followed the lead given by Hobbes”. In contrast, John Dunn argued that the Hobbesian question is irrelevant to the political problem that Locke intended to tackle. In this essay, I intend to first examine the seeming opposition between the two camps. I argued that while the two sides seem to hold diametrically opposite conclusions about Locke’s political philosophy in general, Locke’s theoretical relationship with Hobbes in particular, they share the common basis of Hobbism in the sense that they both take for granted the main assumptions of Hobbism as they proceed with the comparison.
    以批判現代自然權利危機著名的列奧史特勞斯（Leo Strauss）在其經典著 作《自然權利與歷史》中論證：洛克並不像一般以為的是一個傳統的自然法思 想家，相反的，洛克的政治思想所呈現的只是一個「表面上的傳統基督教自然 法」，另一方面，以唐恩（John Dunn）為首的洛克研究者則將洛克視為傳統的 自然法思想家，並主張洛克的政治思想建立在明確的神學基礎上。在這篇文章 裡所要指出的是：兩種詮釋似乎有共同的缺失，也就是他們共同假定「霍布斯 主義就等同於霍布斯」，因此儘管在結論上相互對立，但實際上共享同一個比 較基準。
    Relation: 人文及社會科學集刊, Vol.29, No.2, pp.1-28
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[政治學系] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    1-28.pdf900KbAdobe PDF2283View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback