政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/143857
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文笔数/总笔数 : 111316/142225 (78%)
造访人次 : 48395480      在线人数 : 632
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜寻范围 查询小技巧：
  • 您可在西文检索词汇前后加上"双引号"，以获取较精准的检索结果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜寻，建议至进阶搜寻限定作者字段，可获得较完整数据
    •  进阶搜寻


    请使用永久网址来引用或连结此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/143857


    题名: 霍布斯《利維坦》的神學基礎： 唯物主義與上帝之國
    The theological foundation of Thomas Hobbes`s Leviathan: Materialism and ";Kingdom of God"
    作者: 陳亭潔
    Chen, Ting-Chieh
    贡献者: 周家瑜
    Chou, Chia-Yu
    陳亭潔
    Chen, Ting-Chieh
    关键词: 霍布斯
    唯物主義
    自然法
    政教關係
    上帝之國
    Hobbes
    Materialism
    Natural Law
    Politics and Religion
    Kingdom of God
    日期: 2022
    上传时间: 2023-03-09 18:42:12 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 本文試圖藉由梳理《利維坦》中霍布斯所使用的神學基礎，說明若將霍布斯的思想脫離神學論證，不僅使其理論架空，更是對其理論的價值限縮。霍布斯以物理性上帝為嫁接，試圖調和新興科學與舊時代基督教神學，並結合兩者發展出具有基督教教義色彩的理想政府。主權者作為由上帝所選定的唯一代理人代為統治，所制定的國法，與自然法相互包含，實現上帝意志，以等待救主與上帝之國的降臨。最後，筆者將論證，對於霍布斯而言，上帝之國不僅對於塵世主權者維繫政治秩序是必要的，上帝之國更是世俗政權的前提與基礎。
    This thesis examines the theological motifs in Leviathan, and further argues that if Hobbes`s theoretical framework are to be departed from the theological contention, such departure would simplify and reduce the meanings of Hobbes’s theoretical framework. Hobbes applies the notion of physical God as a mediation to reconcile and integrate science and Christian theology, and develop an ideal government in accordance with Christian doctrine. As the only agent chosen by God to reign on the earth, the sovereign enacts civil law which is mutually contained with the natural law to realize the will of God, waiting for the Second Coming of Messiah and the Advent of Kingdom of God. To conclude, I argue that the notion of Kingdom of God is not only the requirement for the sovereign to maintain political and ecclesiastical power, but also the prerequisite and foundation to consolidate secular regimes.
    參考文獻: 一、中文文獻
    王愛菊（2012）。理性與啟示：英國自然神論研究。北京：人民出版社。
    朱志方、段秀芳（2000）。西方實體主義與機械論略談。哲學與文化，27（6），595- 600。
    林志穎（1999）。霍布斯宗教觀之研究。正修學報，12，1-18。
    周家瑜（2014）。霍布斯論自然法與政治義務。政治與社會哲學評論，50，59-100。
    周家瑜（2019）。論法律與道德的關係：霍布斯之「自然法與實證法相互包含」論題。政治與社會哲學評論，68，107-142。
    宗曉蘭（2019）。簡論十七至十八世紀英國自然神論的基督宗教觀。澳門理工學報，3，105-111。
    孫善豪（2009）。倒讀《厲威也憚》：論霍布斯的弔詭及其可能的解決。政治與社會哲學評論，30，1-32。
    郭承天（2001）。政教的分立與制衡：從聖經看政教關係。臺北：中華福音神學院。
    梁裕康（2001）。《利維坦》及其當代之詮釋。二十一世紀，68，142-150。
    梁裕康（2017）。屬靈的或屬世的？論霍布斯的政教關係理論。政治科學論叢，71，1-39。
    崔西．史壯（2007）。政治性的神聖特質：重新思考霍布斯與施密特（萬毓澤譯）。政治與社會哲學評論，22，1-63。
    陳妙芬（2021）。法哲學：自然法研究。聯經出版公司。
    陳思賢（1991）。理（Logos）與法（Nomos）的對立－柏拉圖與奧古斯丁政體建構理論的一個透視方式。政治科學叢論，2，153-180。
    陳思賢（2014）。西洋政治思想史（2版）。臺北：五南。
    鄔昆如（1990）。哲學概論。臺北：五南。
    曾慶豹（2003）。利維坦與政治神學。政治與社會哲學評論，5，219-255。
    詹姆士．斯魯威爾（1987）。西方無神論簡史（張繼安譯）。臺北：谷風出版社。（原著出版年：1971年）
    霍布斯（1997）。利維坦（黎思復、黎廷弼譯）。北京：商務印書館。（原著出版年：1651年）
    霍布斯（2019）。貝希摩斯：英國內戰緣由史（李石譯）。北京：北京大學出版社。（原著出版年：1681年）
    霍布斯（2021）。利維坦（莊方旗譯）。臺北：五南。（原著出版年：1651年）
    鍾立文（2008）。霍布斯的神學政治觀。政治與社會哲學評論，27，51-104。

    二、外文文獻
    Arp, Robert (2002). Re-thinking Hobbes`s materialistic and mechanistic projects. Hobbes Studies, pp. 3-31.
    Bardin, Andrea (2019). Materialism and Right Reason in Hobbes’s Political Treatises: A Troubled Foundation for Civil Science. History of Political Thought, 40 (1), pp. 85-110.
    Collins, Jeffrey R. (2005). The Allegiance of Thomas Hobbes. Oxford University Press.
    Curley, Edwin (1992). Calvin and Hobbes. In Daniela Bostrenghi (Ed), Hobbes e Spinoza, Bibliopolis (pp. 497-593). University of Michigan.
    Curley, Edwin (1996). Calvin and Hobbes. Journal of the History of Philosophy ,34 (2), pp. 257-271.
    Curley, Edwin (1998). Religion and Morality in Hobbes. In Jules L. Coleman & Christopher W. Morris (Eds.), Rational Commitment and Social Justice: Essays for Gregory Kavka (pp. 90-111). Cambridge University Press.
    Carmel, Elad (2018). Hobbes and Early English Deism. Hobbes on Politics and Religion. Oxford University Press.
    Dworkin, Ronald (2013). Religion without God. US: Harvard University Press.
    Frost, Samantha (2019). Hobbes, Life and the Politics of Self-Preservation: The Role of Materialism in Hobbes’s Political Philosophy. In S. A. Lloyd (Ed), Interpreting Hobbes`s Political Philosophy (pp. 70-92). Cambridge University Press.
    Finnis, John (2011). Natural Law and Natural Rights. Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1980)
    Gorham, Geoffrey (2013). The Theological Foundation of Hobbesian Physics: A Defence of Corporeal God, British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 21(2), pp. 240-261.
    Gottlieb, Anthony (2016). The Dream of Enlightenment: The Rise of Modern Philosophy. US: Liveright Publishing Corporation.
    Gillespie, Michael Allen (2009). The Theological Origins of Modernity. US: University of Chicago Press.
    Henry, John (2021). Hobbes`s Mechanical Philosophy and Its English Critics. A Companion to Hobbes, pp. 381-397.
    Hobbes, Thomas (1889). Behemoth; or, The Long Parliament. London: Simpkin & Marshall. (Original work published 1681)
    Hobbes, Thomas (1994). Leviathan (Edwin Curley). Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company. (Original work published 1651)
    Hood, Francis Campbell (1964). The Divine Politics of Thomas Hobbes. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    J.S. McClelland (1998). A History of Western Political Thought. Routledge Press.
    Lefort , Claude (1988) . The Permanence of the Theologico-Political?( David Macey, Trans.). Democracy and Political Theory (pp.213-255). Cambridge: Polity.
    Martinich, A. P. (1992). The Two Gods of Leviathan：Thomas Hobbes on Religion and Politics. Cambridge University Press.
    Martinich, A. P. (2009). Interpreting the Religion of Thomas Hobbes: An Exchange Hobbes`s Erastianism and Interpretation. Journal of the History of Ideas, 70(1), pp. 143-163.
    Murphy, Mark. (2019, May 26). “The Natural Law Tradition in Ethics,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, from: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/natural-law-ethics/
    Oakeshott, Michael (2000). Hobbes on Civil Association. Liberty Fund.
    Rommen, Heinrich A. (1998). The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy (Thomas R. Hanley, ed. Russell Hittinger). Liberty Fund Press. (Original work published 1936).
    Schmitt, Carl (2008). The Leviathan in the state theory of Thomas Hobbes : meaning and failure of a political symbol. US: University of Chicago Press.
    Skinner, Quentin (1966). The Ideological Context of Hobbes’s Political Thought. The Historical Journal, 9(3), pp. 286-317.
    Skinner, Quentin (2002). Visions of Politics: Hobbes and Civil Science. Cambridge University Press.
    Sorell, Tom (2004). The Burdensome Freedom of Sovereigns. In Sorell, Tom & Foisneau, Luc (Eds.), Leviathan After 350 Years (pp.183-196). OUP Oxford Press.
    Springborg, Patricia (2013). Leviathan and the Problem of Ecclesiastical Authority. Political Theory, 3(3), pp. 289-303.
    Strauss, Leo (1952). The Political Philosophy of Hobbes, its Basis and its Genesis. University of Chicago Press.
    Strauss, Leo (1965). Natural Right and History. University of Chicago Press.
    Taylor, A. E. (1938). “The Ethical Doctrine of Hobbes.” Philosophy 13(52): pp. 406-424.
    Tuck, Richard (1993). Philosophy and Government 1572-1651. University of Cambridge Press.
    Warrender, Howard (1957). The Political Philosophy of Hobbes: His Theory of Obligation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    Watkins, John W. N. (1965). Hobbes`s system of ideas: a study in the political significance of philosophical theories. New York: Barnes & Noble.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    政治學系
    108252001
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108252001
    数据类型: thesis
    显示于类别:[政治學系] 學位論文

    文件中的档案:

    档案 描述 大小格式浏览次数
    200101.pdf2380KbAdobe PDF2100检视/开启


    在政大典藏中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.


    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 ©   - 回馈