父权与同意:洛克的政治人类学与国家建构  

Patriarchy and Consent: John Locke on Political Anthropology and Construction of State

作　　者：张会芸[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学政治与公共管理学院,北京100088

出　　处：《华中科技大学学报（社会科学版）》2014年第1期80-86,共7页Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology(Social Science Edition)

摘　　要：古典社会契约论以政治权威的起源来论证政治权力的合法性,无可避免地要将哲学的论证与历史的阐释相纠葛。在洛克建构政治社会的契约进路中,政治权力以个人主义为合法性基础,以公众福利的达成为运行宗旨。面对理性构建政治社会的历史证据不足问题,洛克部分扭转了对菲尔默父权主义批判的态度,试图在契约理论的框架内接受父权式及征服式的历史演进型国家,成为政治人类学的拓荒者。洛克通过"默示同意"为其政治人类学的两类国家建构个人主义的道德基础,然而这在某种程度上是失败的,并且自身的言说存在不相一致之处。The classical social contract theories tend to demonstrate the legitimacy of political power by il- lustrating its origin, which would inevitably entangle the philosophical argument with historical interpretation. In John Locke＇ s The Two Treatises of Civil Government, the legitimacy of political power which regards public welfare as operating orientation is based on individualism. lack related historical evidence, Locke partly reversed his As political societies originated by social contracts attitude to Robert Filmer＇ s Patriarchalism, and be- came a pioneer of political anthropology though the discussion of patriarchal and conquerable commonwealth within the framework of social contract theory. Although Locke provided moral foundation of individualism for its political anthropology with ＂tacit consent ＂, it some extent was a failure and not consistent.

关 键 词：洛克 政治社会 社会契约 默示同意 父权主义 

分 类 号：D0-05[政治法律—政治学] D03