如何理解霍布斯的自然状态?--施特劳斯和麦克弗森的分歧与争论  

How to Understand Thomas Hobbes’s State of Nature?--The Disagreement and Debate Between Leo Strauss and C.B.Macpherson

作　　者：赵柯 Zhao Ke

机构地区：[1]上海大学马克思主义学院

出　　处：《政治思想史》2024年第2期107-121,199,共16页Journal of the History of Political Thought

基　　金：上海大学“青年英才启航计划”项目“和平与繁荣--霍布斯法哲学研究”(N.13-G210-22-326)的阶段成果。

摘　　要：加拿大政治哲学家麦克弗森对霍布斯的自然状态进行了政治经济学视角的解释。施特劳斯从政治哲学视域出发,批评麦克弗森的解释存在两个问题:一是把霍布斯的自然状态理解为一种逻辑假设;二是用占有性市场社会解释霍布斯从人性到自然状态的路径。施特劳斯表明,为了理解霍布斯的自然状态,无须求助于霍布斯意指何种社会类型,而需求助于霍布斯对基督教的反叛。施特劳斯和麦克弗森在霍布斯自然状态问题上的分歧与争论,是面对现代自由民主理论危机,政治哲学视域与政治经济学视域的分歧与争论。C.B.Macpherson provided a political economical interpretation of Hobbes’s state of nature.However,Leo Strauss,from the perspective of political philosophy,criticized that Macpherson’s interpretation had two problems.First,Macpherson understood Hobbes’s state of nature as a logical hypothesis.Second,Macpherson used the model of possessive market society to explain Hobbes’s path from human nature to the state of nature.Strauss argued that in order to understand Hobbes’s state of nature,there was no need to identify what kind of society Hobbes meant;rather,what was required was the knowledge of Hobbes’s critique of Christianity.The disagreement and debate between Strauss and Macpherson on Hobbes’s state of nature were one between the perspective of political philosophy and that of political economy in the face of the crisis of modern liberal democratic theory.

关 键 词：霍布斯 自然状态 麦克弗森 施特劳斯 

分 类 号：D091[政治法律—政治学]