洛克和霍布斯自由主义思想比较

通过简单分析古典自由主义产生的时代背景,以及他本身的理论表达,以此为前提来分析霍布斯 和洛克的政治思想,并分析他们各自理论中的自由主义因素,进而比较他们政治理论表达的不同以及他们的理 论在自由主义历史发展的影响和它们的历史意义。     

“人对人是狼”——霍布斯的人性理论浅析

霍布斯基于人的自然性，运用机械唯物主义的方法，形成其完整独特的人性理论。他先从人性的“自然欲望公理”推出“一切人对一切人的战争”的自然状态；再由人的“自然理性公理”归结出的自我保全原则，导出人们为了摆脱这一自然状态而付诸理性发现的自然法。     

The power of images: mathematics and metaphysics in Hobbes's optics

This paper deals with Hobbes's theory of optical images, developed in his optical magnum opus, ‘A Minute or First Draught of the Optiques’ (1646), and published in abridged version in De homine (1658). The paper suggests that Hobbes's theory of vision and images serves him to ground his philosophy of man on his philosophy of body. Furthermore, since this part of Hobbes's work on optics is the most thoroughly geometrical, it reveals a good deal about the role of mathematics in Hobbes's philosophy. The paper points to some difficulties in the thesis of Shapin and Schaffer, who presented geometry as a ‘paradigm’ for Hobbes's natural philosophy. It will be argued here that Hobbes's application of geometry to optics was dictated by his metaphysical and epistemological principles, not by a blind belief in the power of geometry. Geometry supported causal explanation, and assisted reason in making sense of appearances by helping the philosopher understand the relationships between the world outside us and the images it produces in us. Finally the paper broadly suggests how Hobbes's theory of images may have triggered, by negative example, the flourishing of geometrical optics in Restoration England.     

Hobbes on natural philosophy as “True Physics” and mixed mathematics

In this paper, I offer an alternative account of the relationship of Hobbesian geometry to natural philosophy by arguing that mixed mathematics provided Hobbes with a model for thinking about it. In mixed mathematics, one may borrow causal principles from one science and use them in another science without there being a deductive relationship between those two sciences. Natural philosophy for Hobbes is mixed because an explanation may combine observations from experience (the ‘that’) with causal principles from geometry (the ‘why’). My argument shows that Hobbesian natural philosophy relies upon suppositions that bodies plausibly behave according to these borrowed causal principles from geometry, acknowledging that bodies in the world may not actually behave this way. First, I consider Hobbes's relation to Aristotelian mixed mathematics and to Isaac Barrow's broadening of mixed mathematics in Mathematical Lectures (1683). I show that for Hobbes maker's knowledge from geometry provides the ‘why’ in mixed-mathematical explanations. Next, I examine two explanations from De corpore Part IV: (1) the explanation of sense in De corpore 25.1-2; and (2) the explanation of the swelling of parts of the body when they become warm in De corpore 27.3. In both explanations, I show Hobbes borrowing and citing geometrical principles and mixing these principles with appeals to experience.     

浅谈霍布斯与洛克的国际关系哲学的不同

英国思想家霍布斯和洛克从各自的人性观出发,演绎出人类不同的自然状态.在霍布斯看来,人性本恶,自然状态下,由于缺乏公共权力的制约,贪婪、自私的人性使人们之间处于战争状态;而洛克却认为,人是有理性的,人天性并不恶,自然状态下人们是一种自由、平等的关系.二人的思想折射到后来的国际关系理论中去,使国际关系向现实主义和理想主义两个不同的方向发展.     

霍布斯法制思想及对当前我国依法治国的启示

通过对比东西方关于国家起源的学说，以霍布斯的政治思想介绍为主线，寻找对我国依法治国建设的借鉴意义。霍布斯认为法治社会是以保障权利为基础，为结束社会秩序混乱而产生的。法律的本质是维护社会的正义。他的思想是先贤们留下的宝贵遗产之一，值得今天的人们认真研究。     

Leibniz on Hobbes’s materialism

This paper discusses Leibniz’s interpretation and criticism of Hobbesian materialism in the period 1698-1705. Leibniz had continued to be interested in Hobbes’s work, despite not engaging with it as intensively as he did earlier (around 1670). Leibniz offers an interpretation of Hobbes that explains Hobbes’s materialism as derived from his imagistic theory of ideas. Leibniz then criticizes Hobbes’s view as being based on a faulty theory of ideas, and as having problematic consequences, particularly with regard to what one says about God. Some of this criticism is found in the New essays, but equally significant is Leibniz’s correspondence with Damaris Masham, who proposed an argument for materialism very much like that which Leibniz attributed to Hobbes. The paper concludes by discussing the suggestion that Leibniz at this time, particularly in the New essays, himself adopted Hobbesian ideas. Though Leibniz did use some of Hobbes’s examples, and did think at this time that all souls were associated with bodies, the resulting position is still rather distant from Hobbesian materialism.     

“主权在君”抑或“主权在民”——霍布斯与卢梭的契约政府理论比较

论述了社会契约理论对近代西方政治哲学的影响,认为它在该领域占有举足轻重的地位,并成为解释国家、政府起源的基本思想。其中,霍布斯＂主权在君＂与卢梭＂主权在民＂的契约政府理念形成鲜明对照。该文首先将二者契约政府理论的主要相同之处进行归纳,然后着力比较分析其重大分歧,及其在国家、政府权力的确立、巩固和完善等方面的不同。