【摘要】：奧克肖特是20世紀(jì)英國著名的保守主義思想家,他在歷史、哲學(xué)、政治、教育方面均有建樹。他在戰(zhàn)后發(fā)表的《政治中的理性主義》一文曾引起學(xué)術(shù)界的廣泛討論,這確立了他20世紀(jì)著名的政治哲學(xué)家的地位。當(dāng)然,奧克肖特也是一位研究霍布斯的專家,他的《(利維坦)導(dǎo)讀》直接促成了《利維坦》的最終定稿。本文也正是要關(guān)注奧克肖特對(duì)《利維坦》的解讀,試圖找出奧克肖特對(duì)《利維坦》解讀的獨(dú)特之處。 本文第一部分從奧克肖特的哲學(xué)觀出發(fā),試圖找出奧克肖特對(duì)《利維坦》的解讀與他的哲學(xué)觀的關(guān)聯(lián)。奧克肖特是一個(gè)唯心主義觀念論者,歷史的方法在他那里占據(jù)著重要的地位。他對(duì)《利維坦》的解讀既放在了整個(gè)政治哲學(xué)史的大背景之下,也放在了霍布斯所生活的時(shí)代背景之下,找出了《利維坦》所屬的傳統(tǒng),并得出了他那《利維坦》是英語世界中最偉大的政治哲學(xué)著作的結(jié)論。 本文第二部分主要探討了《利維坦》中的霍布斯是否是一個(gè)自由主義者。奧克肖特認(rèn)為自由主義發(fā)展到今天,已變成一套意識(shí)形態(tài)的理論,霍布斯當(dāng)然不是這種意義上的自由主義者。但是,自由在霍布斯那里卻占據(jù)著重要的位置,利維坦的建立從根本上說就是要保障公民享有充分的自由,奧克肖特認(rèn)為在《利維坦》中能夠發(fā)現(xiàn)比自由主義者更多的自由。 本文第三部分主要探討了《利維坦》中的霍布斯是否是奧克肖特所批判的理性主義者。對(duì)理性主義的批判在奧克肖特一生的工作中占據(jù)著重要地位,奧克肖特認(rèn)為理性主義者最大的錯(cuò)誤就是對(duì)傳統(tǒng)的無情的拋棄,并認(rèn)為可以運(yùn)用理性建立一套普遍適用的理論。奧克肖特認(rèn)為霍布斯也犯了這樣的錯(cuò)誤,霍布斯是一個(gè)理性主義者。但是我們對(duì)《利維坦》的解讀卻必須跳出理性主義的模式,從歐洲政治傳統(tǒng)中對(duì)《利維坦》加以詮釋。
[Abstract]:Oakchott is a famous British conservative thinker in the 20th century. He has made great achievements in history, philosophy, politics and education. His postwar article rationalism in Politics aroused extensive discussion in academic circles, which established his position as a famous political philosopher in the 20th century. Of course, Oakchott was also an expert at Hobbes, and his Leviathan Guide contributed directly to the finalization of Leviathan. This paper also focuses on Oakchott's interpretation of Leviathan and tries to find out his unique interpretation of Leviathan. The first part tries to find out the relation between Oakchott's interpretation of Leviathan and his philosophy. Oakchott is an idealist, and the historical method plays an important role in him. His interpretation of Leviathan was both in the context of the whole history of political philosophy and in the context of the times in which Hobbes lived, and found the tradition to which Leviathan belonged. His Leviathan is the greatest work of political philosophy in the English language. The second part mainly discusses whether Hobbes in Leviathan is a liberal. Oakchott believes that liberalism has become an ideological theory by now, and Hobbes is certainly not a liberal in this sense. But freedom occupies an important place in Hobbes, and Leviathan was founded to guarantee citizens full freedom, and Oakchott argues that more freedom can be found in Leviathan than in liberals. The third part mainly discusses whether Hobbes in Leviathan is a rationalist criticized by Oakchott. Criticism of rationalism plays an important role in Oakchott's work in his life. Oakchott believes that rationalist's biggest mistake is to abandon the tradition mercilessly, and that rational can be used to establish a set of universally applicable theories. Oakchott thought Hobbes, a rationalist, had made the same mistake. However, our interpretation of Leviathan must go beyond rationalism and interpret Leviathan from the European political tradition.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D09

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 吳之聲;;“鏈鎖”與“自由”:對(duì)霍布斯“利維坦”的辯解[J];湖南科技學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2013年06期

，

本文編號(hào)：2124543