論宗教脈絡在理解霍布斯政治義務理論中的角色：以「自由的恰當意涵」為例

On the Role of Religious Context in Understanding Thomas Hobbes' Theory of Political Obligation: In the Case of 'The Proper Signification of Liberty'

梁裕康(Yu-kang Liang)

《政治科學論叢》 78期 (2018/12) Pp. 23-67

https://doi.org/10.6166/TJPS.201812_(78).0002

摘要

究竟主權者的權威是來自事實權力抑或上帝授權？針對這個問題，本文首先要介紹史欽納（Quentin Skinner）對霍布斯的自由（liberty）此一概念的詮釋，其次討論羅伊德（Sharon Anne Lloyd）的論點，最後則根據史欽納的方法，對羅伊德的宗教性詮釋提出批評。若本文的論點得以成立，可以說明以下觀點：史欽納雖然說明某種科學脈絡影響了霍布斯的政治義務理論，但他卻忽略了宗教脈絡同樣也發生了效力。就這點而言，羅伊德的角度可以作爲史欽納觀點的補充。

關鍵字

湯瑪斯．霍布斯 ； 宗教 ； 自由 ； 昆丁．史欽納 ； 莎莉．羅伊德

並列摘要

Does Thomas Hobbes think that the authority of the sovereign is generated from God or from its own plenary power? This article tries to approach this issue by comparing Quentin Skinners' conception of 'proper signification of liberty' and S. A. Lloyd's religious interpretation of Hobbes' theory. I argue that although Skinner's interpretation of liberty can account for some philosophical parts of Hobbes' theory of political obligation, it fails to account for the other historical or religious parts of the theory. Apart from the philosophical or scientific context, the historical or religious context also plays a significant role, which is well demonstrated in Lloyd's theory. The combination of these two can lead to a better understanding of Hobbes' theory of political obligation.

並列關鍵字

Thomas Hobbes ； Religion ； Liberty ； Quentin Skinner ； S. A. Lloyd

參考文獻

Anon(2014)。聖經。臺北=Taipei:聖經公會=The Bible Society in Taiwan。

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。

陳思賢(1999)。西洋政治思想史：古典世界篇。臺北=Taipei:五南=Wunan。

Anon. 1643. “Solemn League and Covenant.” in https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Solemn_League_and_Covenant&oldid=3447270. Latest update 10 December 2018.

Anon. 2018. “Mortal, adj. and adv OED Online.” in http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/122438. Latest update 25 August 2018.