霍布斯與洛克的自然狀態(tài)學說

行政管理論文編號:ZZ009  附任務(wù)書,開題報告,文獻綜述,及所有過程材料,論文字數(shù):16576,頁數(shù):22

目   錄
內(nèi)容摘要 Ⅱ
ABSTRACT
引言 1
一、霍布斯與洛克的自然狀態(tài)2
（一）霍布斯的自然狀態(tài)2
（二）洛克的自然狀態(tài) 3
二、兩種自然狀態(tài)的異同 5
（一）兩種自然狀態(tài)的相同之處 5
     1.霍布斯與洛克的自然狀態(tài)都是假設(shè)的,都不是歷史上真實存在過的事實5
     2.霍布斯與洛克的自然狀態(tài)的終點都是締結(jié)契約,形成公民社會5
     3.霍布斯與洛克的自然狀態(tài)都有自然法的存在5
（二）兩種自然狀態(tài)的不同之處 6
     1.兩種自然狀態(tài)最根源的區(qū)別就在于霍布斯與洛克對人性的假設(shè)是不一樣的6
     2兩種自然狀態(tài)的本質(zhì)特征不同6
三、兩種自然狀態(tài)導(dǎo)致的理論分野 8
（一） 政府目的的不同 8
（二）政府形式的不同 8
（三）契約內(nèi)容的不同 9
四、對霍布斯和洛克自然狀態(tài)的評價 10
結(jié)論11
參考文獻12
致謝13

摘    要
     “自然狀態(tài)”是近代西方政治學的理論基石，是近代西方政治哲學邏輯推演的前提。霍布斯和洛克的政治學說都是從自然狀態(tài)假說開始的。但由于所處的時代不同，個人經(jīng)歷不同，因而各自對自然狀態(tài)有著不同的理解。但二者在構(gòu)想其自然狀態(tài)時，都留下了自身不可克服的缺陷。二者從自然狀態(tài)假說出發(fā)，論證了資產(chǎn)階級“人生而平等”的觀點，同時說明了國家的起源。兩位思想家都力圖把邏輯與歷史統(tǒng)一起來，使自己的理論植根于歷史之中，假托歷史，增強理論的說服力。雖然出發(fā)點和目的一致，二人卻描繪了兩幅迥異的圖景。本文力圖于分析兩種自然狀態(tài)觀的異同之處以及所導(dǎo)致的兩種不同的契約學說，并分析導(dǎo)致這種差異的原因。本文可分為四個部分：
第一部分是分別描述霍布斯與洛克的自然狀態(tài)，分析兩種自然狀態(tài)的特征和缺陷，以及導(dǎo)致這種缺陷的原因。
第二部分是比較兩種自然狀態(tài)的異同，力圖通過對兩種自然狀態(tài)的深入分析得出其相同點和不同點。
第三部分是分析兩種自然狀態(tài)的分歧所導(dǎo)致的二者的理論分野。由于二者所描繪的自然狀態(tài)不同，從而導(dǎo)致霍布斯和洛克所論證的政府的目的、形式以及締結(jié)契約的內(nèi)容都有很大差異。
第四部分是對二者自然狀態(tài)學說的一個整體評價，不僅分析了二者自然狀態(tài)的實質(zhì)，還說明了導(dǎo)致這種自然狀態(tài)不同的根本原因。
關(guān)鍵詞   霍布斯 洛克 自然狀態(tài)

Hobbes and Locker’s Ideas about Natural State
Abstract
“Natural State” is the theoritical foundation of the modern western political science , and the premise in the logical inference of the modern western political philosophy. Both Hobbes and Locker's political theory are starting from the Natural State hypothesis . However , because the time they lived in is different , the personal experience of them is different, thus they have a different understanding respective to the Natural State. But when they were devising their Natural State , they have left its own insurmountable flaw. The two embarked from the Natural State hypothesis, demonstrated the viewpoint of the bourgeoisie “born equal”,and indicated the origin of a country. The two thinkers are both try to unify the logic and the history , in order to take their theory rooted in history, by the history to strengthen the convincing of their theory . Although the starting point and the purpose are consistent, two people actually described two different prospects. This article tries hard to analysis the differences and similarities of this two kind viewpoint of Natural State,and the different contract theory which resulted from it ,at the same time ,show the reasons for this difference. The article would be divided into 4 points.
The first part is describes Hobbes and Locker's Natural State separately, analyzes its features and flaws ,as well as the reasons that lead to such flaws.
The second part is compare this two kind of Natural State , tries hard to show the differences and similarities of this two viewpoint of Natural State thorough analyses.
The third part analyzes the dividing line of Hobbes and Locker's political theory which caused by the differences of this two kind Natural State . Because the two  thinkers describe a different Natural State , thus the government's goal,form and the contents of the contracts which demonstrated by Hobbes and Locker are all different.
The fourth part is a overall appraisal to this two kind of Natural State theory , not only has analyzed the substance of this two Natural State , but also explained the basic reason that causes the differences of this two Natural State .
Key word:  Hobbes ； Locker ； Natural State