No description available.

本論文主旨在於對霍布斯的權利與義務觀念做一番分析與討論。首先，本論文要說明自然權利就是霍布斯所談論的權利，但是在自然狀態與市民社會中，自然權利有何不同與變化。其次，研究各學者如何從義務的角度來探討霍布斯的權利與義務之間的關係，以及眾學者的觀點有何不同，並予以歸納和比較。說明權利與義務之間有何關連，並提出作者本人的看法。基本上，作者認為可以從權利的角度，來思考權利與義務之間的關係。最後，因為自由主義的思潮的帶動，再度興起學者們認為應該從權利的角度來思考人在政治體制和社會中的價值。在本篇論文中，作者主要想強調，可以從交互利益的取向，來考量人與人之間的關係。研究霍布斯的學者們，常常因為由義務著手，致使人在整個政治體制中處於一種被動的地位。當代的自由主義學者則又因為是從一種反動的態度，抗拒統治者的立場來強調個人所具有的權利。這兩種觀點似乎都有偏頗之處，因此本人在此提出交互利益的看法，以作為解決權利與義務的關係所呈現的問題。

This thesis has three parts. The purpose of the first part is to analyse the origin, general characteristics, context and meaning of A Dialogue. I also include a history of the editions of this work, and a discussion on how the scholars have understood it. My intention is to explore the possibility of adding to their comments some additional reasons for Hobbes??? intentions in writing A Dialogue. In order to do all this, I have to take into account two main questions: ??? First, the relation between Hobbes (his life, ideas, aspirations, enemies) and A Dialogue; and ??? Second, the specific problem posed to Hobbes by common law. These issues correspond to the three chapters of Part One of the thesis. The second part of the thesis is divided into nine chapters; it analysis the content of A Dialogue section by section, trying to explain Hobbes??? interpretation of English law and legal history. According to Hobbes, an analysis of the rational principles expressed by both common and civil (Roman) law in England shows the indivisible nature of sovereignty. History, supposedly, confirms this. In the third part of the thesis I locate Hobbes??? legal philosophy as a science, according to the same deductive principles, which he states, are applied to geometry. Hobbes intends to make jurisprudence a form of scientific knowledge to reinforce the idea that sovereignty cannot be shared. While pursuing this philosophical enterprise, Hobbes wants to square his science of politics with English legal history. Hobbes argues that in England, except for the period during the civil wars, there has always been only one absolute ruler of the country. By taking this stand, Hobbes, indirectly calls for changes in the English constitutional order, to be made by advocating the authority of the past, and not only by advocating the application of reason.

Zugl.: Münster, Univ., Diss., 2007

Thesis (M.A. in Political Science)--Vanderbilt University, Aug. 2008. / Title from title screen. Includes bibliographical references.

Texte remanié de: Diss.--Hamburg--Universität, 1989.

Texte remanié de: Diss.--Fachbereich Geschichts- und Gesellschaftwissenschaften--Darmstadt--Universität-Technische Hochschule, 1989.

Thesis (doctoral)--Justus Liebig-Universität Giessen, 1893. / Reproduction of original from Harvard Law School Library. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Pennsylvania, 1932.

Inaug.-Diss.--Köln. / Vita. Bibliography: p. 72.