本文內容是討論洛克政治思想的主要內涵，研究重點是在他的政治思想中，有關個 人自由保障跟政治社會兩者之間的關係所演釋下來的主要論據，這些論據中有那些 值得爭辯與澄清的問題，發展到近代有那些重要的變化，以及後來的學者作何種批 評，最後提出著者個人的見解，作一總結的評估。 全文共分五章。 第一章 討論洛克的經驗哲學：他的認識論跟自由主義以及政治理論之間有何種關 聯，又經驗主義跟自然法之間有無不協調之處。 第二章 討論洛克的自然社會論：探究自然狀態、自然法，以及跟自然法有密切關 係的財產觀，這些觀念的內在涵義及其值得爭論的地方。 第三章 討論政治社會與個人自由間的調和問題：首先討論他的自由觀，次討論他 的同意論，以及跟建立政治社會的關係，最後討論多數決原則及默認原則。 第四章 討論對政府防制的基本設計：主要的重點是在他的有限政府論以及革命權 利的觀念。 第五章 結論：除扼要敘述洛克政治思想的影響與貢獻外，主要是對他的理論作一 總結性的評估。 #2810309 #2810309

本文檢閱霍布斯與洛克兩人政治理論的政治與宗教背景，以幫助理解他們的政治理論與神學教義之間的相互影響。在當時的智識脈絡中，兩人各自擁有對於自然狀態和自然法的不同看法。對於自然法的看法與盟約神學結合，影響到兩位的盟約論或契約論。本文的核心則是這些神學議題如何影響他們對於主權者或是政府的看法。最後，討論兩人所密切關懷的宗教容忍議題，以及往後學者所延伸出的現代性議題。 身為一位虔誠的安立甘宗教徒，霍布斯使用《聖經》以及神學教義來補充並闡明其政治理論。他使用該隱的《聖經》例子說明自然狀態的意義。霍布斯的自然法理論繼承唯意志論傳統，而非唯理智論傳統。這說明他的自然狀態與自然法都與希臘哲學的自然概念大相逕庭。此外，唯意志論也說明自然權利出自於上帝的命令，即自然法。唯意志論和盟約論神學一起塑造出霍布斯的主權者概念。因為主權者具有政治的身體，所以他是人世間的中保，也是國家意志的代表。霍布斯強調得救唯一所需的是相信耶穌是基督，但是他也強調基督的王國不在此世。主權者必須同時作為國家與教會的元首，以避免因神學爭執所引發對於和平與秩序的威脅。 身為一個清教徒，洛克結合他的信仰發展出一種為人民主權和革命權利辯護的政治理論。這造就了他獨特的神學政治觀。首先，他藉由基督教神學家的自然法理論說明人的天(神)賦政治權利。而且為了避免唯意志論和唯理智論的極端，他採取一種中間路線的托瑪斯主義。第二，洛克的盟約神學和奧體概念強調人民的「同意」。人民同意組成一個「政治的身體」。洛克認為律法和恩典具有同等重要性，相應地，他也主張政治體的法律體現了形塑政治體的契約。最後，洛克的宗教寬容觀念以及政教關係理論也支持著人民的天賦政治權利理論。 霍布斯與洛克都示範了：如何能夠獨立思考《聖經》，並且以一套神學政治論述來同時實現屬世與屬靈的美好生活。每個人都必須同時面對自己的政治身份，也要思考自己在宗教中的生命意義。當兩者和諧地結合時，一個人才能真正獲得和平與幸福。霍布斯和洛克的神學政治觀值得我們參考與借鏡。 / This paper reviews the political and religious background of theory introduced by Thomas Hobbes and Locke, to realize the interplay between their political theory and theological doctrine. They hold distinct viewpoints upon state of nature and natural law in the intellectual context at that time, and the combinations of natural law concepts and covenant theology influenced their covenant theory and contract theory. The focus of this paper is how these theological issues influenced their viewpoints about sovereign or the government. At last, this paper discusses the issue of religious tolerance they both concern closely, and the issue of modernity extended by the successive scholars. As a devout Anglican, Thomas Hobbes supplements and clarifies his political theory by the Bible and theological doctrine. He cites the story about Cain in the Bible to explain the state of nature. Rather than intellectualism, the theoretical basis of Hobbes’ natural law follows that of conventional voluntarism, which implies that the state of nature and natural law are widely distinct from the concept of nature in Greek philosophy. In addition, voluntarism proposes that natural right comes from the command of God, i.e.,natural law. Voluntarism and covenant theology together constitute Hobbes’ conceptualization of sovereign. Since the sovereign possesses “body politic”, he is the “mediator” of the world and the representative of state will. Hobbes emphasizes the unum necessarium (sole necessity) of salvation is to believe in that “Jesus is the Christ”, but also that “the kingdom of Christ is not of this world.” The sovereign serves as the head both of church and state in order to avoid the threat against peace due to theological controversy. As a Puritan, Locke intends to develop a political theory apologized by popular sovereignty and right of revolution, which forms his unique viewpoint of theological politics. He firstly illustrates the inborn political right of human beings through the natural law theory, and to avoid the extremes of voluntarism or intellectualism, he adopts the hybrid Thomism with compromise. In addition, the concept of covenant theology and mystical body introduced by Locke emphasizes the “consent” of the people that sets the basis for body politic. Locke considers that the law and grace of the God are equivalently important, accordingly, he suggests that the law of body politic concretizes the contract shaping the body politic as well. Furthermore, the concept of religious tolerance and theory of relationship between religion and politics support the inborn political right of the people. Hobbes and Locke demonstrate: How to independently reflect on “Bible”, and simultaneously actualize the beautiful life of worldliness and spiritualism by the discourse of theological politics. Everyone has to think of the political identity, and the meaning of life in religions as well. When the two parts combine harmoniously, one can truly gain sense of peace and happiness. The viewpoints of theological politics done by Hobbes and Locke are worth to be referred.