The aim of this dissertation is to shed light on an oft-overlooked aspect of Hobbes’ and Locke’s educational theories. Specifically, this dissertation examines the role of mothers in Hobbes’ Locke’s, and Wollstonecraft’s political theories and defends the claim that mothers have an overlooked, important role to play in civic society insofar as they contribute to educating children to become good members of civic society. To date, scholars working on Hobbes and Locke have largely focused on only one type of education and its relationship to civic society. Specifically, they have focused on civic education. Civic education refers to formal programs, such as day school or university curricula aimed at molding individuals into citizens or subjects, capable of sustaining a thriving commonwealth. However, when scholars focus on civic education, they miss part of the story surrounding how Hobbesian and Lockean education is implemented because not all of their educational program can be contained in formal schooling. In the Chapters 1 and 2 of the dissertation, I show that mothers play a role in educating future subjects and citizens in Hobbes’ and Locke’s theories by means of what I call civic socialization. Civic socialization refers to the informal processes by which children are educated to become good subjects and citizens who contribute to the wellbeing and stability of the commonwealth. In Chapter 3, I consider whether mothers’ role in civic socialization is compatible with early modern, liberal theories. Insofar as Hobbes and Locke are early modern, liberal thinkers, they maintain that men and women are naturally equal. However, mothers’ role in civic socialization often results in their subordination to fathers. Mary Wollstonecraft, although a figure in modern philosophy, is useful for showing this tension. In her theory, even when mothers are highly educated, their role in civic socialization often means that mothers must use their education for the benefit of their children and not for themselves. / 2020-11-27T00:00:00Z

Thomas Hobbes insisted that he had set forth the "true and only moral philosophy" and that he was the founder of civil science. Yet, the character of Hobbes's moral and political theory and its role in his civil doctrines has been the subject of much controversy. In this dissertation I defend an interpretation as a properly natural law theorist in his accounts of the foundations of moral philosophy and civil science, morality, commonwealth, and positive law. I juxtapose Hobbes's thought to the Aristotelian-Thomistic natural law tradition and argue that Hobbes's novelty flows chiefly from his doctrine of the human good. / text

Tesi di perfezionamento--Pisa--Scuola superiore di studi universitari e di perfezionamento "S. Anna", 1995. / Bibliogr. p. 179-196.

Thomas Hobbes first law of nature states that 'each rational man shall and ought to endeavor peace'. Simultaneously, Hobbes first law of nature is perhaps the antithesis of his conception of man in nature (homo naturalis), where man is simply defined as an animal residing in an amoral and arbitrary environment in which every notion of "right and wrong" are connected to the individual's capacity for self-maximizing rationality. In turn, the social creature - zoon politikon - is the contradiction of Hobbes' homo naturalis: he is the impersonated restraint of the impulses and passions that leads him away from a life of an unending state of war into a moral and social community. Hobbes' social and moral creature is the result of a transition involving the creation of a social contract between an arbiter and the masses, binding them together in a shared fate: the excommunication of war and fear into the installment of peace and security. This essay addresses the transition of Hobbes conception of homo naturalis to his implicit understanding of zoon politikon; the transition from the amoral to the moral man. What implications does such a transition have for the egoistic-rational creature? What political and moral obligations are to be found between man and man, and between man and state? Finally, what is rational for the social creature to demand of the state?

O presente estudo parte da proposta de um pacto narrativo com o leitor, envolvendo uma dupla operação: renunciar, provisoriamente, o formato usual de uma tese dirigida contra ou a favor do pensamento conservador (sem perder de vista o posicionamento político e filosófico em questão), e assumir, enquanto isso, a complexidade da perspectiva de autores que se apropriaram e polemizaram questões políticas e temas filosóficos tendo em vista o seu tempo. Quanto ao gênero em questão, a proposta de desenvolver uma reunião de ensaios procura delimitar as configurações teóricas que permitiram o incremento de um pensamento conservador. A partir das leituras que Carl Schmitt e Leo Strauss estabeleceram sobre a filosofia de Thomas Hobbes, uma das principais problematizações tratadas aqui é a que vê na filosofia hobbesiana a fundação do liberalismo. Para tanto, a questão da adesão ou da separação entre a filosofia política e a filosofia natural torna-se bastante polêmica no tratamento que ambos os intérpretes dão a Hobbes. Como críticos dos rumos da política contemporânea, Schmitt e Strauss entenderam a instauração filosófica do racionalismo moderno como a base teórica que permitiu, a um só tempo, a consolidação de um Estado político que superou a ordem passada, o incremento de um regime absoluto de dominação da sociedade e a abertura que viabilizou, pelo desenvolvimento técnico da nova ciência da natureza e pelo rebaixamento moral da finalidade da vida humana, a ascensão liberal. Como uma tentativa de compreensão da força e das consequências que tais intérpretes tiveram, o presente estudo ainda explora uma recepção crítica brasileira da obra de Strauss que questiona e limita a interpretação da fundação hobbesiana do liberalismo. / This study proposes a narrative pact with the reader, involving a double operation: a temporary renouncement of the usual format of a thesis directed against or in favour of conservative thinking (without losing sight of the political and philosophical positioning in question), and assuming, meanwhile, the complexity of the perspective of authors who take political issues and philosophical subjects aiming at polemizing and debating problems that belong to their own times. As to the literary genre, the proposal of making up a set of essays aims to delimit the theoretical settings that enabled the development of a conservative thought. Considering the interpretations that Carl Schmitt and Leo Strauss set out concerning the philosophy of Thomas Hobbes, a major question treated here is that which sees the Hobbesian philosophy as the foundation of liberalism. For this purpose, the issue of adherence or separation between political philosophy and natural philosophy becomes quite provocative in the way both authors treat Hobbes. As critics of the contemporary political directions, Schmitt and Strauss consider the settlement of modern philosophical rationalism as the theoretical basis that made at the same time possible the consolidation of a political State that overcame the former order of politics, the instauration of an absolute regimen of domination of the society and, finally, the breach which, through the technical improvement of the new science of nature and the debasement of the moral purpose of human life, made the liberal ascension feasible. As an attempt to understand the strength and the consequences that such interpreters had, this study also explores the Brazilian critical reception of the works of Strauss, which discusses and delimits the interpretation of the Hobbesian foundation of liberalism.

Made available in DSpace on 2015-05-14T12:11:49Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 arquivototal.pdf: 3841252 bytes, checksum: c783faae083a01abb9f2971b41554d1f (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-07-16 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / This work analizes the rising of the absolutist State, its causes and consequences, as well as its growing in the XVIIth England. We embase this work in the Thomas Hobes's political philosophy. He consideres that the State conception is linked to the might phenomenon. How is possible this conception in Hobbes? What bounds and functions has this might conception? To make explicit this conception, we'll take the historical context in which Hobbes developped your philosophical system. Following, we will analize human nature conception, nature laws, sovereignty and Civil State. / O presente trabalho objetiva analisar o surgimento do Estado absolutista, suas causas e consequências, bem como o seu fortalecimento na Inglaterra do século XVII, tendo por base a filosofia política de Thomas Hobbes, que considera o fenômeno do poder atrelado à sua concepção de Estado. Para isso questiona-se? Como a formulação do Estado é proposta por Hobbes? Quais as funções e os limites desse poder? Para esclarecer estas questões, analisa-se o contexto histórico em que Hobbes desenvolveu seu sistema filosófico, posteriormente, serão analisadas as noções de natureza humana, leis de natureza, soberania e estado civil.

O presente estudo parte da proposta de um pacto narrativo com o leitor, envolvendo uma dupla operação: renunciar, provisoriamente, o formato usual de uma tese dirigida contra ou a favor do pensamento conservador (sem perder de vista o posicionamento político e filosófico em questão), e assumir, enquanto isso, a complexidade da perspectiva de autores que se apropriaram e polemizaram questões políticas e temas filosóficos tendo em vista o seu tempo. Quanto ao gênero em questão, a proposta de desenvolver uma reunião de ensaios procura delimitar as configurações teóricas que permitiram o incremento de um pensamento conservador. A partir das leituras que Carl Schmitt e Leo Strauss estabeleceram sobre a filosofia de Thomas Hobbes, uma das principais problematizações tratadas aqui é a que vê na filosofia hobbesiana a fundação do liberalismo. Para tanto, a questão da adesão ou da separação entre a filosofia política e a filosofia natural torna-se bastante polêmica no tratamento que ambos os intérpretes dão a Hobbes. Como críticos dos rumos da política contemporânea, Schmitt e Strauss entenderam a instauração filosófica do racionalismo moderno como a base teórica que permitiu, a um só tempo, a consolidação de um Estado político que superou a ordem passada, o incremento de um regime absoluto de dominação da sociedade e a abertura que viabilizou, pelo desenvolvimento técnico da nova ciência da natureza e pelo rebaixamento moral da finalidade da vida humana, a ascensão liberal. Como uma tentativa de compreensão da força e das consequências que tais intérpretes tiveram, o presente estudo ainda explora uma recepção crítica brasileira da obra de Strauss que questiona e limita a interpretação da fundação hobbesiana do liberalismo. / This study proposes a narrative pact with the reader, involving a double operation: a temporary renouncement of the usual format of a thesis directed against or in favour of conservative thinking (without losing sight of the political and philosophical positioning in question), and assuming, meanwhile, the complexity of the perspective of authors who take political issues and philosophical subjects aiming at polemizing and debating problems that belong to their own times. As to the literary genre, the proposal of making up a set of essays aims to delimit the theoretical settings that enabled the development of a conservative thought. Considering the interpretations that Carl Schmitt and Leo Strauss set out concerning the philosophy of Thomas Hobbes, a major question treated here is that which sees the Hobbesian philosophy as the foundation of liberalism. For this purpose, the issue of adherence or separation between political philosophy and natural philosophy becomes quite provocative in the way both authors treat Hobbes. As critics of the contemporary political directions, Schmitt and Strauss consider the settlement of modern philosophical rationalism as the theoretical basis that made at the same time possible the consolidation of a political State that overcame the former order of politics, the instauration of an absolute regimen of domination of the society and, finally, the breach which, through the technical improvement of the new science of nature and the debasement of the moral purpose of human life, made the liberal ascension feasible. As an attempt to understand the strength and the consequences that such interpreters had, this study also explores the Brazilian critical reception of the works of Strauss, which discusses and delimits the interpretation of the Hobbesian foundation of liberalism.

No description available.

O presente trabalho tem como objetivo investigar as fontes conceituais de um manuscrito anônimo tradicionalmente atribuído a Thomas Hobbes e conhecido na literatura como A short tract on first principles (Breve tratado sobre os primeiros princípios). Mostra-se, contrariamente à opinião dos principais comentadores, que a teoria física sobre a natureza da luz, elaborada na segunda seção do manuscrito, situa-se em um campo anti-aristotélico e está alinhada a uma perspectiva atomista, o que se evidencia a partir dos fortes e estreitos vínculos que a teoria mantém com as concepções corpuscularistas de Sir Kenelm Digby e de Sir Walter Charleton. / The aim of this work is to investigate the conceptual sources of an anonymous manuscript traditionally attributed to Thomas Hobbes and known on literature as A short tract on first principles. It shows, contrary to the opinions of leading commentators, that the physical theory of the nature of light, elaborated in the second section of the manuscript, is located in an anti-Aristotelian field and is aligned to an atomistic perspective, which is evident from the close and strong ties that the theory holds with the corpuscularianisms conceptions of Sir Kenelm Digby and Sir Walter Charleton.

O presente trabalho tem como objetivo investigar as fontes conceituais de um manuscrito anônimo tradicionalmente atribuído a Thomas Hobbes e conhecido na literatura como A short tract on first principles (Breve tratado sobre os primeiros princípios). Mostra-se, contrariamente à opinião dos principais comentadores, que a teoria física sobre a natureza da luz, elaborada na segunda seção do manuscrito, situa-se em um campo anti-aristotélico e está alinhada a uma perspectiva atomista, o que se evidencia a partir dos fortes e estreitos vínculos que a teoria mantém com as concepções corpuscularistas de Sir Kenelm Digby e de Sir Walter Charleton. / The aim of this work is to investigate the conceptual sources of an anonymous manuscript traditionally attributed to Thomas Hobbes and known on literature as A short tract on first principles. It shows, contrary to the opinions of leading commentators, that the physical theory of the nature of light, elaborated in the second section of the manuscript, is located in an anti-Aristotelian field and is aligned to an atomistic perspective, which is evident from the close and strong ties that the theory holds with the corpuscularianisms conceptions of Sir Kenelm Digby and Sir Walter Charleton.