Hobbes ou la crise de l'état baroque

Thomas Hobbes in Leviathan presented a paradigm of the social contract that has proven foundational in Western political thought. A proper understanding of the philosopher’s thought is thus of paramount importance. I argue that today’s case for a religiously tolerant Hobbes has missed an important part of the historical record. I first consider an obscure but important document, the second edition of the Humble Proposals. It demonstrates that leading members of a seventeenth century Christian denomination, the Independents, considered a state-enforced confession of faith. Independents are generally seen as tolerant, and one of the arguments for Hobbesian toleration is that Hobbes endorsed them. But the second edition of the Humble Proposals aligns with the possibility in Hobbes that the civil sovereign will impose part III of Leviathan on the Universities and treat its contents as a legally required confession of faith – one that may be necessary for security, and the avoidance of civil war. Hobbes’s endorsement of Independency alone cannot be used to argue that his work leads to religious toleration. The evidence I present reinforces an earlier assessment and alongside other evidence points to the return of the intolerant Hobbes.     

The Postmodern Problem

Abstract

Mormon political theology must reconcile two distinct projects: the care for the Church's concrete, temporal existence in the World, and the welcoming of the future Kingdom of God on earth. Because of this duality, political theology finds itself highlighting the distinction between the World and the Kingdom of God and at the same time pointing out common ground and attempting to establish peace between the Church and the World. The alleged contradictions of Mormon political thought are, according to this conception, to be understood not as confrontations between idealism and brute reality (or “utopianism” and “assimilation”), but rather as the bringing together of the two goals of Mormon political reflection, pursued by two sides of political theology. These two sides, apologetic and prophetic political theology, are distinguished not by their political content, but rather by their particular kinds of political rhetoric.     

Hobbes as Political Theologian

Abstract

Although an orphaned subject among scholars of religion, the theology of Thomas Hobbes is now among the most contested issues in Hobbes studies and the study of early liberal political theory. This essay maps the state of the question and offers a theological appraisal of it. In so doing it attempts to critique a leading reading of Hobbes’s Leviathan by highlighting its attack on civil religion and endorsement of a biblical political theology. The relationship between Hobbes’s political and theological views in Leviathan also receives sustained attention.     

Undermining Obligation to God: Hobbes’s Religious Rhetoric and False Forms of Obligation

ABSTRACT

This paper examines Hobbes’s use of religious rhetoric, specifically his definitions of the terms grace, faith, and future words in his explanation of the nature and origins of obligation. Through categorization and analysis of Hobbes’s different forms of obligation, paying special attention to the religious rhetoric of the false forms, it becomes evident that Hobbes’s view of obligation is designed not only to establish a political order, but to undermine man’s obligation to God, and as such, remove the possibility of competing obligation in the life of the citizen, and thereby reduce the cause of civil wars.     

荀子与霍布斯对“人性恶”的认识及其矫治策略比较

荀子与霍布斯都从现实性上也即“人情论”的立场上来观察和把握了“人性恶”的事实,都意识到人性恶的肆意膨胀和发展会导致社会乃至整个世界体系的无序和混乱。然而,在如何限制人性之恶进而去构筑良好社会秩序的对策上,荀子强调“礼教”,霍布斯注重“理法”。荀子要达到的是“王道社会”,霍布斯欲建立的是“理性和正义的国家”,虽理想有别,但目的都是为了实现人与人以及人与社会的和谐相处。     

The End of Socialism's Historical Theology and Its Rebirth in Fukuyama's Thesis

Abstract

I consider Robert Faulkner's “case for greatness” in relation to egalitarianism and the fear of greatness that egalitarianism may justifiably inspire. I question how the “greatness” that Faulkner defends may be fostered—and whether we really do want to foster it after all.     

Conservatives,Liberals, and the Free Exercise Clause

Mark Lilla's summons to recover Hobbes's "art of intellectual separation" is stillborn. Lilla acknowledges the tendentiousness and theoretical inadequacy of Hobbes's approach, yet he falls back on that very strategy, refusing the real task of reconciling political and religious goods.