Hume, Epicureanism, and Contractarianism

IF 0.3 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Hume Studies Pub Date : 2022-05-07 DOI:10.1353/hms.2020.0004
Aaron Alexander Zubia
{"title":"Hume, Epicureanism, and Contractarianism","authors":"Aaron Alexander Zubia","doi":"10.1353/hms.2020.0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:While scholars have begun to illuminate the contribution of modern Epicureanism to developments in political theory during the Enlightenment, scholars remain divided as to whether David Hume should be interpreted as an appropriator of modern Epicurean thought. In this essay, I contend that Hume's political theory contributes not only to the development of the Epicurean idiom, but also to the evolution of contractarian thought, with which Epicureanism is linked. Though Hume is undoubtedly innovative, particularly in regard to his treatment of consent, he does not operate in an entirely new idiom of political theory, one that is \"without precedent\" (Sagar, Opinion of Mankind). Instead, Hume adopts and refines the Epicurean conventionalism that propelled the modern liberal project of turning politics into a science. This interpretation of Hume clarifies what modern Epicurean political theory is, while also showing that the alleged distance between Hume and Lockean liberalism is narrower than often supposed.","PeriodicalId":29761,"journal":{"name":"Hume Studies","volume":"46 1","pages":"121 - 144"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hume Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hms.2020.0004","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract:While scholars have begun to illuminate the contribution of modern Epicureanism to developments in political theory during the Enlightenment, scholars remain divided as to whether David Hume should be interpreted as an appropriator of modern Epicurean thought. In this essay, I contend that Hume's political theory contributes not only to the development of the Epicurean idiom, but also to the evolution of contractarian thought, with which Epicureanism is linked. Though Hume is undoubtedly innovative, particularly in regard to his treatment of consent, he does not operate in an entirely new idiom of political theory, one that is "without precedent" (Sagar, Opinion of Mankind). Instead, Hume adopts and refines the Epicurean conventionalism that propelled the modern liberal project of turning politics into a science. This interpretation of Hume clarifies what modern Epicurean political theory is, while also showing that the alleged distance between Hume and Lockean liberalism is narrower than often supposed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
休谟,伊壁鸠鲁主义和契约主义
摘要:虽然学者们已经开始阐明现代伊壁鸠鲁主义对启蒙运动时期政治理论发展的贡献,但学者们对休谟是否应该被解释为现代伊壁鸠鲁思想的占位者仍然存在分歧。在本文中,我认为休谟的政治理论不仅有助于伊壁鸠鲁习语的发展,而且有助于伊壁鸠鲁主义的契约思想的演变。虽然休谟无疑是创新的,特别是在他对同意的处理方面,但他并没有在一个全新的政治理论习语中运作,一个“没有先例”的习语(萨加尔,人类的意见)。相反,休谟采用并完善了伊壁鸠鲁的传统主义,这种传统主义推动了现代自由主义将政治转变为科学的计划。这种对休谟的解释澄清了什么是现代伊壁鸠鲁政治理论,同时也表明休谟与洛克自由主义之间所谓的距离比人们通常认为的要窄。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Testimony of Sense: Empiricism and the Essay from Hume to Hazlitt by Tim Milnes (review) Hume as Regularity Theorist—After All! Completing a Counter-Revolution Hume on Self-Government and Strength of Mind Hume beyond Theism and Atheism Hume's Theory of Moral Judgment in Light of His Explanatory Project
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1