霍布斯的群体问题

Q3 Social Sciences Review of Politics Pub Date : 2023-08-14 DOI:10.1017/S0034670523000244
Luc Foisneau
{"title":"霍布斯的群体问题","authors":"Luc Foisneau","doi":"10.1017/S0034670523000244","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this article I try to identify the nature of the Hobbesian Crowd Problem as a problem depending on the nature of the connection, or absence of connection, between the notions of “crowd” and “people.” When a crowd is considered as a “subjected crowd” it is but the flip side of a people, which is itself the other name of the sovereign. When considered as a gathering of people, the crowd's status depends on the intention of its members as well as the number of its participants, but also on whether it is authorized by the sovereign. Within the framework of his complex theory of associations (or “system subjects”), Hobbes's theory of crowds is a useful instrument for assessing what we now call “populism,” the claim by some citizens to speak for the whole political community.","PeriodicalId":52549,"journal":{"name":"Review of Politics","volume":"85 1","pages":"474 - 493"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Hobbesian Crowd Problem\",\"authors\":\"Luc Foisneau\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0034670523000244\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In this article I try to identify the nature of the Hobbesian Crowd Problem as a problem depending on the nature of the connection, or absence of connection, between the notions of “crowd” and “people.” When a crowd is considered as a “subjected crowd” it is but the flip side of a people, which is itself the other name of the sovereign. When considered as a gathering of people, the crowd's status depends on the intention of its members as well as the number of its participants, but also on whether it is authorized by the sovereign. Within the framework of his complex theory of associations (or “system subjects”), Hobbes's theory of crowds is a useful instrument for assessing what we now call “populism,” the claim by some citizens to speak for the whole political community.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52549,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Politics\",\"volume\":\"85 1\",\"pages\":\"474 - 493\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034670523000244\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034670523000244","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这篇文章中,我试图将霍布斯群体问题的本质定义为一个依赖于“群体”和“人”概念之间联系或缺乏联系的本质的问题。当一个群体被认为是“臣服的群体”时,它只是人民的另一面,人民本身就是君主的另一个名字。当被认为是一群人的聚会时,群体的地位取决于其成员的意图和参与者的数量,但也取决于它是否得到君主的授权。在他复杂的关联理论(或“系统主体”)框架内,霍布斯的群体理论是评估我们现在所说的“民粹主义”的有用工具,民粹主义是一些公民要求代表整个政治共同体发言的主张。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Hobbesian Crowd Problem
Abstract In this article I try to identify the nature of the Hobbesian Crowd Problem as a problem depending on the nature of the connection, or absence of connection, between the notions of “crowd” and “people.” When a crowd is considered as a “subjected crowd” it is but the flip side of a people, which is itself the other name of the sovereign. When considered as a gathering of people, the crowd's status depends on the intention of its members as well as the number of its participants, but also on whether it is authorized by the sovereign. Within the framework of his complex theory of associations (or “system subjects”), Hobbes's theory of crowds is a useful instrument for assessing what we now call “populism,” the claim by some citizens to speak for the whole political community.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Review of Politics
Review of Politics Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
94
期刊最新文献
Any Time, Any Place, Any Way, Any Pace: Markets, EdTech, and the spaces of schooling. Ethical Growth in History: Good News and Bad Eric MacGilvray: Liberal Freedom: Pluralism, Polarization, and Politics. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022. Pp. xvi, 221.) Ben Jones: Apocalypse without God: Apocalyptic Thought, Ideal Politics, and the Limits of Utopian Hope. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022. Pp. xiv, 225.) Jean-Yves Frétigné: To Live Is to Resist: The Life of Antonio Gramsci. Translated by Laura Marris. Foreword by Nadia Urbinati. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2021. Pp. xxii, 306.)
×
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