恢复凯瑟琳·麦考利的启蒙共和主义?

Q4 Arts and Humanities Dialogue and Universalism Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.5840/du202131344
Karen Green
{"title":"恢复凯瑟琳·麦考利的启蒙共和主义?","authors":"Karen Green","doi":"10.5840/du202131344","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Can Catharine Macaulay’s enlightenment democratic republicanism be justified from the point of view of contemporary naturalism? Naturalist accounts of political authority tend to be realist and pessimistic, foreclosing the possibility of enlightenment. Macaulay’s utopian political philosophy relies on belief in a good God, whose existence underpins the possibility of moral and political progress. This paper attempts a restoration of her optimistic utopianism in a reconciliation, grounded in a revision of natural law, of naturalist and utopian attitudes to political theory. It is proposed that the coevolution of language, moral law, and conscience (the disposition to judge one’s own actions in the light of moral principles) can be explained as solutions to the kinds of tragedy of the commons situations facing our ancestors. Moral dispositions evolved, but, in the light of its function, law is subject to rational critique. Liberal democracy plausibly offers the best prospect for developing rationally justifiable law.","PeriodicalId":36732,"journal":{"name":"Dialogue and Universalism","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Restoring Catharine Macaulay’s Enlightenment Republicanism?\",\"authors\":\"Karen Green\",\"doi\":\"10.5840/du202131344\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Can Catharine Macaulay’s enlightenment democratic republicanism be justified from the point of view of contemporary naturalism? Naturalist accounts of political authority tend to be realist and pessimistic, foreclosing the possibility of enlightenment. Macaulay’s utopian political philosophy relies on belief in a good God, whose existence underpins the possibility of moral and political progress. This paper attempts a restoration of her optimistic utopianism in a reconciliation, grounded in a revision of natural law, of naturalist and utopian attitudes to political theory. It is proposed that the coevolution of language, moral law, and conscience (the disposition to judge one’s own actions in the light of moral principles) can be explained as solutions to the kinds of tragedy of the commons situations facing our ancestors. Moral dispositions evolved, but, in the light of its function, law is subject to rational critique. Liberal democracy plausibly offers the best prospect for developing rationally justifiable law.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36732,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dialogue and Universalism\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dialogue and Universalism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5840/du202131344\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dialogue and Universalism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/du202131344","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

从当代自然主义的角度来看,凯瑟琳·麦考利的启蒙民主共和主义是否合理?自然主义者对政治权威的描述往往是现实主义和悲观的,排除了启蒙的可能性。麦考利乌托邦式的政治哲学依赖于对善良上帝的信仰,上帝的存在支撑着道德和政治进步的可能性。本文试图通过对自然法的修正,以及对政治理论的自然主义和乌托邦态度的调和,恢复她的乐观乌托邦主义。有人提出,语言、道德法则和良心(根据道德原则判断自己行为的倾向)的共同进化可以解释为解决我们祖先面临的共同悲剧的方法。道德倾向是进化的,但是,就其功能而言,法律是理性批判的对象。自由民主似乎为发展合理的正当法律提供了最好的前景。
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
Restoring Catharine Macaulay’s Enlightenment Republicanism?
Can Catharine Macaulay’s enlightenment democratic republicanism be justified from the point of view of contemporary naturalism? Naturalist accounts of political authority tend to be realist and pessimistic, foreclosing the possibility of enlightenment. Macaulay’s utopian political philosophy relies on belief in a good God, whose existence underpins the possibility of moral and political progress. This paper attempts a restoration of her optimistic utopianism in a reconciliation, grounded in a revision of natural law, of naturalist and utopian attitudes to political theory. It is proposed that the coevolution of language, moral law, and conscience (the disposition to judge one’s own actions in the light of moral principles) can be explained as solutions to the kinds of tragedy of the commons situations facing our ancestors. Moral dispositions evolved, but, in the light of its function, law is subject to rational critique. Liberal democracy plausibly offers the best prospect for developing rationally justifiable law.
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
Dialogue and Universalism
Dialogue and Universalism Social Sciences-Communication
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊最新文献
Problems of the Unknowability and Total Unity in the Light of Philosophy of Semyon L. Frank Re-Thinking Cultural Hedonism Do We Really Need a New Enlightenment for the 21st Century? On the Question of Whether We Need a New Enlightenment for the 21st Century How Do We Shape a Reform of the 21st-Century Human World in an Enlightenment Spirit? On Projects by Robert E. Allinson and Michael H. Mitias
×
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