Philosophic Pride - Christopher Brooke

Philosophic Pride

Christopher Brooke

出版时间

2012-04-08

ISBN

9780691152080

评分

★★★★★
书籍介绍

"Philosophic Pride" is the first full-scale look at the essential place of Stoicism in the foundations of modern political thought. Spanning the period from Justus Lipsius' "Politics" in 1589 to Jean-Jacques Rousseau's "Emile" in 1762, and concentrating on arguments originating from England, France, and the Netherlands, the book considers how political writers of the period engaged with the ideas of the Roman and Greek Stoics that they found in works by Cicero, Seneca, Epictetus, and Marcus Aurelius. Christopher Brooke examines key texts in their historical context, paying special attention to the history of classical scholarship and the historiography of philosophy. Brooke delves into the persisting tension between Stoicism and the tradition of Augustinian anti-Stoic criticism, which held Stoicism to be a philosophy for the proud who denied their fallen condition. Concentrating on arguments in moral psychology surrounding the foundations of human sociability and self-love, "Philosophic Pride" details how the engagement with Roman Stoicism shaped early modern political philosophy and offers significant new interpretations of Lipsius and Rousseau together with fresh perspectives on the political thought of Hugo Grotius and Thomas Hobbes. "Philosophic Pride" shows how the legacy of the Stoics played a vital role in European intellectual life in the early modern era.

Christopher Brooke is lecturer in political theory and the history of political thought in the Department of Politics and International Studies at the University of Cambridge, where he is a fellow of King's College.

用户评论
只看了卢梭那一章,大概算是一种新道德主义的解释,认为卢梭非支配的共和国是斯多亚式的。处理的文本主要是二论和Emile,借用了Force的伊壁鸠鲁/奥古斯丁——斯多亚/新斯多亚的区分框架(并没有完全承认这种框架本身的合理性),认为卢梭从二论到Emile是从更伊壁鸠鲁的倾向到更斯多亚倾向的发展,似乎认为Emile更具有解释效力。对于卢梭和斯多亚派的关系,尤其是在Emile当中对于oikeiosis这个斯多亚概念的处理作了相当细致的分析。Brooke认为卢梭试图把伊壁鸠鲁,奥古斯丁和斯多亚传统作一个更好的综合,卢梭接受了伊壁鸠鲁的自爱/自私/自利前提,但是反对发烧的自尊及其好的效果,接受了奥古斯丁对于人的种种恶的分析,但是拒绝原罪,接受了斯多亚的道德,但是在理性和怜悯两个问题上不同于斯多亚。
real难读,看了其中几章
收藏