{"title":"“Missing Link”: The Embryological Interpretation of the State of Nature by Pieter De la Court and Johan De la Court","authors":"P. Sokolov","doi":"10.17323/1728-192X-2017-1-83-100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study examines the status and the functions of the medical (“embryological”) argument in Pieter and Johan De la Court’s treatise Considerations of State, or Political Balance. In the beginning of the second book of the treatise, the co-authors decide not to confine themselves to the Hobbesian explanation of the causes of the state of nature, setting forth their own interpretation of this phenomenon, which is the certain “impressions” or “marks” (indrukselen) the foetus receives at the moment of conception and during the mother’s pregnancy. The article primarily focuses on this striking inversion of the commonplace regarding prenatal conditions, and on the particular way of merging the political arguments with medical arguments while approaching aporia,the famous state of nature. The authors proceed by sorting out the contexts of Cartesian and Harvean embryological writings (A. Deusing), popular medical texts describing the pathologies of conception and pregnancy (J. Cats and J. van Beverwijk), and treatises on “political natural philosophy” (R. Cumberland) which illuminates the reasons of using this “anomalous” argument as an explanation of the inevitability of the state of nature. The research emphasizes the ambivalence of the De la Courts’ political republicanism. Though preserving some significant elements of the ethical-rhetorical paradigm (parrhesia, the idea of the “Batavian liberty”), this political philosophy does not manage to coherently represent the relationships between the biological and the civil orders, or between heroic ethos and “beneficial violence”.","PeriodicalId":137616,"journal":{"name":"The Russian Sociological Review","volume":"3 5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Russian Sociological Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192X-2017-1-83-100","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study examines the status and the functions of the medical (“embryological”) argument in Pieter and Johan De la Court’s treatise Considerations of State, or Political Balance. In the beginning of the second book of the treatise, the co-authors decide not to confine themselves to the Hobbesian explanation of the causes of the state of nature, setting forth their own interpretation of this phenomenon, which is the certain “impressions” or “marks” (indrukselen) the foetus receives at the moment of conception and during the mother’s pregnancy. The article primarily focuses on this striking inversion of the commonplace regarding prenatal conditions, and on the particular way of merging the political arguments with medical arguments while approaching aporia,the famous state of nature. The authors proceed by sorting out the contexts of Cartesian and Harvean embryological writings (A. Deusing), popular medical texts describing the pathologies of conception and pregnancy (J. Cats and J. van Beverwijk), and treatises on “political natural philosophy” (R. Cumberland) which illuminates the reasons of using this “anomalous” argument as an explanation of the inevitability of the state of nature. The research emphasizes the ambivalence of the De la Courts’ political republicanism. Though preserving some significant elements of the ethical-rhetorical paradigm (parrhesia, the idea of the “Batavian liberty”), this political philosophy does not manage to coherently represent the relationships between the biological and the civil orders, or between heroic ethos and “beneficial violence”.
“缺失的一环”:胚胎学对自然状态的解释,作者:Pieter De la Court和Johan De la Court
本研究考察了Pieter和Johan De la Court的论文《国家或政治平衡的考虑》中医学(“胚胎学”)论点的地位和功能。在论文第二本书的开头,合著者决定不局限于霍布斯对自然状态原因的解释,提出他们自己对这一现象的解释,即胎儿在受孕和母亲怀孕期间接受的某些“印象”或“标记”(indrukselen)。这篇文章主要关注的是关于产前条件的这种惊人的反转,以及在接近著名的自然状态aporia时将政治争论与医学争论结合起来的特殊方式。作者继续整理笛卡尔和哈维胚胎学著作(A. Deusing)的背景,描述受孕和怀孕病理的流行医学文本(J. Cats和J. van Beverwijk),以及关于“政治自然哲学”的论文(R. Cumberland),这些论文阐明了使用这种“反常”论点作为自然状态必然性解释的原因。研究强调了德拉法院的政治共和主义的矛盾心理。尽管保留了伦理修辞范式的一些重要元素(直言,“巴达维亚自由”的想法),这种政治哲学并没有设法连贯地表达生物秩序和公民秩序之间的关系,或者英雄精神和“有益的暴力”之间的关系。