Of the origin of government: the afterlives of Locke and Filmer in an eighteenth-century British debate

Q1 Arts and Humanities
James A. Harris
{"title":"Of the origin of government: the afterlives of Locke and Filmer in an eighteenth-century British debate","authors":"James A. Harris","doi":"10.1080/17496977.2022.2147475","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article describes a debate about the basis of allegiance to government that is obscured from view by the historiographical controversy about whether it is liberalism or republicanism that is the key to understanding eighteenth-century Anglophone political thought. This debate is between those who subscribe, more or less, to the principles of Locke, and those who subscribe, more or less, to the principles of Filmer. Taking the Hanoverian succession as my point of departure, I present an outline account of what I take to be the mainstream eighteenth-century argument about the origin of government, up to and including the aftermath of the French Revolution. It played out largely in sermons and occasional pamphlets, written by individuals who, for the most part, did not acquire significant reputations, even in their own age. I then turn to a succession of more familiar writers, from Hume to Burke, who sought to transform argument about the source of political legitimacy by abandoning the question of the origins of government in favour, usually, of considerations of utility. Yet, as they attempted to change the terms of debate about the principles of government, these writers made constructive use of ideas and arguments usually associated with Filmer.","PeriodicalId":39827,"journal":{"name":"Intellectual History Review","volume":"33 1","pages":"33 - 55"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intellectual History Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17496977.2022.2147475","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT This article describes a debate about the basis of allegiance to government that is obscured from view by the historiographical controversy about whether it is liberalism or republicanism that is the key to understanding eighteenth-century Anglophone political thought. This debate is between those who subscribe, more or less, to the principles of Locke, and those who subscribe, more or less, to the principles of Filmer. Taking the Hanoverian succession as my point of departure, I present an outline account of what I take to be the mainstream eighteenth-century argument about the origin of government, up to and including the aftermath of the French Revolution. It played out largely in sermons and occasional pamphlets, written by individuals who, for the most part, did not acquire significant reputations, even in their own age. I then turn to a succession of more familiar writers, from Hume to Burke, who sought to transform argument about the source of political legitimacy by abandoning the question of the origins of government in favour, usually, of considerations of utility. Yet, as they attempted to change the terms of debate about the principles of government, these writers made constructive use of ideas and arguments usually associated with Filmer.
论政府的起源:洛克和费尔默在18世纪英国辩论中的后事
摘要本文描述了一场关于效忠政府基础的辩论,这场辩论被关于自由主义还是共和主义是理解18世纪英语政治思想的关键的历史争议所掩盖。这场辩论是在或多或少赞同洛克原则的人和或多或少赞同菲尔默原则的人之间进行的。以汉诺威王朝的继承为出发点,我简要介绍了我所认为的18世纪关于政府起源的主流论点,直到并包括法国大革命的后果。它主要表现在布道和偶尔的小册子中,这些小册子是由那些在很大程度上没有获得重大声誉的人写的,即使在他们自己的年龄也是如此。然后,我转向了一系列更熟悉的作家,从休谟到伯克,他们试图通过放弃政府起源的问题,转而考虑效用,来改变关于政治合法性来源的争论。然而,当他们试图改变关于政府原则的辩论条件时,这些作家建设性地利用了通常与菲尔默有关的想法和论点。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Intellectual History Review
Intellectual History Review Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
46
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信