{"title":"政治争议","authors":"R. Hammersley","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198809852.003.0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Political debate was particularly important to Harrington. He not only advocated it in his political model but also used his writings to provoke it, believing that debate would bring positive benefits for society. Chapter 9 explores how Harrington provoked debate, before examining his engagement with royalist, republican, and Leveller opponents. While his debates with royalists tended to focus on the respective merits of monarchy and popular government, his disagreements with republicans were more wide-ranging. Although in agreement on the need to protect civil and ecclesiastical liberty, republicans disagreed fundamentally over how to do so. Harrington placed emphasis on good laws and institutions, where his opponents insisted on the need to be ruled by good men. As a result, Harrington offered a more inclusive definition of the citizen body, was more willing to accept virtuous behaviour rather than genuine virtue, and rejected godly rule.","PeriodicalId":430836,"journal":{"name":"James Harrington","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Controversies Concerning Politics\",\"authors\":\"R. Hammersley\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780198809852.003.0009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Political debate was particularly important to Harrington. He not only advocated it in his political model but also used his writings to provoke it, believing that debate would bring positive benefits for society. Chapter 9 explores how Harrington provoked debate, before examining his engagement with royalist, republican, and Leveller opponents. While his debates with royalists tended to focus on the respective merits of monarchy and popular government, his disagreements with republicans were more wide-ranging. Although in agreement on the need to protect civil and ecclesiastical liberty, republicans disagreed fundamentally over how to do so. Harrington placed emphasis on good laws and institutions, where his opponents insisted on the need to be ruled by good men. As a result, Harrington offered a more inclusive definition of the citizen body, was more willing to accept virtuous behaviour rather than genuine virtue, and rejected godly rule.\",\"PeriodicalId\":430836,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"James Harrington\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"James Harrington\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198809852.003.0009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"James Harrington","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198809852.003.0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Political debate was particularly important to Harrington. He not only advocated it in his political model but also used his writings to provoke it, believing that debate would bring positive benefits for society. Chapter 9 explores how Harrington provoked debate, before examining his engagement with royalist, republican, and Leveller opponents. While his debates with royalists tended to focus on the respective merits of monarchy and popular government, his disagreements with republicans were more wide-ranging. Although in agreement on the need to protect civil and ecclesiastical liberty, republicans disagreed fundamentally over how to do so. Harrington placed emphasis on good laws and institutions, where his opponents insisted on the need to be ruled by good men. As a result, Harrington offered a more inclusive definition of the citizen body, was more willing to accept virtuous behaviour rather than genuine virtue, and rejected godly rule.