与卢梭对话的中国政治理论

M. Powers
{"title":"与卢梭对话的中国政治理论","authors":"M. Powers","doi":"10.53397/hunnu.jflc.202201011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Within the vast body of scholarship on the Enlightenment, only a small portion addresses the role of China in the debates of that period. Among those, scarcely any concerns the relationship between China and Rousseau’s thought. Yet the connections are many, and deep. This essay surveys a body of Chinese political theory available to Rousseau, then compares Rousseau’s understanding of sovereignty, the “people,” popular will, public opinion, and the authority of office, with comparable terms present in the Chinese theory available to him. The aim of this exercise is not so much to establish influence, though that can be difficult to deny. Primarily, the essay attempts to show that Rousseau’s system generates contradictions in part because he attempts to combine parliamentary procedure with the conception of sovereignty and the popular will found in his Chinese sources.","PeriodicalId":65200,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Languages and Cultures","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Chinese Political Theory in Dialogue with Rousseau\",\"authors\":\"M. Powers\",\"doi\":\"10.53397/hunnu.jflc.202201011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Within the vast body of scholarship on the Enlightenment, only a small portion addresses the role of China in the debates of that period. Among those, scarcely any concerns the relationship between China and Rousseau’s thought. Yet the connections are many, and deep. This essay surveys a body of Chinese political theory available to Rousseau, then compares Rousseau’s understanding of sovereignty, the “people,” popular will, public opinion, and the authority of office, with comparable terms present in the Chinese theory available to him. The aim of this exercise is not so much to establish influence, though that can be difficult to deny. Primarily, the essay attempts to show that Rousseau’s system generates contradictions in part because he attempts to combine parliamentary procedure with the conception of sovereignty and the popular will found in his Chinese sources.\",\"PeriodicalId\":65200,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Languages and Cultures\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Languages and Cultures\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1092\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53397/hunnu.jflc.202201011\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Languages and Cultures","FirstCategoryId":"1092","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53397/hunnu.jflc.202201011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在关于启蒙运动的大量学术研究中,只有一小部分涉及中国在那个时期的辩论中的作用。其中,几乎没有人关心中国与卢梭思想之间的关系。然而,两者之间的联系是多而深的。本文考察了卢梭所掌握的一系列中国政治理论,并将卢梭对主权、“人民”、民意、舆论和权力的理解与他所掌握的中国政治理论中的可比术语进行了比较。这次演习的目的与其说是建立影响力,不如说是很难否认这一点。本文首先试图表明,卢梭的制度之所以产生矛盾,部分原因是他试图将议会程序与中国资料中的主权和民意概念相结合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Chinese Political Theory in Dialogue with Rousseau
Within the vast body of scholarship on the Enlightenment, only a small portion addresses the role of China in the debates of that period. Among those, scarcely any concerns the relationship between China and Rousseau’s thought. Yet the connections are many, and deep. This essay surveys a body of Chinese political theory available to Rousseau, then compares Rousseau’s understanding of sovereignty, the “people,” popular will, public opinion, and the authority of office, with comparable terms present in the Chinese theory available to him. The aim of this exercise is not so much to establish influence, though that can be difficult to deny. Primarily, the essay attempts to show that Rousseau’s system generates contradictions in part because he attempts to combine parliamentary procedure with the conception of sovereignty and the popular will found in his Chinese sources.
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
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
×
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