格老秀斯与普芬多夫论遗嘱

IF 1.4 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Grotiana Pub Date : 2019-12-12 DOI:10.1163/18760759-04000006
Raphael Ribeiro
{"title":"格老秀斯与普芬多夫论遗嘱","authors":"Raphael Ribeiro","doi":"10.1163/18760759-04000006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hugo Grotius believed that last wills belonged to the Law of Nature, whereas Samuel Pufendorf argued that testamentary succession was a mere creation of human laws. I argue that Pufendorf’s rejection of the Natural Law origins for wills lacks internal consistency in both his Natural Law system and his proprietary rights theory. Pufendorf even contradicts his own previous claim stating wills are recognised by the Law of Nature as useful to the promotion of social peace. Grotius’s analysis of testaments, on the other hand, brief though it may be, is entirely consistent with his previous arguments: that the Law of Nature can attach itself to human creation; and that a human creation such as testamentary succession belongs to Natural Law when derived from, or when it agrees with, human reason and sociability.","PeriodicalId":42132,"journal":{"name":"Grotiana","volume":"40 1","pages":"146-164"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760759-04000006","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hugo Grotius and Samuel Pufendorf on Last Wills and Testaments\",\"authors\":\"Raphael Ribeiro\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/18760759-04000006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Hugo Grotius believed that last wills belonged to the Law of Nature, whereas Samuel Pufendorf argued that testamentary succession was a mere creation of human laws. I argue that Pufendorf’s rejection of the Natural Law origins for wills lacks internal consistency in both his Natural Law system and his proprietary rights theory. Pufendorf even contradicts his own previous claim stating wills are recognised by the Law of Nature as useful to the promotion of social peace. Grotius’s analysis of testaments, on the other hand, brief though it may be, is entirely consistent with his previous arguments: that the Law of Nature can attach itself to human creation; and that a human creation such as testamentary succession belongs to Natural Law when derived from, or when it agrees with, human reason and sociability.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42132,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Grotiana\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"146-164\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760759-04000006\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Grotiana\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760759-04000006\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Grotiana","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760759-04000006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Hugo Grotius认为最后遗嘱属于自然法则,而Samuel Pufendorf则认为遗嘱继承只是人类法则的创造。我认为,普芬多夫对遗嘱自然法起源的否定在他的自然法体系和所有权理论中都缺乏内在的一致性。普芬多夫甚至反驳了他自己之前的说法,即自然法承认遗嘱对促进社会和平有用。另一方面,Grotius对遗嘱的分析虽然简短,但与他之前的论点完全一致:自然法则可以附属于人类创造;人类的创造,如遗嘱继承,如果源于或符合人类的理性和社会性,则属于自然法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Hugo Grotius and Samuel Pufendorf on Last Wills and Testaments
Hugo Grotius believed that last wills belonged to the Law of Nature, whereas Samuel Pufendorf argued that testamentary succession was a mere creation of human laws. I argue that Pufendorf’s rejection of the Natural Law origins for wills lacks internal consistency in both his Natural Law system and his proprietary rights theory. Pufendorf even contradicts his own previous claim stating wills are recognised by the Law of Nature as useful to the promotion of social peace. Grotius’s analysis of testaments, on the other hand, brief though it may be, is entirely consistent with his previous arguments: that the Law of Nature can attach itself to human creation; and that a human creation such as testamentary succession belongs to Natural Law when derived from, or when it agrees with, human reason and sociability.
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
Grotiana
Grotiana HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
80.00%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Grotiana appears under the auspices of the Grotiana Foundation. The journal’s leading objective is the furtherance of the Grotian tradition. It will welcome any relevant contribution to a better understanding of Grotius’ life and works. At the same time close attention will be paid to Grotius’ relevance for present-day thinking about world problems. Grotiana therefore intends to be a forum for exchanges concerning the philosophical, ethical and legal fundamentals of the search for an international order. The journal is to be published annually. At intervals thematic issues will be inserted. The preferred language for papers and reviews is English.
×
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