自然在进步——托克维尔与自然法的转型

Q4 Arts and Humanities
Ádám Smrcz
{"title":"自然在进步——托克维尔与自然法的转型","authors":"Ádám Smrcz","doi":"10.12775/rf.2021.024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hayden White famously claimed that Tocqueville’s emplotment of history was „tragic” by genre, and his ideological implications were „radical”. The aim of this paper is to argue that this interpretation is correct, but that our arguments will be based on a subject entirely ignored by White: Tocqueville’s  meagre scarce remarks on nature and natural law. According to their commonsensical definition, natural laws must „stem from God, nature, or reason”, but this relationship in Tocqueville is highly problematic. As I intend to prove, Tocqueville probably did acknowledge the existence of natural laws, and even intended to describe their resulting obligations (as in the case of what virtuous deeds are, or what humanity is etc.), but the way he defined nature herself suggests that the precise content of such obligations cannot be settled easily. Hence, according to our claim, a disturbing tension can be observed between the way Tocqueville attempted to describe certain natural laws, and the way he defined natural laws in general. Furthermore, this tension is analogous with the aforementioned friction between the author’s personal convictions and his scientific conclusions.","PeriodicalId":36471,"journal":{"name":"Ruch Filozoficzny","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nature in Progress – Tocqueville and the Transformation of Natural Law\",\"authors\":\"Ádám Smrcz\",\"doi\":\"10.12775/rf.2021.024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Hayden White famously claimed that Tocqueville’s emplotment of history was „tragic” by genre, and his ideological implications were „radical”. The aim of this paper is to argue that this interpretation is correct, but that our arguments will be based on a subject entirely ignored by White: Tocqueville’s  meagre scarce remarks on nature and natural law. According to their commonsensical definition, natural laws must „stem from God, nature, or reason”, but this relationship in Tocqueville is highly problematic. As I intend to prove, Tocqueville probably did acknowledge the existence of natural laws, and even intended to describe their resulting obligations (as in the case of what virtuous deeds are, or what humanity is etc.), but the way he defined nature herself suggests that the precise content of such obligations cannot be settled easily. Hence, according to our claim, a disturbing tension can be observed between the way Tocqueville attempted to describe certain natural laws, and the way he defined natural laws in general. Furthermore, this tension is analogous with the aforementioned friction between the author’s personal convictions and his scientific conclusions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36471,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ruch Filozoficzny\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ruch Filozoficzny\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12775/rf.2021.024\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ruch Filozoficzny","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12775/rf.2021.024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

海登·怀特(Hayden White)著名地宣称,托克维尔(Tocqueville)对历史的描述在类型上是“悲剧的”,他的意识形态含义是“激进的”。本文的目的是证明这种解释是正确的,但我们的论点将基于怀特完全忽视的一个主题:托克维尔对自然和自然法的稀少评论。根据他们的常识性定义,自然法则必须“源于上帝、自然或理性”,但托克维尔的这种关系存在很大问题。正如我想证明的那样,托克维尔可能确实承认自然法的存在,甚至打算描述它们由此产生的义务(比如什么是美德,什么是人性等),但他自己定义自然的方式表明,这些义务的确切内容不容易确定。因此,根据我们的说法,在托克维尔试图描述某些自然规律的方式和他对一般自然规律的定义之间,可以观察到一种令人不安的紧张关系。此外,这种紧张关系类似于上述提交人的个人信念与科学结论之间的摩擦。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Nature in Progress – Tocqueville and the Transformation of Natural Law
Hayden White famously claimed that Tocqueville’s emplotment of history was „tragic” by genre, and his ideological implications were „radical”. The aim of this paper is to argue that this interpretation is correct, but that our arguments will be based on a subject entirely ignored by White: Tocqueville’s  meagre scarce remarks on nature and natural law. According to their commonsensical definition, natural laws must „stem from God, nature, or reason”, but this relationship in Tocqueville is highly problematic. As I intend to prove, Tocqueville probably did acknowledge the existence of natural laws, and even intended to describe their resulting obligations (as in the case of what virtuous deeds are, or what humanity is etc.), but the way he defined nature herself suggests that the precise content of such obligations cannot be settled easily. Hence, according to our claim, a disturbing tension can be observed between the way Tocqueville attempted to describe certain natural laws, and the way he defined natural laws in general. Furthermore, this tension is analogous with the aforementioned friction between the author’s personal convictions and his scientific conclusions.
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
Ruch Filozoficzny
Ruch Filozoficzny Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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