首页> 外文学位 >Juridical sociability: The problems of liberality in eighteenth century and contemporary liberal thought.
【24h】

Juridical sociability: The problems of liberality in eighteenth century and contemporary liberal thought.

机译:法治社会:18世纪的自由问题和当代的自由思想。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Recent liberal writers have attempted to redescribe liberalism as a theory of both communal traditions and personal virtue. One of the problems with this new strain of liberal thought is that it articulates this vision of intersubjectivity within a more individualistic framework, dominated by the images and institutions of law and individual rights. As a result, liberal theorists too often collapse social relations into legal relations. This dissertation poses the question: what is the result when narrow notions of juridical citizenship are established as models of public sociability? How liberal is a theory of juridical sociability?; In order to fully explore these contemporary questions, this work uses the concept of liberality as a thread. What might it mean to act liberally, with generosity, toward others? To provide a contrast to contemporary debates over the meaning of a 'liberal culture', the possibilities and dangers of 'acting liberally' will be explored, as understood by three key thinkers of the eighteenth and early nineteenth century: David Hume, Adam Smith and Benjamin Constant. Explicating the problems each associates with the liberal subject in a commercial and constitutional regime will involve close readings of key texts by each writer, with attention paid to the larger discursive languages each are employing.; The goal of this dissertation is two-fold. First, it seeks to better understand how early modern thinkers employed and modified conventional moral discourse to explain the role personal agency and virtue may possess within a modernizing society. Second, by studying these thinkers, we come to widen liberalism's currently impoverished vocabulary for conceptualizing the complex relationships between political, legal, and economic institutions and the manners and deportments of individual subjects within those institutions. The main advisor of this dissertation is Richard E. Flathman, the George Armstrong Kelly Memorial Professor of Political Science at The Johns Hopkins University.
机译:最近的自由派作家试图将自由主义重新描述为一种共同传统和个人美德的理论。这种新的自由主义思想体系的问题之一是,它在一个更加个人主义的框架中阐明了主体间性的这一愿景,该框架以法律,法律制度和个人权利为主导。结果,自由主义理论家常常使社会关系崩溃为法律关系。本文提出了一个问题:将狭义的法治公民概念确立为公众社会交往的模型时会产生什么结果?法学社会性理论的自由度如何?为了充分探讨这些当代问题,本文以自由的概念为主题。慷慨地对他人采取自由行动意味着什么?为了与当代关于“自由文化”的含义的辩论形成对比,将探讨“自由行事”的可能性和危险,正如十八世纪和十九世纪初的三个主要思想家所理解的:大卫·休ume,亚当·斯密和本杰明·康斯坦斯。为了阐明在商业和宪法制度中与自由主义主体相关的每个问题,将涉及每个作者对关键文本的仔细阅读,并注意每个人所使用的较大的论述性语言。本文的目的是双重的。首先,它试图更好地理解早期现代思想家如何运用和修改传统的道德话语来解释个人代理和美德在现代化社会中可能扮演的角色。第二,通过研究这些思想家,我们拓宽了自由主义目前贫困的词汇,以概念化政治,法律和经济制度之间的复杂关系以及这些制度中各个主体的举止和举止。本论文的主要顾问是约翰·霍普金斯大学政治学教授乔治·阿姆斯特朗·凯利纪念政治学教授理查德·弗拉特曼。

著录项

  • 作者

    Dow, Douglas Carlson.;

  • 作者单位

    The Johns Hopkins University.;

  • 授予单位 The Johns Hopkins University.;
  • 学科 Law.; History Modern.; Political Science General.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1998
  • 页码 241 p.
  • 总页数 241
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 法律;现代史(1917年~);政治理论;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号