公民社会中个人自由的重塑——卢梭自由思想内在逻辑一致性分析

摘要

The freedom paradox in Rousseau＇s political thought is the focus of debate among Western political thinkers in two hundred years.His political thought is different from the Natural Law School represented by Locke.Rousseau thought that human beings in the natural state are not granted with innate natural rights.Instead,they simply enjoy the individual freedom according to their entirely unconstrained desires,rather than either inviolable or non-infringing limited rights.This kind of freedom is only possible when social contract is signed and human beings change from the natural state into civil society.Rousseau believed that individual freedom means observation of the law on behalf of the public,and,freedom does not exist in a natural state.Rousseau argued that,in the logic of freedom argument,there is no contradiction.The key point is that only in a political community can individual freedom be achieved.%卢梭政治思想中的自由悖论问题是200年来西方政治思想家争论的焦点。卢梭的政治思想与以洛克为代表的自然法学派具有很大的区别。卢梭认为人类在自然状态中并非没有天赋的自然权利,完全是根据自己的欲望和本性享受着不受任何约束的个人自由,而不是在一定范围内不受侵犯也不得侵犯他人的权利。但这种自由只有在人类签订社会契约,摆脱自然状态,进入公民社会时才可能出现。卢梭认为,个人的自由就是对代表公意的法律的遵守,而这种自由在自然状态中是不存在的。卢梭这种对自由论证的逻辑并不存在矛盾,其关键点就在于人的自由只有在政治共同体中才能够实现。