加拿大温哥华论文代写:社会契约理论

Keywords:加拿大温哥华论文代写:社会契约理论

与托马斯·霍布斯的著作相比，约翰·洛克的社会契约理论全面证明了政府可以分为几个分支。通过比较他们方法论中的步骤，以及分析他们不同的出发点，我们可以得出洛克是正确的结论。随着论文的深入，霍布斯对主权分割提出了两个主要的反对意见:一是他关于“人”的丧失的概念，二是他对自然状态下人类行为的消极看法。霍布斯的后一个反对意见很容易得到回应，通过比较洛克对自然状态的解释，并证明理性的标准为霍布斯创造了一个双重束缚。要么他的自然状态过渡到洛克式的自然状态，然后发展到主权状态，要么他的自然状态必须从霍布斯式的自然状态直接跳到绝对主权状态，这就产生了很多矛盾。前一种反对意见在多个层面得到了回答，从is- should谬论到洛克对主权制衡体系的强烈辩护。通过将霍布斯和洛克的社会契约理论放在一起，我们可以明确地得出这样的结论:主权可以被划分，不仅可以划分为两个分支，还可以划分为尽可能多的公共利益分支。在这本书中引用的利维坦的版本是埃德温·柯利编辑的版本。第二篇论文的版本与教学大纲上注明的版本相同。
加拿大温哥华论文代写:社会契约理论
When compared with the work of Thomas Hobbes, John Locke’s social contract theory comprehensively proves that government can be separated into several branches. By comparing the steps in their methodologies, along with analyzing their different starting points, one arrives at the conclusion that Locke is right. As this paper progressed, it was revealed that Hobbes made two main objections to a divided sovereignty: first, his notion of the forfeiture of “person” and second, his negative view of human behavior in the state of nature. Hobbes’s latter objection was easily answered back by comparing Locke’s interpretation of the state of nature and demonstrating that the standard of reason created a double bind for Hobbes. Either his state of nature transitioned into a Lockean state of nature, which would then progress to sovereignty, or, a jump must occur from a Hobbesian state of nature straight into absolute sovereignty, which creates a number of contradictions. The former objection was answered on multiple levels, ranging from the is-ought fallacy to Locke’s strong defense of a system of sovereign checks-and-balances. By juxtaposing Hobbes and Locke’s social contract theories, one can decisively conclude that sovereignty can be divided, not only to two branches, but to as many as necessary for the public good.The version of Leviathan cited in this work is the Edwin Curley edited edition. The version of Second Treatise is the same as the one noted on the syllabus.