Hobbes’ Social Contract: Absolutist or Liberal?

Authors

  • Francisco Cortes Rodas University of Antioquia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.espo.8072

Keywords:

Liberalism, Political Absolutism, Natural Law, Social Contract;, Theory of Representation, Thomas Hobbes

Abstract

This article presents the central elements of the classic contractualist model of State legitimacy as displayed by Thomas Hobbes in Leviathan. It aims to question the proposal made by Leo Strauss on Hobbes’ political
philosophy according to which Hobbes is the founder of liberalism. Through an interpretation of the Hobbesian theory of political representation, it intends to detach his image as a defender of political absolutism. The type of liberalism from which it is possible to show that Hobbes’ conception is unacceptable, is liberalism represented by authors such as Benjamin Constant, Madame de Stäel and Alexis de Tocqueville.
|Abstract
= 5352 veces | PDF (ESPAÑOL (ESPAÑA))
= 2378 veces|

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Francisco Cortes Rodas, University of Antioquia

Philosopher and Master in Philosophy from the Universidad Nacional de Colombia. D. in Philosophy from the University of Konstanz, Germany. Professor at the Institute of Philosophy of the University of Antioquia.

References

(1). Biral, Alessandro. (1998). Hobbes: la sociedad sin gobierno. En: Giuseppe Duso (Ed.), El Contrato social en la filosofía política moderna. Valencia:Res Publica (pp. 51-107).

(2). Constant, Benjamin. (2008). Del espíritu de conquista y de usurpación. Madrid: Tecnos.

(3). Constant, Benjamin. (1988). Del espíritu de conquista. Madrid: Tecnos.

(4). Duso, Giusseppe. (2004). Génesis y Lógica de la representación política moderna. Fundamentos: Cuadernos monográficos de teoría del estado, derecho público e historia constitucional, Nº 3, Universidad de Oviedo, Asturias, España.

(5). Goldwin, Robert. (1993). John Locke [1632-1704]. En: Leo Strauss y Joseph Cropsey (Comps.), Historia de la Filosofía Política. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica (pp. 451-485).

(6). Hobbes, Thomas. (1994). Leviatán o la materia, forma y poder de una república eclesiástica y civil. México:Fondo de Cultura Económica.

(7). Kersting, Wolfgang. (1994). Die politische Philosophie des Gesellschaftsvertrags, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.

(8). Locke, John. (1991). Dos ensayos sobre el gobierno civil. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe.

(9). Macpherson, C.B. (2005). La teoría política del individualismo posesivo. De Hobbes a Locke. Madrid: Trotta.

(10). Montesquieu. (1984). Del espíritu de las leyes. México: Orbis.

(11). Münkler Herfried. (2001). Thomas Hobbes. Berlín, Campus Verlag.

(12). Rawls, John. (2009). Lecciones sobre la historia de la filosofía política.Barcelona: Paidós.

(13). Strauus Leo. (2006). La filosofía política de Hobbes. Su fundamento y su génesis. Buenos Aires:Fondo de Cultura Económica.

(14). Strauss, Leo. (1970). Qué es filosofía política. Madrid: Guadarrama.

Estudios Políticos, edición 37, 2010

Downloads

Published

2010-12-15

How to Cite

Cortes Rodas, F. (2010). Hobbes’ Social Contract: Absolutist or Liberal?. Estudios Políticos, (37), 13–32. https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.espo.8072

Issue

No. 37 (2010): Historia y política

Section

General Section Articles

License

Estudios Políticos authorizes the copy of articles and texts for academic purposes or the internal use of institutions as long as the proper citation of the source is provided. Total or partial reproduction of the journal with different purposes should have an explicit authorization by the Institute of Politic Studies of the University of Antioquia. 

The views and opinions expressed in the articles are those of the authors and do not necessary reflect or bind those of the Institute of Political Studies of the University of Antioquia.

Creative Commons: Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share Alike

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>