【作者】 项松林；

【导师】 高力克；

【作者基本信息】 浙江大学 ， 政治学理论， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 苏格兰启蒙运动是18世纪启蒙运动的另一重镇。与法、德等欧陆启蒙运动不同,苏格兰启蒙运动是一场政治转型已然完成的后革命启蒙,它的主要关切不再是政治革命而是经济与社会的发展,不再是政治社会的建立而是市民社会的运行。本文以“问题”为导向,以“文本”解读为着力点,探究苏格兰启蒙思想家市民社会理论中涵盖的对人、对社会、对国家、对道德生活、对经济发展的理论思考与思想启蒙。通过全文五个维度的立体式的考察,作者认为,尽管苏格兰启蒙思想家之间有分歧乃至思想取向上的对立,但在市民社会的形成、维系与发展等问题上又分享很多共识:与唯理主义者不同,他们走的是一条情感主义的路径,将人看成是情感的动物,认为通过“道德感”的认同与赞许公序良俗完全可能。与契约论者不同,他们认为社会是自生自发,“无意识之后果”;社会的演进是自然的历史过程,是生存方式、财产关系等使然;社会的发展充满着历史的辩证法。与各种形式的干涉主义者不同,他们力主商业植根于自由,推崇市场自身的逻辑;同时又深信商业能开出自由之花、结出文明之果,尽管对“商人”社会中分工的异化、财富与德性的张力、公共精神的缺失与政治奴役之忧虑不一。与后继者黑格尔、马克思的市民社会概念不同,在他们的市民社会理论中还存续着德性之维,都认同市民社会不需要国家的道德救济,在伦理上是自足的。与法国启蒙之激进态度不同,在他们的政治法律思想中,有着浓郁的稳健、渐进与调和的政治风格。他们既不鼓吹“威权国家”,也不倾心于“最小国家”,而是主张一种“有限国家”与“法治国家”;既强调“权利原则”,又不否认“实利原则”;既将统治者看做是“无赖”,又规劝公民要有忠诚感;既积极伸张公民“法律下的自由”,同时又对“反抗权”与政治革新甚为谨慎。在结语部分,作者充分肯定他们对现代市民社会的基本特性——非伦理化的政治、非政治化的经济、非宗教化的伦理——之卓有成效的启蒙。更多还原

【Abstract】 The Scottish Enlightenment is an important component of the Enlightenment in the 18^th century. Unlike the European Enlightenment in France and Germany, Scottish Enlightenment is a post-revolutionary Enlightenment after the political transition. Its main concerns are the economic and social development of the society rather than political revolution, and the running of civil society instead of the establishment of the political society.This dissertation is "problem"-oriented, focusing on the reading of the "text". It probes into the Scottish Enlightenment thinkers’ civil society theory, particularly the theoretical studies and enlightenment ideas concerning man, society, state, moral life, and economic development. Through a spatial observation form five dimensions, the writer holds that Scottish Enlightenment thinkers share a lot in common in the shaping, maintenance and development of the civil society despite the disagreement even antagonism existing among them in the ideological orientation. Unlike the rationalist, they adopt an emotional approach, view man as sentimental animal, and believe that public order and good manners are possible by the approbation and applause by moral sense. Different from the contractualist, they hold that society is spontaneous and the unconscious consequences, thus the evolution of society is a natural historical process, which is driven by modes of subsistence, property relation, etc., and the development of society is full of historical dialectics. Unlike the various interventionism, though they expressed different concerns towards the society of businessmen on alienation of labor division, the tension of wealth and virtue, lack of public spirit, political slavery, they still assert that commerce should be rooted in freedom; advocate the logic of the market itself, and are convinced that commerce can develop out of the flower of freedom and bear the fruits of civilization.Unlike successors Hegel’s and Marx’s civil society theory, they believe that their theory has the dimension of virtue, and that the civil society is self-contained in ethnics, thus it doesn’t need the moral relief by the state. Unlike the radical attitude in the French Enlightenment, there are the sound, progressive and compromising political styles in their political thoughts: they neither advocate "the authoritarian state" nor fall for "the minimum state", rather, they contend for "the limited state" and "the state under the rule of law", laying special stress on "the principle of rights" without the denial of "the pragmatic principles" at the same time. Therefore, on one hand, they view the ruler as "a knave", on the other hand, they advise that citizens should have the sense of loyalty; still, they uphold "liberty under the law" for citizens, meanwhile, they are quite cautious about "the right to revote" and political innovation.In the epilogue, the writer fully affirms their fruitful Enlightenment to de-ethical politics and de-relionized ethics, which are the fundamental characteristics of the modem civil society.更多还原