• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >Aristotle's regime-centered political science and Machiavelli's objections (Niccolo Machiavelli).
【24h】

Aristotle's regime-centered political science and Machiavelli's objections (Niccolo Machiavelli).

机译：亚里士多德以政权为中心的政治学和马基雅维利的反对意见（尼科洛·马基雅维利）。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

My topic is an examination of the core concept of Aristotle's political science---the regime: what does he mean by this term, how does he arrive at it, and what are the presuppositions of a regime-centered political science? I try to answer these questions by a careful study of Book III of the Politics. There Aristotle shows that such routine political questions of who does, and does not, deserve to be a citizen, and who should rule, are unavoidably tied up with questions about the identity of the city, and what human type should be honored by the city. The variety of answers to these questions provided by the various groups contending for rule (the poor, the rich, the aristocrats, etc), give rise to the various regimes. Aristotle shows that the claims to rule made by the various groups contain within them a vision of the whole over which the groups wish to rule, and a notion of the common good that follows from that vision. The ruling group's conception of justice seeps into the parts of the city and integrates them in a certain way, and this integration is both psychic and structural, since the regime affects not just the external actions of the citizens, but also their inner-disposition, their soul. This comprehensive integration is what makes the regime the fundamental political fact, the key to understanding the nature of a political order. Machiavelli in his Discourses on Livy also begins from opposed groups in political life, but understands them not by examining what they say, but by looking beyond their speeches to a particular conception of the necessities they face. Machiavelli finds that these groups have essentially selfish and irreconcilable goals, and shows us how these selfish goals can be aligned to achieve a limited common good consisting of political stability, order and liberty. The dissertation ends by comparing and contrasting Aristotle and Machiavelli's differing analysis of the opposing groups in political life and suggests reasons for preferring the Aristotelian approach.
机译：我的主题是对亚里士多德政治学的核心概念-政权的考察：他用这个术语是什么意思，他是如何得出的，以政权为中心的政治学的前提是什么？我试图通过仔细研究《政治第三书》来回答这些问题。亚里士多德（Aristotle）的研究表明，这样的例行政治问题不可避免地与谁应该成为公民，谁应该统治，应该由谁统治相关的政治问题与城市的身份以及城市应尊重的人种有关。 。争夺统治权的各个群体（穷人，富人，贵族等）对这些问题的回答多种多样，从而形成了各种政权。亚里斯多德（Aristotle）表明，各个团体提出的关于统治的主张中包含着各个团体希望统治的整体视野，以及从该视野中得出的共同利益的观念。统治集团的正义概念渗透到城市的各个部分，并以某种方式将它们整合在一起。这种融合既是心理上的又是结构上的，因为该政权不仅影响公民的外部行为，而且还影响其内部处置，他们的灵魂。这种全面的融合使该政权成为基本的政治事实，成为理解政治秩序性质的关键。马基雅维利（Machiavelli）在他的《关于利维的论述》中也从政治生活中的对立群体开始，但不是通过审视他们所说的话来理解他们，而是通过演讲之外的眼光看待他们所面对的必需品的特定概念。马基雅维利（Machiavelli）发现，这些集团的目标本质上是自私和不可调和的，并向我们展示了如何调整这些自私的目标，以实现包括政治稳定，秩序和自由在内的有限的共同利益。本文通过比较和对比亚里士多德和马基雅维利对政治生活中对立群体的不同分析而结束，并提出了偏爱亚里士多德主义方法的原因。

著录项

  • 作者

    Samad, Joy.;

  • 作者单位

    Boston College.;

  • 授予单位 Boston College.;
  • 学科 Political Science General.; Philosophy.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2006
  • 页码 128 p.
  • 总页数 128
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 政治理论;哲学理论;
  • 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