霍布斯真的鼓吹威權、不信任民主嗎? Was Hobbes an Enemy of Democracy?

霍布斯真的鼓吹威權、不信任民主嗎? Was Hobbes an Enemy of Democracy?

**「威權」是現代詞彙。**霍布斯主張的是「不可分割的絕對主權」,而這個主權可以是君主,也可以是議會,甚至是民主式的人民大會。他個人偏好君主制,但他並沒有把「反對民主」作為論證的核心。

**他的論證是以「同意」為基礎。**他認為人們出於對暴力死亡的恐懼,彼此訂立契約,授權給主權者。這是一種以平等個人的同意為起點的理論,常被視為現代自由主義的先驅之一,也因此有人說他是「專制的論據,自由主義的前提」。

**他仍保留個人的自衛權。**依他的說法,人民不能被要求殺死自己,面對威脅生命時可以抵抗。這是對「無限服從」的重要限制。

● 字源與思想史概念

**sovereign(主權者)**源自古法語 soverain,字根是拉丁文 super(在……之上)。**Leviathan(利維坦)**是《舊約聖經》中的海怪(見《約伯記》與《詩篇》),霍布斯以此比喻強大的國家。**covenant(契約)**源自古法語 covenir,拉丁文 convenire(聚合、同意)。**demagogue(煽動者)**由希臘文 dēmos(人民)加 agōgos(引導者)構成,字面是「引導人民者」,原為中性,後來帶有貶意。**authoritarian(威權的)**源自拉丁文 auctoritas(權威),是二十世紀才流行的政治學詞彙。

霍布斯(1588–1679)經歷英國內戰(1642–1651),在《利維坦》(1651)中主張:人在「自然狀態」中處於人人相互為敵的狀態,生活「孤獨、貧窮、齷齪、殘忍而短暫」,所以必須建立一個強大的主權者來維持和平。他早年(1629)翻譯了修昔底德的《伯羅奔尼撒戰爭史》,據說他對雅典民主與煽動者的觀察,影響了他的政治看法。

核心概念:

**Social contract(社會契約):**人們同意把權力交給主權者,以換取安全。

**Indivisible sovereignty(不可分割的主權):**霍布斯認為主權若被分割,就會引發內戰。

**Right of self-preservation(自我保存權):**即使在主權之下,人仍保留保護生命的權利。

同源與核心詞彙:sovereign(主權者)、covenant(契約)、state of nature(自然狀態)、demagogue(煽動者)、authoritarian(威權的)、consent(同意)

● 全新例句(127 字長句)

Rarely has a political philosopher been so often condemned as an apologist for tyranny as Thomas Hobbes, who, having watched civil war tear England apart and having translated Thucydides' warnings about demagogues, argued in Leviathan in 1651 that peace requires a single sovereign power, undivided and answerable to none of its subjects, yet the charge is only half fair, for the sovereign he described, though he preferred a king, could be an assembly, drew its authority from the consent of equal individuals who surrendered their rights to escape the fear of violent death, and left subjects, he held, the right to resist when their lives were threatened, so that what he distrusted was less democracy as such than divided authority and the persuasive speech of ambitious men.

● 排列為比較容易閱讀的方式

Rarely has a political philosopher been so often condemned

　as an apologist for tyranny

　as Thomas Hobbes,

who,

　having watched civil war tear England apart

　and having translated Thucydides' warnings about demagogues,

argued in Leviathan in 1651

　that peace requires a single sovereign power,

　　undivided

　　and answerable to none of its subjects,

yet the charge is only half fair,

for the sovereign he described,

　though he preferred a king,

could be an assembly,

drew its authority from the consent of equal individuals

　who surrendered their rights

　to escape the fear of violent death,

and left subjects, he held,

　the right to resist

　when their lives were threatened,

so that what he distrusted

was less democracy as such

　than divided authority

　and the persuasive speech of ambitious men.

● 分解為原初的短小句

A political philosopher has rarely been so often condemned as an apologist for tyranny as Thomas Hobbes.

(Rarely has...倒裝的還原;so...as 表比較。)

Hobbes watched civil war tear England apart.

(having watched 的還原;watch + 受詞 + 原形動詞。)

Hobbes translated Thucydides' warnings about demagogues.

(having translated 的還原。)

Hobbes argued in Leviathan in 1651 that peace requires a single sovereign power.

(who 子句的主幹。)

The sovereign power is undivided.

(後置形容詞的還原。)

The sovereign power is answerable to none of its subjects.

(第二個後置形容詞片語。)

The charge is only half fair.

(yet 子句的主幹。)

The sovereign could be an assembly.

(for 子句,第一項;though 子句插入。)

Hobbes preferred a king.

(though 子句的還原。)

The sovereign drew its authority from the consent of equal individuals.

(第二項。)

The individuals surrendered their rights to escape the fear of violent death.

(who 子句的還原。)

The sovereign left subjects the right to resist.

(第三項;leave + 雙受詞。)

Hobbes held this.

(he held 插入語的還原。)

Subjects' lives were threatened.

(when 子句的被動還原。)

Hobbes distrusted divided authority and the persuasive speech of ambitious men.

(what 子句的還原。)

He did not distrust democracy as such.

(less...than 對比的還原。)

● 全新文法解析

1. Rarely has + 主詞 + p.p.(否定副詞倒裝)與 so...as 比較

句型:Rarely + has + 主詞 + been + so often + p.p. + as + 名詞 + as + 人名

作用:Rarely 放句首引起倒裝,把「很少有哲學家像霍布斯那樣常被指為暴政辯護者」的意思強調出來。so often...as 是同等比較的否定轉化,as...as 兩個 as 都要保留。

關鍵詞彙:rarely(很少)、condemn(譴責)、apologist(辯護者)、tyranny(暴政)

2. who 子句:兩個 having p.p. 並列加主要動詞 argued

句型:人名, who, having + p.p. + 受詞 + 補語 and having + p.p. + 受詞, + argued + that 子句, + 後置形容詞片語

作用:兩個完成式分詞構句並列,說明霍布斯的經歷,插在 who 與 argued 之間。having watched civil war tear England apart 中 watch + 受詞 + 原形動詞。undivided and answerable to none... 兩個後置形容詞修飾 power。

關鍵詞彙:watch + 受詞 + 原形動詞(眼見……發生)、demagogue(煽動者)、undivided(不可分割的)

3. yet 轉折加 for 子句,內含 though 插入與三個並列動詞

句型:yet + 主詞 + is + 形容詞, for + 主詞 + he described, though + 子句, + could be... , drew..., and left...

作用:yet 引出對批評的修正。for 解釋理由。the sovereign he described 省略了關係代名詞 that,that 是 described 的受詞。though he preferred a king 插入,承認他偏好君主。三個動詞並列(could be、drew、left),共用主詞 the sovereign。

關鍵詞彙:yet(然而)、assembly(議會)、authority(權威)、consent(同意)

4. leave + 雙受詞,內含 he held 插入與 when 子句

句型:left + 受詞 A, he held, + 受詞 B + when + 主詞 + were + p.p.

作用:left subjects the right to resist 是 leave + 雙受詞。he held 是插入語,表示這是霍布斯的主張。the right to resist 的 to resist 是後置不定詞。when 子句為被動,說明條件。

關鍵詞彙:leave(留給)、resist(抵抗)、threaten(威脅)

5. so that + what 子句作主詞 + was less A than B

句型:so that + what + 主詞 + distrusted + was less + 名詞 + than + 名詞 A and 名詞 B

作用:what he distrusted 是名詞子句作主詞,動詞 was 要等它結束才出現。less A than B 表「與其說是 A,不如說是 B」,把「民主本身」與「分裂的權威與野心家的說服」對比,是全句的結論。

關鍵詞彙:distrust(不信任)、as such(本身)、persuasive(有說服力的)、ambitious(有野心的)

● 參考翻譯

很少有政治哲學家像霍布斯那樣,常被指為暴政的辯護者。他目睹內戰把英格蘭撕裂,又翻譯過修昔底德關於煽動者的警告,在 1651 年的《利維坦》中主張,和平需要一個單一、不可分割、不對其臣民負責的主權者。然而這項指控只有一半公平,因為他所描述的主權者(儘管他偏好君主)可以是議會,其權威來自平等個人的同意(他們為了擺脫對暴力死亡的恐懼而讓渡權利),而且他認為,當人民的生命受到威脅時,他們仍保有抵抗的權利。因此,他不信任的,與其說是民主本身,不如說是分裂的權威,與野心家的說服性言辭。

● 逆向工程(請嘗試不看原文,還原長句)

A political philosopher has rarely been so often condemned as an apologist for tyranny as Thomas Hobbes.

Hobbes watched civil war tear England apart.

Hobbes translated Thucydides' warnings about demagogues.

Hobbes argued in Leviathan in 1651 that peace requires a single sovereign power.

The sovereign power is undivided.

The sovereign power is answerable to none of its subjects.

The charge is only half fair.

The sovereign could be an assembly.

Hobbes preferred a king.

The sovereign drew its authority from the consent of equal individuals.

The individuals surrendered their rights to escape the fear of violent death.

The sovereign left subjects the right to resist.

Hobbes held this.

Subjects' lives were threatened.

Hobbes distrusted divided authority and the persuasive speech of ambitious men.

He did not distrust democracy as such.

對照完整句子:見上方「全新例句」。

**補充說明:**全句已用程式逐字核算為 127 字。本篇改用「Rarely has 倒裝加 so...as 比較、who 加雙 having p.p. 加後置形容詞、yet 加 for 加 though 插入加三動詞並列、leave + 雙受詞加 he held 插入、so that 加 what 子句加 less A than B」,主題與句型和前面各篇不重複。

**「平等個人的同意」:**霍布斯確實從平等的自然狀態出發,論證主權來自契約授權(《利維坦》第 17、18 章),但這個「同意」是否真正「自由」,尤其是被征服者的同意,常受批評。句中 the consent of equal individuals 是概括。

**「主權者可以是議會」:**霍布斯在《利維坦》第 19 章列出三種政體(君主制、貴族制、民主制),承認民主制(人民大會)也可擔任主權者,但他偏好君主制,理由是君主的利益與國家較易一致,且意見不易分裂。我憑記憶,請核對。

**抵抗權:**他認為人不能被約束去傷害自己、放棄生命,所以面臨處決時有權抵抗;這項權利的範圍與限制,學界有爭論,句中只寫「生命受威脅時」。

**不信任什麼:**他批評的包括權力分立(他把它視為內戰的根源)、利用口才煽動群眾的人(《利維坦》第 25 章「論勸告」及《論公民》中有相關論述),但說他「不信任民主本身」,學界有不同看法;句中以 less...than 表示「與其說是」,是詮釋,不是定論。

**翻譯修昔底德:**1629 年出版,常被用來說明他對雅典民主與煽動者的看法,但這個影響多大,學者意見不一,所以句中只寫「翻譯了有關煽動者的警告」,沒有說「因此得到結論」。

**「answerable to none of its subjects」:**霍布斯的主權者不受民法約束,也不與臣民訂立契約,但仍須對上帝負責(依自然法),句中以 none of its subjects 限定範圍。

**「威權」一詞:**英文 authoritarian 是二十世紀的政治學詞彙,與霍布斯所處的十七世紀不同,句中改用 apologist for tyranny,借用批評者的說法,而不是替他貼標籤。

**其他解讀:**有學者(如史金納)強調霍布斯的修辭與時代背景;也有人(如施特勞斯)強調他的現代性;也有人把他視為自由主義與威權主義的共同祖先。

**「孤獨、貧窮、齷齪、殘忍而短暫」:**出自《利維坦》第 13章。