David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Hobbes Studies 25 (1):66-90 (2012)
Both Hobbes and Kant tackle the issue of natural right in a radical and controversial way. They both present systematic, secular theories of natural law in a highly religious age. Whereas Hobbes transforms natural right by placing the rational individual bent on self-preservation at the centre of political philosophy, Kant transforms natural right by putting the metaphysical presuppositions of his critical philosophy at the heart of his reasoning on politics. Neither attempts to provide an orthodox view of natural right as directly or indirectly derived from God's commands, although subsequent to their philosophical deduction as natural rights or laws both do not entirely repudiate the idea that these rights or laws can be portrayed as having divine support
|Keywords||Hobbes Kant natural law|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Henrik Syse (2007). Natural Law, Religion, and Rights: An Exploration of the Relationship Between Natural Law and Natural Rights, with Special Emphasis on the Teachings of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. St. Augustine's Press.
Gabriella Slomp (2007). Kant Against Hobbes: Reasoning and Rhetoric. Journal of Moral Philosophy 4 (2):207-222.
Michael Cuffaro (2011). On Thomas Hobbes's Fallible Natural Law Theory. History of Philosophy Quarterly 28 (2):175-190.
Helen Thornton (2005). State of Nature or Eden?: Thomas Hobbes and His Contemporaries on the Natural Condition of Human Beings. University of Rochester Press.
Daniel Chernilo (2013). The Natural Law Foundations of Modern Social Theory: A Quest for Universalism. Cambridge University Press.
C. Fred Alford (2010). Narrative, Nature, and the Natural Law: From Aquinas to International Human Rights. Palgrave Macmillan.
Richard Tuck (1979). Natural Rights Theories: Their Origin and Development. Cambridge University Press.
Francis Oakley (2005). Natural Law, Laws of Nature, Natural Rights: Continuity and Discontinuity in the History of Ideas. Continuum.
Michael Zuckert (2001). Natural Law, Natural Rights, and Classical Liberalism: On Montesquieu's Critique of Hobbes. Social Philosophy and Policy 18 (1):227-251.
Eleanor Curran (2002). Hobbes's Theory of Rights – a Modern Interest Theory. Journal of Ethics 6 (1):63-86.
Eleanor Curran (2012). Hobbes on Equality: Context, Rhetoric, Argument. Hobbes Studies 25 (2):166-187.
Eleanor Curran (2007). Reclaiming the Rights of the Hobbesian Subject. Palgrave Macmillan.
Paul Guyer (2012). Hobbes Is of the Opposite Opinion Kant and Hobbes on the Three Authorities in the State. Hobbes Studies 25 (1):91-119.
Giuseppe Mario Saccone (1999). Hobbes' Dialogue of the Common Laws and the Difference Between "Natural" and "Civil Philosophy". Hobbes Studies 12 (1):3-25.
Norberto Bobbio (1993). Thomas Hobbes and the Natural Law Tradition. University of Chicago Press.
Added to index2012-06-16
Total downloads10 ( #118,353 of 1,006,103 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,735 of 1,006,103 )
How can I increase my downloads?