Crucial Evidence: Hobbes on Contractual Obligation

Journal of the Philosophy of History 7 (1):106-135 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The author introduces the notions of crucial argument and crucial evidence in the philosophy of intellectual history (broadly construed, including the history of political thought). He will use these concepts and take sides in an important controversy in Hobbes studies, namely whether Hobbes holds a prudential or a deontological theory of contractual obligation. Though there is textual evidence for both readings, he will argue that there is especially relevant evidence - crucial evidence - for interpreting Hobbes's account in a deontological fashion

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,322

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-09-24

Downloads
106 (#161,760)

6 months
3 (#1,023,809)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Una nueva edición del Leviatán.Luciano Venezia - 2014 - Revista Latinoamericana de Filosofia 40 (1):93-97.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Toxin Puzzle.Gregory S. Kavka - 1983 - Analysis 43 (1):33-36.
Scientific realism.Michael Devitt - 2005 - In Frank Jackson & Michael Smith (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Contemporary Philosophy. Oxford University Press.
Scientific Realism.Michael Devitt - 2005 - In Patrick Greenough & Michael P. Lynch (eds.), Truth and Realism. Clarendon Press.
A Puzzle About Hobbes on Self‐Defense.Claire Finkelstein - 2001 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 82 (3-4):332-361.
Liberty and Contractual Obligation in Hobbes.Daniel Eggers - 2009 - Hobbes Studies 22 (1):70-103.

Add more references