世界名著典藏係列：社會契約論（英文全本） epub pdf mobi txt 電子書下載 2024

☆☆☆☆☆
簡體網頁||繁體網頁

[法] 盧梭著，[英] 科爾譯

下載链接在页面底部

點擊這裡下載

facebook linkedin mastodon messenger pinterest reddit telegram twitter viber vkontakte whatsapp 複製鏈接

想要找書就要到靜思書屋

book.tinynews.org

立刻按 ctrl+D收藏本頁

你會得到大驚喜!!

發表於2024-04-27

商品介绍

齣版社：世界圖書齣版公司

ISBN：9787510023682

版次：1

商品編碼：10405845

包裝：精裝

叢書名：世界名著典藏係列

開本：32開

齣版時間：2010-10-01

用紙：膠版紙

頁數：89

正文語種：英文

世界名著典藏係列：社會契約論（英文全本） epub pdf mobi txt 電子書下載 2024

类似图書點擊查看全場最低價

書籍描述

編輯推薦

　　在中國現代化的進程中，西方哲學社會科學始終是最重要的思想資源。然而，一個令人遺憾的事實是，自19 世紀末20 世紀初“西學東漸”起，國人對於西學的瞭解，基本上是憑藉零星的翻譯和介紹，認真地去讀原著的人少之又少。這些中譯本，囿於譯者的眼光和水平，往往與原著齣入頗大。因此，國人談論西學的情景，很像是瞎子摸象，雖然各執一詞，卻皆不得要領。
　　當然，100年間，還是齣現瞭一批學貫中西的學者，但其中肯花工夫於譯業的太少。許多年積纍下來，我們在這個領域擁有的優質中譯本依然十分有限。而且，再好的譯本，畢竟與原著隔瞭一層。倘若我們的學術界始終主要依靠中譯本去瞭解和研究西學，我們的西學水平就永遠不能擺脫可憐的境況。
　　好在現在有瞭改變這種境況的條件。在當今全球化時代，隨著國門進一步開放，中外交流日漸增多，人們普遍重視英語學習，國人中尤其年輕人中具備閱讀英文原著能力的人越來越多瞭。在這種形勢下，本叢書應運而生。編輯者的計劃是，選擇西方哲學、人文學科、社會科學領域的最基本的英文經典原著，分批陸續齣版，為有誌者提供價廉的版本和閱讀的便利。我贊賞這樣的善舉，並且相信，這也是為學術界做的一件益事。
　　周國平
　　2010年2月24日

內容簡介

　　《世界名著典藏係列：社會契約論（英文全本）》是全英文版。如果要評定影響人類曆史的一百部經典，盧梭的《世界名著典藏係列：社會契約論（英文全本）》必定榜上有名；如果隻評定十部這樣的經典，《世界名著典藏係列：社會契約論（英文全本）》同樣不會名落孫山。處在革命時代的各國資産階級把它當作福音書，天賦人權的思想至今仍然深刻地影響著這個世界。

1 BOOK Ⅰ
1.1 THE SUBJECT OF THE FIRST BOOK
1.2 THE FIRST SOCIETIES
1.3 THE RIGHT OF THE STRONGEST
1.4 SLAVERY
1.5 THAT WE MUST ALWAYS GO BACK TO A FIRST CONVENTION
1.6 THE SOCIAL COMPACT
1.7 THE SOVEREIGN
1.8 THE CIVIL STATE
1.9 REAL PROPERTY

BOOK Ⅱ
2.1 THAT SOVEREIGNTY IS INALIENABLE
2.2 THAT SOVEREIGNTY IS INDIVISIBLE
2.3 WHETHER THE GENERAL WILL IS FALLIBLE
2.4 THE LIMITS OF THE SOVEREIGN POWER
2.5 THE RIGHT OF LIFE AND DEATH
2.6 LAW
2.7 THE LEGISLATOR
2.8 THE PEOPLE
2.9 THE PEOPLE （continued）
2.10 THE PEOPLE （continued）
2.11 THE VARIOUS SYSTEMS OF LEGISLATION
2.12 THE DIVISION OF THE LAWS

BOOK Ⅲ
3.1 GOVERNMENT IN GENERAL
3.2 THE CONSTITUENT PRINCIPLE IN THE VARIOUS FORMS OF GOVERNMENT
3.3 THE DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTS
3.4 DEMOCRACY
3.5 ARISTOCRACY
3.6 MONARCHY
3.7 MIXED GOVERNMENTS
3.8 THAT ALL FORMS OF GOVERNMENT DO NOT SUIT ALL COUNTRIES
3.9 THE MARKS OF A GOOD GOVERNMENT
3.10 THE ABUSE OF GOVERNMENT AND ITS TENDENCY TO DEGENERATE
3.11 THE DEATH OF THE BODY POLITIC
3.12 HOW THE SOVEREIGN AUTHORITY MAINTAINS ITSELF
3.13 HOW THE SOVEREIGN AUTHORITY MAINTAINS ITSELF （continued）
3.14 HOW THE SOVEREIGN AUTHORITY MAINTAINS ITSELF （continued）
3.15 DEPUTIES OR REPRESENTATIVES
3.16 THAT THE INSTITUTION OF GOVERNMENT IS NOT A CONTRACT
3.17 THE INSTITUTION OF GOVERNMENT
3.18 HOW TO CHECK THE USURPATIONS OF GOVERNMENT

BOOK Ⅳ
4.1 THAT THE GENERAL WILL IS INDESTRUCTIBLE
4.2 VOTING
4.3 ELECTIONS
4.4 THE ROMAN COMITIA
4.5 THE TRIBUNATE
4.6 THE DICTATORSHIP
4.7 THE CENSORSHIP
4.8 CIVIL RELIGION
4.9 CONCLUSION

精彩書摘

　　But， as men cannot engender new forces， but only unite and direct existing ones， they have no other means of preserving themselves than the formation， by aggregation， of a sum of forces great enough to overcome the resistance. These they have to bring into play by means of a single motive power， and cause to act in concert.
　　This sum of forces can arise only where several persons come together： but， as the force and liberty of each man are the chief instruments of his self-preservation， how can he pledge them without harming his own interests， and neglecting the care he owes to himself？ This difficulty， in its bearing on my present subject， may be stated in the following terms：
　　"The problem is to find a form of association which will defend and protect with the whole common force the person and goods of each associate， and inwhich each， while uniting himself with all， may still obey himself alone， and remain as free as before." This is the fundamental problem of which the Social Contract provides the solution.
　　The clauses of this contract are so determined by the nature of the act that the slightest modification would make them vain and ineffective; so that， although they have perhaps never been formally set forth， they are everywhere the same and everywhere tacitly admitted and recognised， until， on the violation of the social compact， each regains his original rights and resumes his natural liberty， while losing the conventional liberty in favour of which he renounced it.
　　These clauses， properly understood， may be reduced to one - the total alienation of each associate， together with all his rights， to the whole community; for， in the first place， as each gives himself absolutely， the conditions are the same for all; and， this being so， no one has any interest in making them burdensome to others.
　　Moreover， the alienation being without reserve， the union is as perfect as it can be， and no associate has anything more to demand： for， if the individuals retained certain rights， as there would be no common superior to decide between them and the public， each， being on one point his own judge， would ask to be so on all; the state of nature would thus continue， and the association would necessarily become inoperative or tyrannical.
　　Finally， each man， in giving himself to all， gives himself to nobody; and as there is no associate over whom he does not acquire the same right as he yields others over himself， he gains an equivalent for everything he loses， and an increase of force for the preservation of what he has.
　　If then we discard from the social compact what is not of its essence， we shall find that it reduces itself to the following terms：
　　"Each of us puts his person， and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will， and， in our corporate capacity， we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole."
　　At once， in place of the individual personality of each contracting party， this act of association creates a moral and collective body， composed of as many members as the assembly contains votes， and receiving from this act its unity， its common identity， its life and its will. This public person， so formed by the union of all other persons formerly took the name of city， and now takes that of Republic or body politic; it is called by its members State when passive. Sovereign when active， and Power when compared with others like itself. Those who are associated in it take collectively the name of people， and severally are called citizens， as sharing in the sovereign power， and subjects， as being under the laws of the State. But these terms are often confused and taken one for another： it is enough to know how to distinguish them when they are being used with precision.
　　1.7 THE SOVEREIGN
　　THIS formula shows us that the act of association comprises a mutual under-taking between the public and the individuals， and that each individual， in making a contract， as we may say， with himself， is bound in a double capacity; as a member of the Sovereign he is bound to the individuals， and as a member of the State to the Sovereign. But the maxim of civil right， that no one is bound by undertakings made to himself， does not apply in this case; for there is a great difference between incurring an obligation to yourself and incurring gone to a whole of which you form a part.
　　Attention must further be called to the fact that public deliberation， while competent to bind all the subjects to the Sovereign， because of the two different capacities in which each of them may be regarded， cannot， for the opposite reason， bind the Sovereign to itself; and that it is consequently against the nature of the body politic for the Sovereign to impose on itself a law which it cannot infringe. Being able to regard itself in only one capacity， it is in the position of an individual who makes a contract with himself; and this makes it clear that there neither is nor can be any kind of fundamental law binding on the body of the people - not even the social contract itself. This does not mean that the body politic cannot enter into undertakings with others， provided the contract is not infringed by them; for in relation to what is external to it， it becomes a simple being， an individual.
　　But the body politic or the Sovereign， drawing its being wholly from the sanctity of the contract， can never bind itself， even to an outsider， to do anything derogatory to the original act， for instance， to alienate any part of itself， or to submit to another Sovereign. Violation of the act by which it exists would be self-annihilation; and that which is itself nothing can create nothing.
　　As soon as this multitude is so united in one body， it is impossible to offend against one of the members without attacking the body， and still more to offend against the body without the members resenting it. Duty and interest therefore equally oblige the two contracting parties to give each other help; and the same men should seek to combine， in their double capacity， all the advantages dependent upon that capacity.
　　……