下载文档原格式
霍布斯托马斯·霍布斯（Thomas Hobbes，1588—1679）出生在英国南部威尔特郡的马尔麦斯堡一位乡村牧师家庭，因父亲离家出走，从小由叔父抚养。
15岁考入牛津大学，攻读古希腊罗马哲学和经院哲学。
1608年大学毕业，不久受聘于卡文迪什男爵，成为他的儿子的家庭教师，从此与这个贵族之家建立了终身的联系。
在培根遭贬隐居时，他曾给培根当过秘书，并且帮助他将其作品译成拉丁语。
他曾三次陪他的学生游历欧洲大陆各国，了解到了开普勒和伽利略的新的科学成果，并亲自拜访过伽利略，和他讨论了有关力学的问题，同时还结识了伽森狄和马勒伯朗士等著名哲学家。
1640年英国内战爆发，霍布斯随卡文迪什家族逃到巴黎避难。
1646—1647年霍布斯曾经给当时流亡巴黎的英国威尔士亲王（即后来的查理二世）当数学老师。
1648年在巴黎会见了笛卡尔。
1651年底，霍布斯经过11年的流亡生活之后，回到了克伦威尔统治下的英国，同年他在伦敦发表了名著《利维坦》。
1660年斯图亚特王朝复辟之后，霍布斯又宣布效忠国王，但由于他的专制主义立场同样危及了贵族们的利益而受到了王党的迫害，同时亦因为无神论的倾向遭到了教会的攻击。
所有这一切使晚年的霍布斯避政治如水火，将兴趣转向了文学和历史，在87岁高龄时还把荷马史诗翻译成英文。
他的主要哲学著作有：《利维坦》、《论物体》和《论公民》。
虽然霍布斯哲学以经验论为基本原则，但是也容纳了其他不同的因素，因而并不是典型的经验论。
与培根相比，霍布斯具有丰富的科学知识，他依据并概括了伽利略的机械力学成果，也曾受到笛卡尔哲学的影响，并且非常重视几何学的方法（通常这是唯理论的基本特征），建立了一个典型的机械唯物主义体系。
由于身处英国资产阶级革命时期，霍布斯非常关注政治问题，在其哲学思想中，他的政治哲学对后世影响最大，他自己也认为这一方面是他最大的贡献。
按照霍布斯的观点，哲学是关于物体的科学。
物体可以分为两大类：一类是自然物体，它是自然的作品；一类是人工物体，即国家，它是由人们的意志和契约造成的。
霍布斯一、人物简介托马斯•霍布斯（Hobbes，Thomas），英国政治家、思想家、哲学家。
生于英国威尔特省一牧师家庭，早年就学于牛津大学，后做过贵族家庭教师，游历欧洲大陆。
他创立了机械唯物主义的完整体系，认为宇宙是所有机械地运动着的广延物体的总和。
他继承了F.培根的唯物主义经验论的观点，但把逻辑的思维看作是观念的加或减的机械运算，认为几何学和力学是科学思维的理想楷模。
他力图以机械运动原理解释人的情感、欲望，从中寻求社会动乱和安宁的根源。
他提出“自然状态”和国家起源说，认为国家是人们为了遵守“自然法”而订立契约所形成的，是一部人造的机器人，反对君权神授，主张君主专制。
他把罗马教皇比作魔王，僧侣比作群鬼，但主张利用“国教”来管束人民，维护“秩序”。
著有《论物体》、《利维坦》、《论人》、《论社会》、《对笛卡尔形而上学的沉思的第三组诘难》等。
二、生平与著述霍布斯于1588年4月5日出生于英国南部的维斯堡镇。
他的母亲是一个普通的自耕农家庭的女儿。
父亲是当地的乡村牧师，性格暴躁而又愚蠢无知。
霍布斯出生不久，他的父亲便在一次和同事的争斗后弃家远遁了。
霍布斯早年的抚养和教育都是由他的叔父资助的，四岁时被送到当地的教会小学读书，后又转到私立学校上学。
1603年不到十五岁的霍布斯就以优异的成绩进入牛津大学麦克多伦学院学文科。
当时的牛津大学给学生灌输的是经院哲学，学生们只能死记硬背三段论公式。
霍布斯后来说，科学在牛津根本没有地位，数学被当作魔术而加以禁止。
他对学校讲授的课程不感兴趣，经常跑到附近的书店就浏览地图和游记。
他觉得这比枯燥的公式要有趣得多。
尽管霍布斯对学校中所教的东西感到厌恶，但是，他还是以优异的成绩修完了课程，并取得了文学学士的学位。
1608年霍布斯大学毕业后，留校讲授了一年逻辑学。
随后，他受聘为卡文迪什（William Cavendish）男爵的儿子当家庭教师。
从此，霍布斯便和这个贵族家庭建立了终生的联系。
來源：中國大百科全書智慧藏【漢語拼音】Huobusi【中文詞條】霍布斯﹐T.【外文詞條】Thomas Hobbes (1588～1679)【作 者】章海山英國機械唯物主義哲學家。
生平與著作 霍布斯 1588年4月5日出生於英國威爾特省馬爾曼斯貝爾(Malmesbury )附近的堆特堡鎮的一個牧師家庭。
14歲進牛津大學學習﹐1608年受聘為貴族家庭的家庭教師。
1610～1637年﹐先後 3次陪同他的學生訪問歐洲大陸﹐在義大利結識了物理學家﹑天文學家伽利略﹐ G. 。
1621～1626年期間﹐與英國哲學家培根﹐ F. 交往甚密。
1640年﹐在英國內戰爆發前夕﹐霍布斯流亡法國﹐在巴黎﹐他批評了法國哲學家笛卡爾﹐ R. 的二元論和天賦觀念論。
在反駮笛卡爾哲學的論戰中﹐霍布斯和法國哲學家伽森狄﹐ P. 成了同盟者﹐結為好友。
1646年﹐霍布斯受聘為流亡法國的英國王子(後來的查理二世國王)的數學教師。
1651年返回O. 克倫威爾(1599～1658)統治下的英國。
同年在倫敦發表了名著《利維坦》﹐系統地闡述了關於專制主義的國家學說﹐適應了克倫威爾統治的需要。
1655年和1658年﹐霍布斯相繼發表了《論物體》和《論人》﹐從而實現了他運用機械力學的觀點和幾何學的方法構造一個包括論物體﹑論人和論國家 3部分的哲學體系的願望。
霍布斯回國後﹐同布朗霍爾主教展開了關於自由和必然問題的論戰﹐批評了意志自由論﹐而後又和牛津大學的教授們進行了關於數學問題的長達20年之久的爭論。
1660年斯圖亞特王朝復辟後﹐霍布斯一方面受到他的學生﹑國王查理二世的禮遇﹐同時又遭到教會和貴族方面的攻擊和迫害。
1679年12月 4日去世。
他的著作還有《論公民》﹑《論社會》﹑《對笛卡爾形而上學的沉思的第三組詰難》等。
論物體 “物體”是霍布斯哲學體系的基本範疇。
在《論物體》中﹐霍布斯指出﹐“物體是不依賴於我們思想的東西﹐與空間的某個部分相合或具有同樣的廣延”。
诗人霍布斯相关资料介绍托马斯;霍布斯(英语：Thomas Hobbes，1588年4月5日-1679年12月4日)，是英国的政治哲学家，创立了机械唯物主义的完整体系，认为宇宙是所有机械地运动着的广延物体的总和。
关于霍夫斯你还了解哪些资料?下面是为你搜集到的相关内容，希望对你有所帮助。
霍布斯生平简介霍布斯自小遍览古典著作，14时岁便翻译了欧里庇得斯的《美狄亚》，15 岁时进入牛津大学学习经院派逻辑和亚里士多德的哲学。
然而，在晚年时，他却认为这段大学经历没有给他带来任何收益，因为经院派逻辑和亚里士多德哲学成了他憎恶的怪物。
1610 年，22 岁的霍布斯担任哈德威克男爵之子，也就是后来的德文郡公爵威廉的家庭教师。
这使得他得以跟随威廉周游世界。
就在这时，霍布斯了解到了开普勒和伽利略，这两个人和他们的学说影响了霍布斯的一生。
1636 年，霍布斯拜访了伽利略。
在巴黎时，霍布斯得到笛卡儿等许多知名科学家的欢迎。
但是，他在1651 年发表的《利维坦》给他招来了灾难;《利维坦》宣扬的理性主义惹恼了在法国的英国流亡者，而对旧教的尖锐抨击又得罪了法国政府。
霍布斯只好再次逃回英国，并退出一切政治活动。
但毋庸置疑，霍布斯的声望主要是通过《利维坦》获得的。
在这本书的开篇，他就表示自己信仰彻底唯物论。
他认为，生命是四肢的运动，机器人的生命是人造的。
国家，即利维坦，是人的技巧创造的，是一个模造的人，主权是它的灵魂。
在结尾部分，霍布斯说，这本书有趣而易读，希望主权者也可以看到这本书，以便成为一个绝对的主权者。
霍布斯的一生是忙碌的一生。
他曾与布兰霍尔主教就自由意志问题展开论战;他幻想自己发现了怎样“化圆为方”，并与牛津大学的几何学教授瓦里斯就此展开辩论;王政复辟时期，霍布斯受到王党人士的抬举，他的肖像甚至被国王挂在了自己的寝宫内。
霍布斯重要著作1629.翻译修昔底德的《伯罗奔尼撒战争史》1650.TheElementsofLaw,NaturalandPolitical,写于1640年HumanNature,ortheFundamentalElementsofPolicieeCorporePolitico1651-8.Elementaphilosophica1642.DeCive(拉丁文)1651.PhilosophicalRudimentsconcerningGovernmentand Society(DeCive的英文译本)1655.DeCorpore(拉丁文)1656.DeCorpore(英文翻译);1658.DeHomine(拉丁文)1651.利维坦，或教会国家和市民国家的实质、形式和权力.Online.1656.QuestionsconcerningLiberty,NecessityandChance1668.利维坦的拉丁文翻译1675.翻译荷马的奥德赛和伊利亚特为英文1681.死后出版的Behemoth,orTheLongParliament(写于1668年).。
霍布斯的政治哲学与绝对主义托马斯·霍布斯（Thomas Hobbes）是17世纪英国最重要的哲学家之一，被誉为西方哲学史上最重要的政治哲学家之一。
他的政治哲学强调国家的绝对权威和统治者的绝对权力，主张社会需要一种强有力的政治结构来实现秩序与稳定。
在霍布斯的政治哲学中，国家是生存的根本，国王则是国家的护卫者、统治者、最高法官。
霍布斯的政治哲学对现代政治学的发展起到了关键作用，同时也为历史上绝对主义君主制的形成提供了理论基础。
霍布斯的政治哲学起源于他的自然状态理论。
在霍布斯看来，自然状态下的人类是一群“自私的野兽”，他们缺乏集体意识、互相合作以及传统的道德、法律体系。
这种自私和“战争状态”不仅导致了暴力和混乱，也使人们的生存受到了威胁。
为了避免“战争状态”，人们必须通过一种“社会契约”形成政治结构，建立起国家与政府，由一个最高的统治者来统治全国。
在霍布斯看来，由于人性的自私与脆弱，国家结构必须具有强有力的中央掌控，以保证社会安全和秩序。
政府应该按照王权的原则来行使权力，统治者具有不可削减的权威和权力。
霍布斯认为，国家权力的合法性来自于社会契约，而权力的合法运用必须是无限的，不受困扰和监管。
国王在保持和平和秩序方面，具有近乎无限的权力。
这种思想体系对当时的英国政治形势产生了非常重要的影响。
17世纪英国著名的内战（英国内战）已经结束，政治矛盾与混乱也扰乱了整个国家。
这时，绝对主义风潮正从欧洲大陆传入英国，并且逐渐占据了主导地位。
霍布斯为这种思想系统提供了重要的哲学依据，为绝对主义的扩张创造了社会和政治舞台。
但霍布斯所提倡的这种绝对主义体系并不是没有缺陷的。
他的观点很容易被政府当成控制民众的工具，而政府的权力也有可能被滥用。
此外，霍布斯的政治哲学在某种程度上忽略了人们的个性和自由意志，将个体都归于国家，进一步加强了国家的控制力度，使人丧失了个人的自由和独立性。
结语总的来说，霍布斯的政治哲学在当时的英国应运而生，并为绝对主义的发展提供了理论基础。
人类的理解托马斯霍布斯的20句名言与社会契约人类的理解：托马斯·霍布斯的20句名言与社会契约托马斯·霍布斯(Thomas Hobbes,1588-1679)是17世纪英国著名的政治哲学家,他在著作《利维坦》中提出了社会契约论,阐述了人类自然状态下的生活以及建立政府的必要性。
以下是他20句富有哲理的名言,反映了他对人性和社会的独特见解。
人性论与社会契约1. "人的自然状态是战争状态,人对人是狼"。
这句话表达了霍布斯对人性的悲观看法,认为人天性自私,处于无序的混乱状态,必须通过社会契约建立政治权威来维护秩序。
2. "和平是美德,战争是必要"。
这说明了霍布斯认为和平状态是理想,但通过战争手段建立政治秩序也是不可或缺的。
3. "每个人都有权利使用自己的力量去保护自己的生命和肢体"。
这体现了人类固有的自我保护欲望,是建立社会契约的出发点。
4. "生存权是最基本的权利,任何人都不能剥夺"。
这涉及了人权理念,为社会契约的订立提供了依归。
5. "同意是人性中的一种主要因素"。
这说明建立社会契约需要公民自愿的同意和认同。
6. "建立国家意味着让多数人有权决定一切"。
这阐释了民主思想,为社会契约的内容提供了指引。
7. "不公正的和平不如公正的战争"。
这体现了霍布斯主张通过战争手段建立秩序的思想。
国家的起源与作用8. "国家是为了保护人民的生命和财产而建立"。
这说明了国家的功能和基本目标。
9. "政府存在的目的是维护公众利益,而不是统治者的私利"。
这提出了政府的责任和义务。
10. "只有经由合理同意而建立的政治权威才是正当的"。
这表明政治权力必须建立在公民自愿的基础之上。
11. "只有臣民放弃部分自由权,国家才能维系"。
5. Hobbes托马斯·霍布斯（Thomas Hobbes, 1588-1679），17世纪英国伟大的政治思想家。
就读于牛津大学，结识英国的本·琼生（Ben Johnson）和弗朗西斯·培根（Francis Bacon）、意大利的伽利略（Galileo Galilei）、法国的笛卡尔（Rene Descartes）等思想名家。
霍布斯深受修昔底德《伯罗奔尼撒战争史》及其现实主义思想的影响，成为第一个将其译成英文的学者。
贯穿于霍布斯一生的几大命运起落，几乎都与内乱和战争相连，因为他亲身经历了英国内战和欧洲大陆的三十年战争。
基于对社会动荡的敏感性和敏锐性，他试图去解释人和社会的本质，去发现政治的内在规律。
享有盛名的《利维坦》（Leviathan），就是这种努力的卓越表现。
霍布斯在书中写道，人类进入社会并组成国家之前，处于人人自危的普遍争斗的自然状态，人与人之间充满着自私自利、猜疑、恐惧、贪婪和残暴无情；在这种情况下，人的自然本性首先在于求得自保和生存，为此，个人出于对和平与安定生活的渴望，出于理性，相互订立契约，放弃个人的自然权利，将它交给一个集体，这个集体就拥有来源于所有个人意志的集体意志，它就成为主权者，亦即国家。
主权是绝对和至高无上的，也是不可分割和不可转让的。
霍布斯还将人与人之间的自然状态模式应用于国际关系，认为国际关系处于无政府状态，普遍的国际冲突或战争状态是它的根本特征。
在战争状态下，不存在任何道义，没有是非之分，也没有正义与非正义的区别。
一国为了安全，可以不择手段，连本身的承诺都可以背弃。
当然，出于国家利益的需要，主权国家可以根据理性而结盟，并推行均势外交。
霍布斯揭示的国际关系的无政府特征，极大了影响了20世纪的现实主义学派的思维。
本篇选自《利维坦》，探讨了人与人之间的自然状态以及自然状态下人的自然权利和道德限度。
Of the State of NatureNature has made men so equal, in the faculties of the body, and mind; as that though there be found one man sometimes manifestly stronger in body, or of quicker mind than another; yet when all is reckoned together, the difference between man, and man, is not so considerable, as that one man can thereupon claim to himself any benefit, to which another may not pretend, as well as he. For as to the strength of body, the weakest has strength enough to kill the strongest, either by secret machination, or by confederacy with others, that are in the same danger with himself.And as to the faculties of the mind, setting aside the arts grounded upon words, and especially that skill of proceeding upon general, and infallible rules, called science; which very few have, and but in few things; as being not a native faculty, born with us; nor attained, as prudence, while we look after somewhat else, I find yet a greater equality among men, than that of strength.1For prudence is but experience; which equal time, equally bestows on all men, in those things they equally apply themselves unto. That which may perhaps make such equality incredible, is but a vain conceit of one’s own wisdom, which almost all men think they have in a greater degree, than the vulgar; that is, than allmen but themselves, and a few others, whom, by fame, or for concurring with themselves, they approve. For such is the nature of men, that howsoever they may acknowledge many others to be more witty, or more eloquent, or more learned; yet they will hardly believe there be many so wise as themselv es; for they see their own wit at hand, and other men’s at a distance. But this proves rather that men are in that point equal, than unequal. For there is not ordinarily a greater sign of the equal distribution of anything, than that every man is contented with his share.From this equality of ability, arises equality of hope in the attaining of our ends. And therefore if any two men desire the same thing, which nevertheless they cannot both enjoy, they become enemies; and in the way to their end, which is principally their own conservation, and sometimes their delectation only, endeavor to destroy or subdue one another. And from hence it comes to pass that where an invader has no more to fear than another man’s single power; if one plant, sow, build, or possess a convenient seat, others may probably be expected to come prepared with forces united to dispossess and deprive him, not only of the fruit of his labor, but also of his life or liberty. And the invader again is in the like danger of another.And from this diffidence of one another there is no way for any man to secure himself, so reasonable as anticipation—that is, by force or wiles to master the persons of all men he can, so long till he see no other power great enough to endanger him; and this is no more than his own conservation requires, and is generally allowed. Also, because there be some that taking pleasure in contemplating their own power in the acts of conquest, which they pursue farther than their security requires, if others that otherwise would be glad to be at ease within modest bounds should not by invasion increase their power, they would not be able, long time, by standing only on their defense, to subsist. And by consequence, such augmentation of dominion over men being necessary to a man’s conservation, it ought to be allowed him.2Again, men have no pleasure, but on the contrary a great deal of grief, in keeping company where there is no power able to overawe them all. For every man looks that his companion should value him at the same rate he sets upon himself; and upon all signs of contempt or undervaluing naturally endeavors as far as he dares (which among them that have no common power to keep them in quiet is far enough to make them destroy each other), to extort a greater value from his contemners by damage and from others by the example.3So that in the nature of man we find three principal causes of quarrel: first, competition; secondly, diffidence; thirdly, glory.The first makes men invade for gain, the second for safety, and the third for reputation. The first use violence to make themselves masters of other men's persons, wives, children, and cattle; the second, to defend them; the third, for trifles, as a word, a smile, a differentopinion, and any other sign of undervalue, either direct in their persons or by reflection in their kindred, their friends, their nation, their profession, or their name.Hereby it is manifest that, during the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war, and such a war as is of every man against every man.4 For WAR consists not in battle only, or the act of fighting, but in a tract of time5 wherein the will to contend by battle is sufficiently known; and therefore the notion of time is to be considered in the nature of war as it is in the nature of weather. For as the nature of foul weather lies not in a shower or two of rain but in an inclination thereto of many days together, so the nature of war consists not in actual fighting but in the known disposition thereto during all the time is no assurance to the contrary. All other time is PEACE.Whatsoever, therefore, is consequent to a time of war where every man is enemy to every man, the same is consequent to the time wherein men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them with all. In such condition there is no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain: and consequently no culture of the earth; no navigation nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea; no commodious building; no instruments of moving and removing such things as require much force; no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society; and, which is worst of all, continual fear and danger of violent death; and the life of man solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.It may seem strange to some man that has not well weighed these things that nature should thus dissociate and render men apt to invade and destroy one another; and he may therefore, not trusting to this inference made from the passions, desire perhaps to have the same confirmed by experience. Let him therefore consider with himself—when taking a journey he arms himself and seeks to go well accompanied, when going to sleep he locks his doors, when even in his house he locks his chests, and this when he knows there be laws and public officers, armed, to revenge all injuries shall be done him—what opinion he has of his fellow subjects when he rides armed of his fellow citizens when he locks his doors, and of his children and servants when he locks his chests. Does he not there as much accuse mankind by his actions as I do by my words? But neither of us accuse man's nature in it. The desires and other passions of man are in themselves no sin. No more are the actions that proceed from those passions till they know a law that forbids them, which, till laws be made, they cannot know, nor can any law be made till they have agreed upon the person that shall make it.It may peradventure be thought there was never such a time nor condition of war as this, and I believe it was never generally so over all the world; but there are many places where they live so now. For the savage people in many places of America, except the government of small families, the concord whereof depends on natural lust6, have nogovernment at all and live at this day in that brutish manner as I said before. Howsoever, it may be perceived what manner of life there would be, where there were no common power to fear, by the manner of life, which men that have formerly lived under a peaceful government, use to degenerate into, in a civil war.But though there had never been any time wherein particular men were in a condition of war one against another, yet in all times kings and persons of sovereign authority, because of their independency, are in continual jealousies and in the state and posture of gladiators, having their weapons pointing and their eyes fixed on one another—that is, their forts, garrisons, and guns upon the frontiers of their kingdoms, and continual spies upon their neighbors—which is a posture of war. But because they uphold thereby the industry of their subjects, there does not follow from it that misery which accompanies the liberty of particular men.7To this war of every man against every man, this also is consequent: that nothing can be unjust. The notions of right and wrong, justice and injustice, have there no place. Where there is no common power, there is no law; where no law, no injustice. Force and fraud are in war the two cardinal virtues. Justice and injustice are none of the faculties neither of the body nor mind. If they were, they might be in a man that were alone in the world, as well as his senses and passions. They are qualities that relate to men in society, not in solitude. It is consequent also to the same condition that there be no property, no dominion, no Mine and Thine distinct; but only that to be every man's that he can get, and for so long as he can keep it. And thus much for the ill condition which man by mere nature is actually placed in, though with a possibility to come out of it consisting partly in the passions, partly in his reason.The passions that incline men to peace are fear of death, desire of such things as are necessary to commodious living, and a hope by their industry to obtain them. And reason suggests convenient articles of peace, upon which men may be drawn to agreement. These articles are they which otherwise are called the Laws of Nature8.Quoted from Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan (New York: Macmillan/Collier Books, 1962).1“至于智力，除了以词语为基础的文艺，特别是科学，即根据普遍的和颠扑不破的法则处理问题的技能，这种技能很少有人具有，而且也只限于少数事物，它既不是一种天生的能力，也不象慎虑那样是在我们关注其他事物时获得的，我还发现在智力方面人与人之间更加平等。
