道德与政治哲学讲义集 (Note 1)

最近在阅读Cohen那本lectures on the history of moral and political philosophy，发现Cohen对于古希腊三哲人的一些解读非常有意思。

1.The idea that he was executed because he was an intellectual gadfly or nudnik, is a philosophers’ myth. (“When you say. . . .”) and the reason why he was accused of impiety is that a postwar amnesty forbade charging him with wartime misdeeds.

苏格拉底之死不是因为他对于哲学的求索态度让城邦厌恶，而是因为他（及他的学生）反对雅典的民主政治。

事实上，苏格拉底的看法在美诺篇（Meno）中有隐晦的体现。美诺与苏格拉底探讨美德的本质，苏格拉底认为美德并非一种可以传授的知识。何也？他认为，城邦中的确有有德之人，这些有德之人肯定必然想把所有的知识传授给自己的孩子，然而我们观察到的是这些儿子从父亲那里学会了具体的技艺，却未能学会德性，可见德性与一般性的知识不同。

苏格拉底最后得出结论，美德是上天偶然赐予的礼物。苏格拉底在这篇中似乎并未明确表达对民主的看法，但如果这个结论正确，民主政治的合法性便站不住脚，因为民主政治面临如下道德上的两难困境。倘若美德与统治的资格相关，那么按照苏格拉底的结论，只有那一小批天生有德之人适合统治。倘若美德与统治的资格无关，那么民主政体将是缺乏道德基础的政体。

2.The main point is that Plato’s state is not totalitarian precisely because of the dim view  Plato takes of the quality of the mass of its citizens. Because they are pretty hopeless, the state will not intrude enough into their lives to qualify as totalitarian, as far as they are concerned.

Cohen认为，波普尔对于理想国的解读几乎全盘错误，柏拉图并非一个极权主义的支持者。当然，这不是因为他尊重底层百姓，而是因为他认为底层百姓天然质料败坏（bronze nature）无药可救所以听之任之不让他们干扰政治即可。极权主义的一个特征是全社会都朝着一个统一目标行动（如苏联，纳粹德国），然而柏拉图的理想国并没有这种想法。柏拉图政治理想中不近人情之处（如，不能有私产，不能用私心对待自己的儿女），只是专门用来要求统治者的。

3.Now the distinction between use and exchange-value can be found in Aristotle, and also the Marxian attitude of friendliness toward use-value and hostility toward exchange-value. Aristotle expresses the distinction as that between household management, which seeks to satisfy the needs of the members of a family or society, and the unlimited art of acquisition, whose aim is the unlimited accumulation of wealth, undirected to satisfying needs.  

Aristotle also anticipates another element in Marxism, the idea that the nature of a state, the form of a government, is largely determined by the class composition of its members, and that a change in political life is a direct consequence of a change in the socioeconomic fundament of politics.

马克思主义政治经济学中对于使用价值和交换价值的分离，对于交换价值与财富积累的贬低，和某种经济基础决定论都可以在亚里士多德的论述中找到雏形。

4.Man has not found it possible to enjoy the values the polis brought in the huge states which succeed the polis. The Christianity of Augustine enforces this disposition. Only in the modern era do thinkers again seek to weld individual and society together in harmonious union, do they try to revivify the legacy of Greece. for this is the aspiration of Rousseau, Hegel, and Marx.

亚里士多德通过对城邦的经验研究敏锐地认识到，真正的全民参与的政治非小国寡民而不可行。（从现代的政治科学的眼光看，全民参与的政治需要一定的文化同质度。）他的最出色的学生亚历山大用一种极为讽刺的方式证实了他老师的看法。亚历山大穷尽文治武功一统欧亚，然而马其顿王国下的诸子民却无政治参与度可言。后世的政治哲学家们普遍同意亚里士多德的看法。只是中世纪的思想家们愿意忍受理念城邦和现实城邦的差距，现代的思想家们却要努力在大的民族国家内部实现政治（应该要注意到施特劳斯也认为这种在地上实现天国的努力是现代政治哲学的开端），而卢梭，黑格尔，马克思三人开出了不同的药方。