从社会结构的分层看卢梭与洛克社会契约论的异同

On Similarities and Differences between Social Contract Theories of Rousseau and Locke from Point View of Division of Levels of Social Structure

洛克的公民社会由掌握立法权、行政权的政府和接受政府统治的人民两个层次组成,但他同时认为政府立法机关的立法权是由人民交给立法机关的;卢梭的共和国由人民—政府—人民三个层次组成,政府之上的人民作为主权者掌握立法权,政府负责执行法律,并依照法律来统治作为臣民之全体的人民。从社会结构的分层来看,卢梭与洛克社会契约论最根本的区别在于主权的归属不同:洛克把主权即立法权交给政府中的立法机关,而卢梭则让人民直接掌握立法权,这便是代议制民主与直接民主的区别。但卢梭最终却让神明般的立法者来为人民立法,这是卢梭民主理论中存在的最大问题。从总体上看,卢梭与洛克的社会契约论确有诸多区别,但卢梭的思想毕竟是由洛克的思想演变而来的,因而存在深刻的继承性和一致性。

Locke insists that the civil society is composed of two levels:the government who grasps legislative power and administrative power,and the people who accepts the administration of government,while Rousseau insists that the republic is composed of three levels:the people who surpasses the government,and the government and the people who subjects to the government.From the view of division of levels of social structure,the most fundamental difference between Rousseau and Locke is the belonging of sovereign rights:Locke insists that sovereign right(legislative power) should be grasped by the lawmaking organ of government while Rousseau argues that people should grasp the law-making right directly.This is the difference between representative democracy and pure democracy.The biggest defect of Rousseau's theory of democracy is that he insists law should be legislated by God like people.Athough there are great many differences between Rousseau' theory of social contract and that of Lock,their theories have deep consistency.