对《自然正当与历史》中的古典自然正当的辨析和阐明

On Classic Natural Right in Natural Right and History

《自然正当与历史》中的古典自然正当(natural right)是施特劳斯政治哲学中很重要的一个主题,也是西方政治哲学“古今之争”的关键问题。然而,学界迄今仍缺少对此主题的深入研究,甚至未清晰地理解自然正当的含义。本文围绕此主题,通过辨析、阐明相关联的几个重要问题来深化、推进我们对古典自然正当的理解和研究。这些问题包括自然正当学说与习俗主义的争论、自然正当的三层含义、正义及道德是否在自然中有其根基、三种意义上的道德、各类型的古典自然正当学说的特征。本文反对这样一种较常见的观点:在施特劳斯和他所阐释的柏拉图、亚里士多德看来,正义及道德仅仅是习俗的、约定的,在自然中没有根基、根据,实践道德美德不是人的一个自然目的。并且,本文质疑、批判古典自然正当学说中认为哲学或爱智慧高于正义或爱他人的倾向。

This paper focuses on classic natural right in Leo Strauss’Natural Right and History.It attempts to deepen and advance our understanding and study of classic natural right by analyzing and clarifying several interrelated important problems.These problems include the controversy between natural right teaching and conventionalism,the three meanings of natural right,the political character of natural right and Christian position on this matter,whether justice and morality are by nature good,morality in three senses,and the characters of various types of classic natural right teachings.This paper argues against a common opinion:according to Plato and Aristotle as Strauss understood,justice and morality are merely conventional and have no basis in nature,and the practice of moral virtues is not a natural end of man.In addition,this paper criticizes the contention of classic natural right teaching that philosophy or love for wisdom is higher in dignity than justice or love for others.