نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
استادیار علوم سیاسی دانشگاه شهید باهنر کرمان، کرمان، ایران
چکیده
هدف این مقاله تحلیل نحوه فروپاشی دولتهای تازه تأسیس‌شده در دوران مدرن از نظر هابز است. این امر مستلزم واکاوی استعاره هابز از فروپاشی آن‌هم از منظر شناختی، یعنی «بهیموت» است. اگرچه استعاره لویاتان دلالت بر تأسیس دارد نه فروپاشی، اما در نزد هابز، استعاره بهیموت واجد معانی دوگانه «فروپاشی» و «سقوط» است: اولی دلالت بر امر «ذهنی» و دومی دلالت بر امر «حقوقی» دارد. منشأ این استعاره در کتاب ایوب و خنوخ حاکی از اهمیت و معنای «سیاسی-شناختی» آن است. هابز بر این نظر بود که اساس دولت مدرن ریشه در «حرکت فیزیکی» دارد، که وقتی «باور» به حرکت از بین برود، دیگر آن وجود نخواهد داشت. وقوع این امر در وضع مدنی، نشان از فروپاشی دولت، یعنی قبل از سقوط و انحلال قانونی آن، دارد. سقوط و انحلال به معنای از دست دادن حاکمیت سیاسی و حق اعمال آن است. در این خصوص، هابز دو نوع باور سیاسی فروپاشی را شناسایی میکند: یکی باور «رستگاری» توسط اسکو لاستیک‌های مذهبی و دیگری، باور «رهایی» توسط قدرتطلبان مجلس. باور اول خواهان تمرد از قدرت سیاسی، به دلیل فقدان اعتبار شرعی بود و باور دوم نیز خواهان رهایی مردم مظلوم و منکوب از قدرت سلطنت، به دلیل فقدان اعتبار مردمی بود. اما راهحل هابز، باور «رهسپاری» (سرسپردگی) به قدرت مطلق بود و هدفش اینکه افراد را از طریق آموزش «ترس» به جای اقناع، مطیع قدرت عمومی دولت کند. این رویکرد به دنبال جلوگیری از فروپاشی دولتهای تازه تأسیس و تضمین تداوم و بقای آن‌هاست. در مقابل، آنچه اهمیت دارد وجه شناختی باور است. اگر باور به ترس در میان سوژههای سیاسی از بین برود، آنگاه دولت در حیات ذهنی خود فروپاشیده است، حتی اگر در قلمرو فیزیکی خود از طریق نیروی قانون و اقتدار تداوم داشته باشد.
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
The breakdown of modern states: Analyzing the Behemoth metaphor in Hobbes's political theory
نویسنده [English]
- Mohammad Abdolahpour Chenari
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Sciences, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran
چکیده [English]
Introduction
Behemoth is one of Hobbes's most significant and final works of thought. Its importance for research does not stem from its references to historical events or the connections of its previous arguments with historical materials. Instead, it addresses a fundamental issue: the origins of the "collapse" and "fall" of newly established states. The research problem at hand revolves around the same Hobbesian concern. We aim to understand the conditions under which newly founded states collapse and what leads to their dissolution or downfall. A key assumption of this research is that collapse is fundamentally a cognitive matter. Thus, within political knowledge, collapse, and fall are regarded as primary issues, along with establishment and continuity. This idea is also reflected in our Iranian intellectual tradition, particularly in the book Siasatnameh by Khajeh Nizam al-Molk. The choice of Hobbes for this research is significant due to his insights as a thinker of the New Testament, who recognized that the collapse of newly established states—known in the modern context as "artificial persons" characterized by "political sovereignty"—is a critical problem of the contemporary era. This era has led to a regression back to a state of nature, civil war, and national disintegration. For Hobbes, the collapse and dissolution of the state involve two aspects: one stemming from the "legal" angle, as discussed in his book Leviathan, and the other from the "mental" perspective, as presented in Behemoth. The first aspect relates to the time of the state's establishment, while the second pertains to the continuity of power. Before Hobbes, Machiavelli addressed this fundamental problem in his work Discourses, where he viewed the decline of the ancient Roman state as a historical example. In contrast, Hobbes philosophically examined this issue in 17th-century England, particularly during the reign of Charles I. He expanded the collapse theory in newly founded states and proposed an innovative solution that transcended Machiavelli's approach, emphasizing naked force.
Theoretical Approach of the Research
The approach adopted for this research is based on cognitive psychology. This choice is made to analyze Hobbes's thought because other methods, such as Quentin Skinner's hermeneutic approach to intentionalism, John Donne's biography, or Strauss's "Between the Lines," do not effectively address mental and psychological metaphors. In essence, these approaches focus primarily on political concepts and overlook the importance of psychological factors. According to Howard Gardner, the cognitive approach aims to illustrate how mentalities within a political society change. He posits that individuals' mindsets can shift based on several empirical conditions. For instance, one condition that prompts a change is when an individual is exposed to an environment where diverse beliefs and convictions are presented, often differing from their own. Another condition occurs when individuals face traumatic experiences that alter their perspectives on various issues and subjects in their surrounding environment. Moreover, the influence of enlightened figures that individuals encounter can also lead to shifts in thinking. These changes can manifest quickly, such as a sudden shift in religious beliefs, or occur gradually over time (Gardner, 2017, p. 101). Ultimately, metaphors play a crucial role in explaining these changes—whether they are the metaphors through which a thinker interprets the world or those through which ordinary people perceive politics.
Discussion and Conclusion
According to Carl Schmitt, the metaphor of the leviathan in Hobbes' political theory suggests that just as the establishment of the modern state is rooted in political matters, so is the collapse of newly founded states reliant on political and cognitive factors. On one hand, Behemoth serves as a metaphor within a religious context, illustrating the relationship between the creator and the creature and the dynamics between limited and unlimited power. On the other hand, this concept carries an additional metaphorical significance, which implies that collapse, unlike a straightforward fall, is primarily a mental phenomenon influenced by human cognitive beliefs. Accordingly, the demise of a state should be understood in its mental dimensions rather than its natural aspect—defined as the end of political power. Hobbes argued that beliefs such as the desire for power and self-interest have led individuals to conflict with one another, prompting a regression to a more primitive state and creating challenges for newly established states. The historical expression of these dual beliefs is evident in the concepts of "salvation" and "liberation." The first belief highlights the issue of "sin," positing that the path to salvation involves seeking forgiveness and pardon, which has, over time, undermined the authority of the ruling prince. Conversely, the second belief addresses "oppression," suggesting that liberation can be achieved through popular rule, emphasizing the necessity of eradicating tyranny by invoking historical references and contemporary events. In the context of Hobbes's cognitive framework presented in this work, the notion of "departure" emerges as a fundamental belief. He contends that realizing and maintaining security depends on creating political "fear" and instilling a sense of political subordination. This approach is arguably more problematic than the previously mentioned beliefs. According to Hobbes, this educational endeavor should aim to purge the populace of these two rebellious beliefs, fostering obedience and compliance with the ruler's mandates. The ultimate goal of this education is to cultivate a politically constructed individual—a subject entirely submissive and perceived as the foundation of the prince's power.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- Modern states
- Collapse
- Cognitive
- Political Metaphor and Behemoth
فارسی
- اخوان کاظمی و نریمانی (1402)، واکاوی مفهومی فروپاشی دولت، فصلنامه دولت پژوهی، دوره 9، شماره 35، صص 195-228.
- اسمایلی، مایون و اشلمن، اندرو (1394)، مسئولیت جمعی و اخلاقی، ترجمه مریم خدادادی، نشر ققنوس.
- اسوندسن، لارس (1395)، فلسفه ترس، ترجمه خشایار دیهیمی، تهران: نشر گمان.
- بارت، کارل (1397)، مسیح و آدم، ترجمه محمد صبائی، تهران: نشر ققنوس.
- جیفین، اشتفان (1402)، توماس هابز و سیاست فلسفه طبیعی، ترجمه زهرا تدین، تهران: نشر دنیای اقتصاد.
- سلیمی، حسین (1394)، دولت-ملتهای مدرن و نسبت آن با منازعه، فصلنامه دولت پژوهی، دوره 1، شماره 2، صص1-20.
- عبید زاکانی (1387)، اخلاق الاشراف، تصحیح علی‌اصغر حلبی، تهران: نشر اساطیر.
- کتاب ایوب، (1386) ترجمه قاسم هاشمینژاد، تهران: نشر هرمس.
- کریتندن، جک و لوین، پیتر (1396)، آموزش مدنی، ترجمه مریم هاشمیان، نشر ققنوس.
- گاردنر، هوارد (1396)، تغییر ذهنها: هنر و علم تغییر ذهن خود و دیگران، ترجمه سید کمال خرازی، تهران: نشر نی.
- ماکیاولی (1388)، شهریار، ترجمه محمود محمود، تهران: نشر عطار.
- مایر، هاینریش (1393)، «الاهیات سیاسی چیست؟»، در مفهوم امر سیاسی، کارل اشمیت، ترجمه یاشار جیرانی و رسول نمازی، تهران: نشر ققنوس.
- ولگان، جفری (1395)، تربیت سیاسی در اندیشه هابز، ترجمه حسین بشیریه، تهران: نشر نی.
- هابز، توماس (1392)، لویاتان، ترجمه حسین بشیریه، تهران: نشر نی.
- هابز، توماس (1395)، بهیموت، ترجمه حسین بشیریه، تهران: نشر نی.
References
- Bejan, Teresa M (2010) Teaching the Leviathan: Thomas Hobbes on education, Oxford Review of Education, vol. 36, no.5, pp. 607-626.
- Bejan, Teresa M (2018), First Impressions: Hobbes on Religion, Education, and the Metaphor of Imprinting, in Laurens van Apeldoorn, and Robin Douglass (eds), Hobbes on Politics and Religion, pp. 45-62.
- Harris, R. Laird (1972), The Book of JOB and Its Doctrine of GOD, Grace Theological Journal3 (Fall), pp. 3-33.
- Hetmański, Marek (2021), Cognitive-methodological functions of metaphors, Argument: Biannual Philosophical Journal, Vol.11, No (1), pp. 93-109.
- Hobbes, Thomas (1998), On The Citizen, Uk: Cambridge University of Press.
- Hobbes, Thomas, (2020), The Elements of Law, Natural and Politic, Uk: Routledge.
- Johnson, M. (2007). The meaning of the body: Aesthetics of human understanding. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Kabala, Boleslaw Z. and Cook, Thomas (2022), Hobbes and Spinoza on Sovereign Education, Philosophies, Vol. 7, no 6. pp.1-27.
- Kiseleva, S.v. and Trofimova, N. a. (2017), Metaphor as a device for understanding cognitive concepts, Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, 226-246.
- Kuhn de Oliveira, Mariana. (2023). The Governing of Opinions: Hobbes on How Civic Education and Censorship Impact Subjects’ Deliberation. Disputatio. Vol. 14. pp. 395-410.
- Marshall, J. D. (1980), Thomas Hobbes: education and obligation in the Commonwealth, Journal of Philosophy of Education, November, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 193-203.
- Marshall, James. D. (2016), Hobbes and Philosophy of Education, inEncyclopedia of Educational Philosophy and Theory, p. 1-4.
- Snauwaert, Dale T and Paul Theobald (1994), Two Liberal Trajectories of Civic Education: The Political and Educational Thought of Hobbes and Winstanley, The Journal of Educational Thought (JET), 28, No. 2 (August), pp. 179-197.
- Sokolowski, Asaf (2018), Hobbes’s Leviathan and Behemoth - back to the Book of Job, in Hobbes After Leviathan, Beyond Leviathan?
- Winter, Jay. (2015), The Complete Book of Enoch: Standard Version.
Translated References into English
- Akhavan Kazemi and Narimani (1402), “A Conceptual Analysis of the Collapse of the State”, State Studies Journal, Volume 9, Issue 35, pp. 195-228. [In Persian]
- Barthes, Karl (1397), Christ and Adam, translated by Mohammad Sabaei, Tehran: Qognoos Publishing. [In Persian]
- Crittenden, Jack and Levine, Peter (2017), Civic Education, translated by Maryam Hashemian, Qognoos Publishing House. [In Persian]
- Esmaili, Mayon and Eshelman, Andrew (1394), Collective and Moral Responsibility, translated by Maryam Khodadadi, Qognoos Publishing. [In Persian]
- Gardner, Howard (2017), Changing Minds: The Art and Science of Changing One’s Own Mind and the Mind of Others, translated by Seyyed Kamal Kharrazi, Tehran: Ney Publishing House. [In Persian].
- Hobbes, Thomas (2013), Leviathan, translated by Hossein Bashirieh, Tehran: Ney Publishing House. [In Persian]
- Hobbes, Thomas (2016), Behemoth, translated by Hossein Bashirieh, Tehran: Ney Publishing House. [In Persian]
- Jiffin, Stefan (1402), Thomas Hobbes and the Politics of Natural Philosophy, translated by Zahra Tadayin, Tehran: Donyayeh Eqtesad Publishing. [In Persian]
- Machiavelli (2009), Shahriar, translated by Mahmoud Mahmoud, Tehran: Attar Publishing House. [In Persian]
- Meyer, Heinrich (2014), “What is Political Theology?”, In The Concept of the Political, Carl Schmitt, translated by Yashar Jairani and Rasoul Namazi, Tehran: Qoqnoos Publishing House. [In Persian]
- Obaid Zakani (2008), Akhlaq al-Ashraf, edited by Ali Asghar Halabi, Tehran: Asatir Publishing House. [In Persian]
- Salimi, Hossein (2015), “The Modern State-Nations and Its Relation to Conflict”, State Studies Journal, Volume 1, Issue 2, pp. 1-20. [In Persian]
- Svendsen, Lars (1395), The Philosophy of Fear, translated by Khashayar Dehimi, Tehran: Gaman Publishing. [In Persian]
- The Book of Ayub, (2007), translated by Qasem Hasheminejad, Tehran: Hermes Publishing House. [In Persian]
- Welgan, Jeffrey (2016), Political Education in Hobbesian Thought, translated by Hossein Bashirieh, Tehran: Ney Publishing House. [In Persian]
)