自然法抑或自然權(quán)利：從阿奎那到洛克.pdf

1、學(xué)校代碼：10270分類(lèi)號(hào)：B97學(xué)號(hào)：132201133碩士學(xué)位論文自然法抑或自然權(quán)利：從阿奎那到洛克學(xué)院：哲學(xué)學(xué)院專(zhuān)業(yè)：宗教學(xué)研究方向：基督教研究生姓名：姜曉莉指導(dǎo)教師：吳廣成完成日期：2016年5月AbstractShanghaiNmalUniversityMasterofPhilosophyAbstractThesubjectthatmodernmalphilosophycannotavoidisthatwhetherclass

2、icalphilosophymodernphilosophymakesthecontributiontoNatureLawNaturalRights.AquinasdefinesNatureLawasrationalcreaturesparticipatedineternallawwecanknowthatAquinasthinksthetheyofNaturalRightsisaxiomaticfromhisthreeprecepts

3、ofNatureLaw.Hethinksthatnaturalrightisselfevidentcanbepracticeknowable.MeanwhileJohnLockethepioneerofmoderntheyregardsNaturalRightsasumanselfpreservationattemptedtofindnaturalrightsfoundation.Thisarticleisthemedievaltheo

4、logianThomasAquinasnaturallawcomparedwithnaturalrightstheyfromtheModernEnlightenmentliberalismpioneerLockesbackinhistytheconceptofnaturallawaswellasclassicalthedifferencebetweenthetheythesourcesofthenaturallawofmodernnat

5、uralrightstheyinThomasstheyofnaturallawthenaturallawisthestudyofnaturalrightsobtainedfrominLockestheyisobtainedfromthenaturallawtonaturaltheconceptofrights.Modernistlookingfchange“NatureLaw““NaturalRights“inthelimitsofla

6、wmalityinthegapthatitsscholarstopursuefa“promulgation“awaytofulfillthebasis.It’salsomypaper’sconsidersofthecrisisofmodernnaturallaw.FromnaturallawtonaturalrightfromAquinastoLockebetweencenturiesoftimetheexpleofNaturalLaw

7、NaturalRightsdoesnotfocusontheboundariesoflegalethical.TheinferenceoftheconceptionflawisinsufficientbutEnlightenmentthinkershasfoundthewaytodeterminetheNaturalRightsfromtheexplationofthe“nature“state.Sothatthewholetheyof