An Order According to Nature versus an Order According to Rights
Zhou Lian
2009-01-01
Abstract:By comparing three philosophers',Leo Strauss,David Hume and Xenophon,different interpretations of the same case,this essay attempts to demonstrate that (1) the classic political philosophy which Strauss prefers to claims an order according to nature,which assumes the God Eye with benevolence and wisdom;however,modern political philosophy maintains an order according to rights,which is to understand the political order from the perspective of individuals;(2) Strauss's criticism of Locke is based on his peculiar understanding of law of nature,which is very different from mainstream of traditional understanding of law of nature;(3) Strauss claims that the reconciliation between the wisdom of philosopher and the consent of the unwise is the philosophical root of the distinction between the primeval natural right and the secondary natural right,to admitting the importance of the consent of the unwise is amount to admitting a right of unwise,i.e.,an irrational right.In contrast with Strauss's idea,I argue that the reconciliation between wisdom and consent is not a kind of modus vivendi but inherent in the logic of tradition of moral philosophy and law of nature.In that sense,the correlation between wisdom and consent is not only reconciliation but also identical,moreover,it is necessary and legitimate to transfer from the primeval natural right to the secondary natural right.