From Laslett to Waldmann: The Case for Reconsidering Strauss on Locke
-
Published:2022
Issue:4
Volume:84
Page:570-591
-
ISSN:0034-6705
-
Container-title:The Review of Politics
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Rev Pol
Author:
Behnegar Nasser,Stauffer Devin,Major Rafael,Nadon Christopher
Abstract
AbstractThe denial of Locke's debt to Hobbes has long been characteristic of many scholars of Locke influenced by the Cambridge School. Peter Laslett was the first to argue for this view, and he did so in conscious opposition to Leo Strauss and his interpretation of Locke. The recent discovery by Felix Waldmann of a memoir that confirms Locke's deep interest in Hobbes as well as his prudent concealment of that interest has undermined Laslett's case against Strauss. Waldmann's discovery, moreover, comes in the wake of other historical work, by Jeffrey Collins and others, that has provided further grounds for abandoning the Cambridge view of Locke. These developments have yet to lead to a serious reengagement with Strauss's interpretation of Locke, but they should, because his controversial claim about Locke's debt to Hobbes has been vindicated.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Political Science and International Relations,Sociology and Political Science
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Hobbes and God in Locke’s law of nature;British Journal for the History of Philosophy;2024-04-25