لویاتان و اپیکوریسم سیاسی: بحثی انتقادی درباره تفسیر الهیاتی هابز

نظریه سکولاریزاسیون یکی از موضوع‌های جدل‌برانگیز در فلسفه سیاسی معاصر است. به‌طور کلی بر اساس این نظریه طی فرایند سکولار شدن، دین تنها کنار نمی‌رود، بلکه با ساحت این‌جهانی ارتباط برقرار می‌کند و به‌موجب آن برخی از مولفه‌های استعلایی‌اش درون‌ماندگار می‌شود. این نظریه بر اساس رویکردی الهیاتی اصالت نظریه‌های مدرن را نفی می‌کند. پژوهشگرانی مانند کارل اشمیت، کارل لوویت، جان میلبنک و ولفگانگ پالاور از پشتیبان‌های نظری این رویکردند. هدف این پژوهش ارائه شرحی انتقادی از کاستی این رویکرد تفسیری در مورد مطالعه توماس هابز، با تمرکز بیشتر روی نظریه دین مدنی اوست و تلاش می‌کند با روش تفسیر زمینه و متن اسکینری از آنچه اپیکوریسم سیاسی هابز خوانده می‌شود، به‌مانند تلاشی به‌طور کامل مدرن، در برابر تفسیر الهیاتی از لویاتان دفاع کند. پرسش‌های پژوهشی عبارت‌اند از: 1. چه ارتباطی بین فلسفه هابز و اپیکور وجود دارد؟ و 2. تفسیر الهیاتی از هابز چه تضاد بنیادینی با اپیکوریسم سیاسی او دارد؟ فرضیه پژوهش این است که اپیکوریسم سیاسی هابز به‌دلیل تضاد بنیادینی که با نظرگاه الهیات یهودی – مسیحی دارد، با خوانش الهیاتی از هابز ناسازگار است. این پژوهش با بررسی اندیشه هابز و بستر پیدایی آن و ارتباطش با احیای فلسفه اپیکوری، بین هستی‌شناسی، معرفت‌شناسی و اخلاقیات اپیکور و هابز، همچنین رویکرد این دو به سیاست، تناظرهای مفهومی‌ای برقرار می‌کند و بیانی از اپیکوریسم سیاسی را با اصطلاحی که دروغ الهیاتی نامیده می‌شود، در اندیشه هابز ترسیم می‌کند. این پژوهش نتیجه می‌گیرد آنچه در اندیشه سیاسی هابز به نظر الهیاتی می‌آید، در واقع دروغ الهیاتی اپیکوری است.

leviathan and political epicureanism: a critical discussion on theological reading of hobbes

interpreting the ideas of early modern philosophers through the lens of theology and secularization thesis has arguably been one of the controversial issues in contemporary political philosophy. following the secularization thesis, regardless of its ambiguous process, religion does not simply get discarded or abandoned; instead, it interacts with the worldly sphere, by which some of its transcendental components become immanent. secularization as a thesis underscores a theological reading of modern theories and undermines their legitimacy as being modern. according to notable philosophers who advocate this view (e.g., carl schmitt, karl löwith, john milbank, and wolfgang palaver) secularization indicates a successful reoccupation of christianity's theological structures, doctrines, and metaphysics by modern grand narratives and doctrines. for instance, schmitt considers hobbes's absolute ruler, leviathan as the secularized version of the omnipotent god, while löwith views the theory of progress as the secularization of god's providence. in palaver’s opinion hobbes’s leviathan is the secularized katéchon, a force or agent that prevents the chaos prior to the second coming of christ. furthermore, based on dumouchel’s theological reading of leviathan, christianity is the political solution of hobbes, and therefore his eschatology has a religious spirit. these are some examples of theological interpretation of hobbes. the primary objective of this article is to present a critical account of these theological interpretations of thomas hobbes’s leviathan and his concept of civil religion. in the hypothesis, it is argued that a strong but hidden influence of epicurean philosophy, if proved, makes it incompatible to interpret hobbes through theological lens. in this paper, quentin skinner’s methodological contextualism is used as the method of investigation. according to skinner, analyzing the text to discover its author’s intentions is based on speech acts. therefore, what an author writes is not merely an expression of reality, but is also aimed at influencing the audience. skinner uses the term illocutionary act, which means in order to discover the meaning of the text or an author’s intentions, one should go beyond the text cand investigate the author’s motives and intentions that are conveyed by words as well as the implications of social, intellectual, and linguistic context. the focus of this essay is hobbes’s theological expressions in leviathan and his other works concerning civil religion. in other words, we try to interpret hobbes’s motives and intentions in expressing his ideas on god, faith, christian commonwealth, and civil religion, in the context of this thinker’s social and historical standing. thus, the following topics are examined: the revival of epicurean philosophy in seventeenth century, documents that accuse hobbes of epicureanism, his correspondence and close affinity (and disagreements) with christian epicureans, the conceptual association between hobbes and epicurus in terms of their ontology, epistemology, ethics, attitude toward politics, the difference between english and latin versions of leviathan, historia ecclesiastica, and his essay entitled an historical narration concerning heresie. the main research questions are as follows: 1. what is the nature of relationship between hobbes and epicurus? and 2. what is the fundamental problem between theological reading of hobbes and his political epicureanism? epicurus was a greek philosopher in the 3rd century bc, and was a materialist whose philosophy can be described as a continuation of the naturalist ionian philosophical tradition which was interrupted by socrates and plato. epicurus as a philosopher shaped his doctrines and teachings in a sharp contrast to plato’s approach — a fact that has been broadly ignored in the investigation of epicurus’s philosophy. he rejected plato’s dualistic ontology and his idealism which became the backbone of christian theology. epicurean philosophy enjoyed a revival in seventeenth century. in our account of hobbes’s epicureanism which is particularly shown in his theory of civil religion, we identified a kind of political epicureanism which explains hobbes’s theological claims about the nature of god, hell, the kingdom of christ, and is compatible with his philosophical materialism. we conclude that hobbes’s perceived theological claims are in fact epicurean theological lies that he uses in order to undermine the first principles of nicene creed, divine legitimacy and the authority of the church, differentiating the public and private sphere, separating the theology from philosophy and introducing an epicurean civil religion to the hypothetical sovereign of the commonwealth.