為何不需要一個世界政府？－－霍布斯論國際關係與自然狀態的（不）完美類比

Why Not a World Government?Thomas Hobbes on a (Dis)qualified Analogy betweenState of Nature and International Relations

本文的問題意識在於：為何證成了國內主權者的霍布斯，未能繼續完成其世界政府的推論，以及這是否是一個邏輯上的不一致。一般論者的回答可分兩種：一、認為行為主體（國家與個人）的差異使得國際政治領域遠較原初自然狀態緩和，因此不需要一個作為超級利維坦的世界政府；二、差異存在於行為主體之間的關係。本文主要論證為：這兩種回答均有不足之處，若是深入檢視霍布斯對於原初自然狀態的論述，本文試圖指出：原初自然狀態中的「人人認為自己較他人優越」的心態平等為回答此一疑問的關鍵。

In order to answer the long-standing question of why Hobbes does not justifya world government as a super-Leviathan, this paper examines Hobbes’saccounts of international relations and the pre-civil state of nature. One commonview tends to emphasize the differences between “the agents” in these tworealms, namely states as artificial persons and individuals as natural persons;the other common view emphasizes the differences of “the relations betweenthe agents”. By re-examining Hobbes’s account of the pre-civil state of nature,I argue that both of these common views are not sufficient. This essay intendsto argue that if Hobbes’s assumption of equality about the original state of natureis re-examined, it can be seen that what actually causes a state of war is not somuch the equal ability of men as men’s common tendency of considering themselvessuperior to others, namely vain-glory.