Why, in spite of its long tradition in Political Literature, does Thomas Hobbes seem not so eager to use the comparison between the king and the pastor in his political works? Why, on the rare occasions when it happens, does he handle this metaphor very carefully? Why does he often avoid using it, despite the fact he clearly writes that the sovereign has to ensure safety to his subjects, a duty easily comparable with that of a shepherd who takes care of his sheep? Causes seem to lie outside simply stylistic reasons and may deeply related to Hobbesian political theory. Starting from a text analysis, the essay aims both to analyse why Hobbes is so cautious in using this metaphor and, accordingly, to stress why this deliberate and systematic choice is highly significant from the perspective of his political theory
The Missing Metaphor: Thomas Hobbes and the Political Problem of Pastoral Sovereignty
andrea catanzaro
2017-01-01
Abstract
Why, in spite of its long tradition in Political Literature, does Thomas Hobbes seem not so eager to use the comparison between the king and the pastor in his political works? Why, on the rare occasions when it happens, does he handle this metaphor very carefully? Why does he often avoid using it, despite the fact he clearly writes that the sovereign has to ensure safety to his subjects, a duty easily comparable with that of a shepherd who takes care of his sheep? Causes seem to lie outside simply stylistic reasons and may deeply related to Hobbesian political theory. Starting from a text analysis, the essay aims both to analyse why Hobbes is so cautious in using this metaphor and, accordingly, to stress why this deliberate and systematic choice is highly significant from the perspective of his political theory
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
