Can any of my theologically inclined colleagues tell me if the last half of the Leviathan has any lasting importance and, thus, should be read? While it appears to be largely about “political theology,” I’m hesitant to read a hundred and fifty pages on the Christian commonwealth and another hundred and fifty pages on the kingdom of darkness. I can’t recall if I’ve ever see those two parts cited in discussions of Hobbes’ political theory.
About
This is the personal website of Craig McFarlane, a doctoral candidate in the Graduate Programme in Sociology at York University, Toronto and a lecturer in the Department of Law at Carleton University, Ottawa. I also contribute to The Inhumanities.
Theoria
Categories
- Animals (106)
- Barbarians (8)
- Being Critical (7)
- Boneheaded (10)
- CFPs, Conferences, Lectures and Journals (55)
- Commentary (16)
- Dissertation (37)
- Election (7)
- Foucault (16)
- John Locke (3)
- Lanark County (13)
- Mandeville (1)
- Monsters (4)
- Montesquieu (6)
- Music (17)
- Other (105)
- Pets (7)
- Pirates (5)
- Research Notes (91)
- Sociology (25)
- State, Sovereignty & Violence (72)
- Teaching (38)
- Thomas Hobbes (4)
Archives
- February 2012 (1)
- January 2012 (2)
- December 2011 (7)
- November 2011 (5)
- October 2011 (2)
- September 2011 (2)
- August 2011 (2)
- July 2011 (7)
- June 2011 (7)
- May 2011 (3)
- April 2011 (6)
- March 2011 (5)
- February 2011 (6)
- January 2011 (5)
- December 2010 (2)
- November 2010 (5)
- October 2010 (3)
- September 2010 (2)
- August 2010 (4)
- July 2010 (5)
- June 2010 (4)
- May 2010 (1)
- February 2010 (2)
- January 2010 (7)
- December 2009 (5)
- November 2009 (3)
- August 2009 (9)
- July 2009 (7)
- June 2009 (5)
- May 2009 (10)
- April 2009 (5)
- March 2009 (5)
- February 2009 (2)
- January 2009 (3)
- December 2008 (4)
- November 2008 (8)
- October 2008 (4)
- September 2008 (6)
- August 2008 (8)
- July 2008 (10)
- June 2008 (13)
- May 2008 (6)
- April 2008 (5)
- March 2008 (4)
- February 2008 (10)
- January 2008 (6)
- December 2007 (5)
- November 2007 (3)
- October 2007 (3)
- September 2007 (5)
- August 2007 (7)
- July 2007 (1)
- June 2007 (6)
- May 2007 (12)
- April 2007 (9)
- March 2007 (7)
- February 2007 (9)
- January 2007 (18)
- December 2006 (5)
- November 2006 (13)
- October 2006 (19)
- September 2006 (15)
- August 2006 (15)
- July 2006 (7)
- June 2006 (13)
- May 2006 (11)
- April 2006 (7)
- March 2006 (14)
- February 2006 (11)
- January 2006 (25)
- December 2005 (17)
- November 2005 (27)
- October 2005 (6)
- September 2005 (10)
- August 2005 (3)
RSS
5 Comments
I’ve seen a paper given by Srinivas Aravamudan arguing for the importance of that last half. You may want to check out his publications. I’m suspecting the talk was subsequently published as “The Unity of the Representer in Hobbes’ Leviathan.” South Atlantic Quarterly 104:4 (August, 2005): 631-53.
Looks as though that URL didn’t work. Try http://fds.duke.edu/db/aas/English/faculty/srinivas/publications.
Pah! That URL, neither. Google Aravamudan, then.
Thanks Jon – a couple of his papers have been helpful.
I thought reading those sections in Hobbes was helpful. For instance, I learned that daemonology is the false version of the true science of meteorology (ghosts are the result of “condensation.”) Also Strauss wrote a small book on Hobbes theology. It’s published in the Gesammelte Schriften 3.
Post a Comment