| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立中山大學 === 政治學研究所 === 91 === The purpose of this thesis is to give a critical analysis of “Macphersonian possessive individualism”, with regards to the issues of historical methodology as well as political theory. Having introduced my project of study in the opening chapter, I begin chapter two with an examination of the very idea of “possessive individualism” proposed by C. B. Macpherson, and the theory of property and democracy that the thinker comes to develop in his later works. In chapter three, I turn to cope with the methodological problems implicit in Macpherson’s study of history, mainly in terms of the Cambridge School’s serious attack on its anti-historicity. In addition, the relative criticisms that I have addressed to Macpherson’s methodology include the Marxist determinism and the Rationalist mode of modernity that appear his work. In chapter four, by contrast, it is Macpherson’s theory of property and democracy that is under consideration. Here, taking the thought of Hayek as my case, I set out to show how the liberal formulations of democracy and property can still be free from Macpherson’s Marxist charge. Finally, I conclude this thesis with a brief talk about the plausibility of Giddens’ third way as the possible solution for the long-term debate regarding the intricate tension between property and equality.
|
|---|
