理想城市的轉變

http://www.scottlondon.com/articles/idealcity.html

A cursory look at some early conceptions of the ideal city as set forth by Plato, Aristotle, St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas.

基於對柏拉圖，亞里斯多德，奧古斯丁，阿奎那的早期理想城理念的淺略描述。

By Scott London

For Plato, the ideal city was one which mirrored the kosmos, on the one hand, and the individual on the other. As he described in The Republic, the ideal city, or polis, was one based on justice and human virtue. It was a form of social and political organization that allowed individuals to maximize their potentialities, serve their fellow citizens, and live in accordance with universal laws and truths.

對柏拉圖來說，理想城的一方面是kosmos的一個鏡射，另一方面就是個人。在《論共和》裡面，他描述道，理想城市或城邦，是基於正義和人類美德的。它是一個社會和政治的組織，它能使個人的潛能得到最大限度的發揮，它能更好地服務于他們的公民夥伴，大家在基於普通法和真實的基礎上面和諧共處。

Plato set forth a five-fold classification to describe how the city ought to be governed. The best form of government, he argued, was an aristocratic model based on the rulership of philosopher kings. A second form of government he called timocracy, or rule by a privileged elite of guardians, or strong men. Oligarchy, the third type, consisted of rule “by the few.” The remaining two — democracy and tyranny — represented rule by the many.

柏拉圖為這個理想城市應該如何管理提供了相關功能的幾條分類。他說道，最好的政府管理模式，應該是貴族制的，是一種哲學家當王的模式。次好的政府管理模式是金權制，或者說是精英特權制，強權政治。寡頭制，是第三種管理模式，是一種少數人統治的模式。餘下的兩種，民主和專制，都是取決於多數人的管理模式。

According to Plato, the ideal city had to be an enlightened one, one based on the highest universal principles. He insisted that only individuals who were committed to these truths, who could protect and preserve them for the sake of the common good, were fit to rule the city.

根據柏拉圖的說法，理想城市應該是一個啟蒙的城市，是基於普遍原則來建立的。他堅稱，只有那些真正領會到那些普遍善的個人，才有資格來管理這樣的城市。

Becoming a philosopher king, or an ideal ruler, involved a rigorous course of study that extended into mid-life. The ideal ruler was therefore someone chosen by an inner calling, or daimon, not by circumstance or privilege. This point is crucial because it distinguishes Plato’s ideal city from those of other thinkers who shared Plato’s faith in guardianship but favored oligarchical systems of government.

成為哲學家王或者是一個理想的管理者，必須要接受嚴格的對人生的教育。所以，理想的管理者是通過對內心自身而成為的，不是取決於環境或者特權。這一點是決定性的，因為它是區分柏拉圖和其它那些把柏拉圖的理念看成是寡頭政治的護衛者的思想家的關鍵點。

Aristotle drew heavily on Plato’s vision but also criticized what he saw as its excessively idealistic nature. He believed that Plato’s republic could never exist in the real world. It may be that Aristotle read The Republic too literally. Plato work was never intended as a political manifesto but as a work of moral philosophy.

亞里斯多德很好地刻畫了柏拉圖的理想城，但同時他也批評這樣一個太過於理想化的城市。他確信柏拉圖的共和國在現實世界之中是不可能存在的。這可能是亞里斯多德在讀共和國的時候太過於文學化了。柏拉圖的作品從來就不是作為一個政治學上面的宣言的，它只是一個道德哲學上面的理念。

In any case, Aristotle made a number of improvements on Plato’s ideal in the interest of making it more practically useful. In his view, there were three basic forms of political organization: rule of the one, rule of the few, and rule of the many. The first form, at its best, led to monarchy; at its worst, to tyranny. The second, at its best, to aristocracy; at its worst, to oligarchy. And the third, at its best, to something he called politeia; at its worst, to democracy.

不管怎麼說，亞里斯多德對於柏拉圖的理想城做了很大的改進，使它更加符合實際。依他的看法，有三種政治統治的模式，一個人的統治，少數人的統治，多數人的統治。第一種形式，最好的是君主，最差的是暴君。第二種形式，最好的是貴族，最差的是寡頭。第三種形式，最好的是共和，最差的是民主。

Aristotle maintained that both monarchy and aristocracy were ideal forms of government, in the sense that they were virtually impossible to achieve in reality. He therefore invented a third form which drew from the unique strengths of both: politeia. This form combined rule of law and rule by the few. It was a brilliant formulation that incorporated many of Plato’s key elements (such as guardianship, the idea of self-sufficiency, and the critical role of law) while making it more practical — and thereby attainable. For example, he introduced land ownership and rulership by lot as crucial elements of the ideal polis, while dispensing with what he considered unrealistic concepts such as distributive justice and voluntary rule.

亞里斯多德堅稱君主制和貴族制是理想政治的統治模式，但是感覺在事實上面是不可能實現的。於是，他提出了第三種獨特的模式，即共和制。這個形式把依法統治和少數人的統治聯合在了一起。它是一個很有想法的設計，它包含了柏拉圖的很多關鍵的概念在裡面，（比如衛士，自足的理念，對法律的批評），並把它們變為更加實際，因而更加可實現。舉個例子，他建議土地所有權和多數人的統治應該作為一個理想城邦不可缺少的重要元素，同時去掉那些他認為不太符合實際的理念，比如分配正義和自願原則。

The ideas of Plato and Aristotle figured prominently in the political thought of both St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas. But the Christian philosophers introduced a new element — divine right. In so doing, they shifted the emphasis away from this world and toward the next world. The ideal city was no longer conceived as a system of purely social or political arrangements but rather as a means toward alignment with the laws of God. Authority was shifted from individuals (organized into one social body) to God. Legitimacy was now a matter of divine right, not individual virtue.

柏拉圖和亞里斯多德的理念在政治思想中比奧古斯丁和阿奎那顯得格外的重要。但是，基督教哲學家引入了一個新的元素-神權。為了更好地論述，他們不在現世展開討論，而轉向了彼岸的世界開始述說。這樣理想的城市不在是基於完全純粹的社會或者政治契約來考慮，而是根據上帝的律令來考慮的。統治者從個人（社會的組織）轉向了上帝。合法性來自於神權，而不是來自於個人的品質（美德）。

For St. Augustine, this idea took the form of the “City of God” — an ideal city to which humans could at best aspire, to which they could look for inspiration and guidance in carrying out their worldly affairs. For Aquinas, the ideal city was something which could only be fully grasped by a monarch of God. In a section of his Summa Theologica, he outlined a theory of “kingship” which made a forceful case for rule by a divine emissary, an individual capable of understanding and translating the will of God for all those who wished to one day enter the kingdom of heaven.

對於奧古斯丁來說，可以用上帝之城來表示這樣的理念，即是說，這樣的城市人類是有很大的嚮往的，在這裡他們可以找尋現實世界中的靈感和指引。對於阿奎那來說，理想城市就是完全是上帝統治的並被它牢牢把握住的。在她的theologica中，她提及到了一種君主象徵的理論，這樣的君主可以作為上帝的使者進行強有力的統治，並且具有一種可以很好地理解和傳遞上帝的意圖和幫助那些想在某一天能夠生活在上帝之城的人進入上帝之城的能力。

In this way, the ideal city was transferred to the next world. Human beings could only hope to attain it by committing their lives to Christian virtues, and not — as Plato insisted — by service to the common good or devotion to universal truths. While the metaphor of the ideal city had survived, its essential features had been radically transformed.

在這個意義上面來說，理想城市開始轉向了彼岸世界。人們只能將希望寄託在通過對基督教價值的追尋中才可以獲得，而不在是柏拉圖所堅持的理念，即基於公共善和普世價值的尊重。理想城市的隱喻即使存在，然而它的重要特徵已經發生了完全的改變了。

December 2000