Counsel, Command and Crisis.

Although the distinction between counsel and command in Hobbes's works, especially Leviathan, has been often acknowledged, it has been little studied. This article provides background and analysis of this critical distinction by placing it in conversation with the works of Henry Parker and in the co...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Hobbes Studies Vol. 28; no. 2; pp. 103 - 132
Autor principal: Paul, Joanne
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Brill Academic Publishers 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=110617694&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 110617694
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        09215891
        5D7Q
      jtl: Hobbes Studies
      issn: 09215891
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: 2015
      vid: 28
      iid: 2
      pid: 639
      pub: Brill Academic Publishers
    artinfo:
      ui:
        110617694
        10.1163/18750257-02802002
      ppf: 103
      ppct: 29
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 1.2MB
      tig:
        atl: Counsel, Command and Crisis.
      aug:
        au: Paul, Joanne
        affil: Department of History, New College of the Humanities, 19 Bedford Square, London, UK WV1B 3HH
      su:
        Sovereignty
        Prudence
        Leviathan (Book : Hobbes)
      sug:
        subj:
          Sovereignty
          Prudence
          Leviathan (Book : Hobbes)
      keyword:
        counsel
        English Civil War
        Henry Parker
        prudence
        sovereignty
      ab: Although the distinction between counsel and command in Hobbes's works, especially Leviathan, has been often acknowledged, it has been little studied. This article provides background and analysis of this critical distinction by placing it in conversation with the works of Henry Parker and in the context of the English Civil War, especially as regards the discussion of prudence, interests and crisis. In so doing, three conclusions can be drawn. First, it becomes clear that for both Parker and Hobbes, counsel serves as a foundation to their arguments about the placement and function of sovereignty. Second, in grounding their arguments about sovereignty in the discourse of counsel, both authors -- intentionally or unintentionally -- undermine the previously critical discourse of counsel. Finally, we see that especially Hobbes's engagement with and overthrow of the discourse of counsel profoundly alters of the terms and focus of modern political debate, moving from a 'monarchy of counsel' to a discussion of political sovereignty.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Hobbes Studies is the property of Brill Academic Publishers and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: Hobbes Studies
      holder: Brill Academic Publishers
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2015
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N