荀子和霍布斯兩位哲學家相距近二千年，但卻同時對人性有著相近的觀點：人的本性在原始的自然狀態下是惡的。霍布斯在自然狀態的人性私欲基礎上，建立了自然律的政治哲學；荀子則為針對人性之惡而建立其政治制度與倫理綱常；依此，這讓他們二位產生相當的關連性。荀子認為人的本欲是惡的，但這種本性是可以靠著聖人創造的道德規範和法律來等外在的力量來改變，其最終目標即是將人的社會轉變到善的境地。 而霍布斯則認為只要自然狀態可能，人性的惡是不可以改變的，只有形成一個政治強權—國家，經由群眾互訂契約，授予它絕對的權力，才能真正維護人類的和平與安全。本文寫作結構分五章：第一章為緒論，將本文寫作的動機、目的、研究範圍及研究方法略作論述。第二章為荀子人性的思想淵源之探討，從先秦諸子到儒家孔孟對於人性善惡的思想見解，以及荀子如何以禮義法制，來化性起偽，以建立一個禮義的國度。第三章為霍布斯的思想析論，本章介紹霍布斯理性的時代背景，並論述其自然狀態說與人性激情論的理論。 第四章為荀子和霍布斯的思想比較，探究其人性觀的同異關係，並找出如何在「禮法」與「理法」下建立一個善的社會體制。第五章為結語，陳述本文研究感想與展望。依此，筆者期望能由此篇論文的著述，說明荀、霍二人人性論的思想內涵與理論基礎，並進而了解其如何建構出一個善的社會體制。 Xunzi and T. Hobbes were the philosophers living in different eras far from two thousand years but they had the same standpoint about human nature, that is, the human nature was evil in natural state. Hobbes built because of the natural states the political philosophy based on natural laws; Xinzi hold the political system and moral norms also because of the evil human nature. Xinzi thought that the human nature was evil, but it can be changed by external powers, for examples, wise man and the moral norms and national laws in order to make the human in society to become good. Hobbes had different standpoint about the problem whether the human nature can be changed or not, namely the evil human nature can’t be changed when the natural states were still possible, therefore the nation – political power was necessary, and in the nation people make a contract in which they gave up their right in nature state, and gave the sovereign the absolute power, and the safety of human therefore can be guaranteed. This paper is constructed in 5 chapters: 1. An introduction including my motions, the end and the methods. 2. The discourses on the history of the thought of Xinzi. 3. The analysis of the thought and the history of Hobbes. 4. A comparison between the thoughts of the two philosophers, to discuss their same and the difference. 5. The conclusion. I hold that the basical thoughts of this two philosophers can be explored by my paper and further to understand how they build a good system of society.
