抄録
In H.Warrender's The Political Philosophy of Hobbes, he classifies Hobbes's natural law in civil society as natural law in the old style and natural law in the new style ; the former is the natural law interpreted by the individual and applied by him to his own situation and actions, and the latter is the natural law interpreted by the sovereign authority as part of the civil law (146〜147). According to his classification, the natural law is eternal and the civil law is positive. Then, this interpretation denies Hobbe's assertion that "Civill, and Natural law are not different kinds, but different parts of law." And the relationship between the natural law and the civil law in Hobbes is interpreted by Warrender as follows : this relationship "can be accepted only as applying to the official version of natural law interpreted by the sovereign and supported by his penalties(167)." Warrender goes on to assert that the authentic interpretation of natural law made by the sovereign will present the civil law to the subject which is enforced by public authority. He, therefore, insists that Hobbes put supremacy of natural law over the civil law(169). But this interpretation ignores Hobbes's assertion that "The law of Nature, and the Civill law, contain each other, and are of equall extent." Can Warrender maintain that his interpretation doesn't contradict Hobbes? Now, the modern legal theory enables us to interpret the relationship between the natural law and the civil law in Hobbes. According to this legal theory, the natural law is equivalent to "Handlungsnorm" and the civil law to "Entscheidungsnorm".
