试析《法律篇》第十卷中柏拉图对法的辩护——神和法律是自然的吗？

A Review of Plato’s Defense of Law’s Divinity in Laws X—Are God and Law “by Nature”?

摘要: 作为柏拉图晚期最重要的对话录之一，《法律篇》集中体现了他对理想城邦制度的再思考，以对话的形式呈现了构建理想城邦的法律框架，全书共分十二卷，内容涵盖婚姻、教育、宗教仪式、财产制度乃至日常生活规范等多个方面。其中，第十卷尤为特殊：其重要性不仅在于直接讨论宗教问题，更在于集中探讨法律正当性的根本基础——即人为何应当服从法律这一问题。若第十卷无法为法律的正当性提供充分论证，那么其所建构的整个法律体系将失去根基。在第十卷中，法律的正当性建立在神的存在基础上，由此，对法律的辩护与对神的辩护不可避免地交织在一起。故而，如何证明神的存在，以及如何在此基础上确立法律的正当性，构成了《法律篇》第十卷的核心议题。但是柏拉图对法的辩护真的成立吗？且他的这番辩护又隐藏着怎样的真实动机？本文旨在阐明：柏拉图通过论证神、灵魂及其相关存在(包括法律)具有第一性地位(即“自然的”)，从而为法律奠定形而上学基础，这一努力不仅为城邦秩序提供了规范性的正当依据，其更深层的动机在于回应并对抗智者学派的无神论立场及由此引发的道德相对主义危机，以重建被智者所瓦解的价值客观性。

Abstract: As one of the most important dialogues of Plato’s late period, “The Laws” embodies his renewed reflection on the constitution of the ideal polis. Presented in dialogical form, the work lays out a comprehensive legal framework for the construction of such a city. The dialogue is divided into twelve books, covering a wide range of topics, including marriage, education, religious rites, property arrangements, and even the norms of everyday life. Among these, Book X is particularly distinctive. Its significance lies not merely in its explicit engagement with religious issues, but more fundamentally in its concentrated examination of the grounds of legal legitimacy—that is, the question of why human beings ought to obey the law. If Book X fails to provide a sufficient justification for the legitimacy of law, then the entire legal system constructed in the Laws would lose its foundation. In Book X, the legitimacy of law is grounded in the existence of god, such that the defense of law becomes inextricably intertwined with the defense of god. Accordingly, the demonstration of divine existence and the establishment of legal legitimacy on that basis together constitute the central concerns of Book X of the Laws. Yet does Plato’s defense of law truly succeed? And what underlying motivation informs this line of argument? This article aims to show that Plato seeks to ground law metaphysically by arguing that god, soul, and related entities—including law itself—possess a status of priority, that is, that they are “by nature.” This endeavor not only provides a normative justification for civic order, but more deeply serves as a response to, and a countermeasure against, the atheistic tendencies of the Sophists and the moral relativism they engendered, with the ultimate aim of restoring the objectivity of values that the Sophists had undermined.