本文綜述幾位重要蘇格蘭啟蒙思想家如何以社會友誼觀念來理解現代 市民社會的內涵與品質。本文的核心論旨有二：第一，本文認為蘇格 蘭啟蒙有意識地建立社會友誼的討論；此一新的友誼論傳統與希臘羅 馬以降，乃至近代早期貴族所流行的擇友論大不相同。第二，蘇格蘭 啟蒙作家們認為，現代市民社會或文明社會的出現，並非只是為了保 全個人生存與福祉，更有自然的情感因素為基礎。本文以市民友誼與 公民友誼來指認這些作家的友誼論述。蘇格蘭啟蒙作家們有意識地回 應霍布斯、普芬多夫以及曼德維爾所留下的智識遺產與難題：人是否 僅僅是因為自利或自愛的理由而結成社會。面對個體主義與理性主義 的社會哲學，蘇格蘭啟蒙作家從情感論的角度強勢介入辯論。從哈奇 森的普遍慈愛開始，繼起的蘇格蘭啟蒙作家，漸次發展出不同的社會 友誼觀點，包括休姆與米勒的文明論，史密斯的習慣性共感與情境論， 克里洪的心智論，與佛格森的社會衝突論等。雖然這些啟蒙作家所論 友誼面貌不一，類型有別，但他們的著作卻共同宣稱，社會必然有友 愛情感的基礎。市民社會或公共領域不只滿足人們對快樂與安全的追 求，也是創造友誼的場所。對蘇格蘭啟蒙道德哲學家們而言，社會友 誼與家庭中兄弟姊妹，甚至夫妻的情誼只有程度上的差別，而無本質上的差異。

By reconstructing discussions of several influential figures in the Scottish Enlightenment, this article sheds light on novel arguments about social friendship. First, it argues that these Scottish luminaries forged a new approach to social friendship, distinct from the time-honored Greco-Roman tradition of friendship that cautioned the young to be prudent in choosing friends. Second, the article identifies two subtypes of social friendship, namely civil friendship and civic friendship, and argues that these enlightened writers actively propagated and deliberated upon the concept of general social friendship as conscientious responses to the ideas put forth by Hobbes, Pufendorf, and Mandeville, who claim that society or associations are formed for little more than the sake of self-love and self- preservation. Inspired by Francis Hutcheson’s idea of universal benevolence, David Hume, Adam Smith, William Cleghorn and Adam Ferguson engaged forcefully with the fashionable social philosophy of egoism and rationalism. While they distanced themselves from Hutcheson’s universalism, each philosopher developed unique forms of social friendship, aligned with their respective concerns surrounding civilization, habitual sympathy, philosophy of mind, and social conflict. Despite the subtle distinctions in their presentations and arguments, these Enlightenment thinkers collectively held firm to the entrenched principle that people enter into society, driven by mutual sentiments of agreement, care, or affection. To the Scottish moral philosophers, a civil society or public sphere is as much a space for the aggregation of individuals seeking mutual happiness and protection as it was a workshop of friendship.