数字吉凶纵横谈

人类进化到识数阶段,可能就对不同数字赋予了吉凶、善恶的含义,可是对远古人们的这种认识缺乏记录和研究,不甚了解。自从有史以来,由于不同族群的经济社会发展,不同宗教和生活习俗的影响,不同族群的人们就形成对不同数字的偏爱、憎恶与忌讳,至今仍为相当多的人们所相信和因循。人们认为某些数字可以影响事物的发展、生活     

现代西方善恶评价理论述评

善恶评价的性质和善恶评价的真理性问题是伦理学研究的难点问题。现代西方伦理学界对此问题也多有探讨。对现代西方善恶评价理论的主要观点的介绍,有助于我们深化善恶评价问题的研究。     

道德选择与善恶因果律

选择 ,是人类所特有的有目的的活动的一定形式 ,是个人在自己面临的各种可能性之间进行取舍的一种特殊活动。道德选择 ,作为一种现实的活动 ,正是人们在多种可能性之间或在某些矛盾冲突的复杂情景中所作的善恶选择。它总是建立在心理活动的基础之上 ,这种心理活动不仅仅是通常所简单认为的那种内心善恶搏斗 ,同时也是一种复杂的利弊权衡过程。而这种对道德选择的权衡 ,又与人的本性紧密联系。一、道德选择的人性基础人是利己的 ,还是利他的 ?从古到今 ,这个问题一直是人们争论的焦点。在中国古代 ,就有人性善恶的说法 ,而以儒家的“人性本善…     

Good,Evil, and the Necessity of an Act

Kant asserts that the formula of the schools “nihil appetimus, nisi sub ratione boni” is undoubtedly certain when clearly expressed (KpV 177). Conversely, doubt reflects a failure clearly to express it. Once we comprehend the concepts of the formula, of the good (bonum) and of desire (appetitus), there is no doubting it. In recent times, the formula has fallen into doubt. If Kant is right, then this shows a lack of clarity with respect to the concepts the formula conjoins. I want to suggest that Kant is right: the formula of the schools is undoubtedly certain. I first explain in Kant’s own terms why there is no such thing as doubting the formula. Then I approach it from a different angle, provided by what I take to be the unclarity that affects current thought on the topic.     

恶、自由与康德的善人概念

本文将借鉴康德哲学的资源来重新思考自由与恶的问题.之所以以康德为中心,主要是因为康德与自由主义(Liberalism)之间存在着微妙的关系.一方面,两者有很多共同的价值诉求,如在凯克斯看来,"自由主义归属给个人的核心重要性通过康德所表达的自主观念得到极大的提高";而在另一方面,康德与自由主义在诸如自主这样的基本概念层面并不完全相同,而康德哲学的复杂性与深刻性也许能为容纳这些基本价值提供另一种可能的空间.     

市场经济假象与善恶倒错

市场经济的本质是利己与利他的统一,并且只有在利己与利他统一之中才能担保市场经济的健康运用。可是,由于市场经济活动的主体在从事经济活动时,更多地是从思考本身利益出发,更甚者是亚当.斯密把利己作为市场经济运行的原点,因而产生了市场经济的一个假象,似乎利己是市场经济的本质。正是这种市场经济假象导致道德错识,认为利己自私在市场经济活动中具有天然的道德合理性。揭露市场经济这种假象,为善恶的各归其位具有重要意义。     

The Tree of Knowledge: Good and Evil: Conflicting Interpretations

This article examines a debate concerning the exegesis of the story of the garden of Eden and the tree of knowledge, as told in Genesis. Two contradictory interpretations of the garden narrative are examined, the first as the story is elucidated by the psychoanalyst and social theorist Erich Fromm and the alternative interpretation by the Talmudic scholar and philosopher Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik. This article compares and contrasts their exegeses and the respective implications of each view. The controversy, which has profound implications, reflects differences in world views concerning the good life, autonomy and relatedness, assertion and submission, will and surrender, obedience and rebellion, independence and interdependence, subjectivity and intersubjectivity. Links are drawn to a variety of contemporary psychoanalytic theories, developments, and controversies.     

Aquinas on Quality

For Kant, Aristotle's categories are arbitrary but brilliant and they do not ultimately correspond to extramental reality. For Aquinas, however, they are rational divisions of extramental being. In this perennial and ongoing dispute, the various positions seem to dissolve upon delving into the particulars of any one category. If, however, the categories are divisions of extramental being, it should be possible to offer plausible accounts of particular categories. I offer Aquinas's unstudied derivation of quality as a test case to see how one could hold, and how Aquinas did hold, to a realism about Aristotle's categories at a highly specific level. Although Aristotle divides quality into four species and some further subspecies, unlike Aquinas, he offers no reasons for these divisions. For Aquinas each accident is a particular mode of existing, that is, it is a particular way that an accident exists in a substance. In the case of quality, this mode of existing follows substantial form and its real extramental causes or effects further divide it into four species. Aquinas's account is both compelling and original, inspired by Aristotle but also un-Aristotelian. The paper concludes by comparing Aquinas's account of quality with the best extant account of Aristotle's quality, namely, Paul Studtmann's.     

Aquinas on Doctrine

Book reviewed:
Thomas Weinandy, Daniel Keating and John Yocum (eds). Aquinas on Doctrine: A Critical Introduction.     

Recent Scholarship on Aquinas

Books reviewed in this article: John Bowlin, Contingency and Fortune in Aquinas's Ethics John I. Jenkins, C.S.C., Knowledge and Faith in Thomas Aquinas John Milbank and Catherine Pickstock, Truth in Aquinas