首页> 外文学位 >The natural love of God over self: The role of self-interest in thirteenth-century ethics (Saint Thomas Aquinas, John Duns Scotus).
【24h】

The natural love of God over self: The role of self-interest in thirteenth-century ethics (Saint Thomas Aquinas, John Duns Scotus).

机译:上帝对自我的自然爱:自我利益在13世纪伦理学中的作用(圣托马斯·阿奎那,约翰·邓斯·斯科特斯)。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This dissertation uses the context of the thirteenth-century debate about the natural love of God over self to clarify the difference between the ethical system of Thomas Aquinas and that of John Duns Scotus. Although Thomas and Scotus both believe that such love is possible, they disagree about the reasons for this position.; Early thirteenth-century thinkers, such as William of Auxerre and Philip the Chancellor, were the first to distinguish between a natural love of God and charity, which is a love assisted by grace. Thomas Aquinas' approach to the issue is original. According to Thomas, since human beings are part of a political whole and also part of a whole whose good is God, it follows that they have a natural inclination to love the common good and God more than themselves. Although Thomas' position and his corresponding interpretation of Aristotle were upheld by Godfrey of Fontaines and Giles of Rome, it was severely criticized by James of Viterbo, who argued that the part always seeks its own good.; John Duns Scotus makes the same criticism of the part/whole argument, although Scotus emphasizes that the human will is free to act against the natural inclination for self-perfection. Scotus clearly distinguishes between the will and nature.; The conclusion of the dissertation argues that the debate prefigures the modern shift sway from an ethics based upon natural inclination along with the modern tendency to understand morality as a limitation of self-interest. Moreover, it is argued that modern Thomists need to take into account Thomas' original emphasis on natural inclination and the priority of the common good.
机译:本文以十三世纪关于上帝对自我的自然爱的辩论为背景,以阐明托马斯·阿奎那和约翰·邓斯·斯科特斯的道德体系之间的差异。尽管托马斯和斯科特斯都认为这样的爱是可能的,但他们不同意这一职位的原因。十三世纪早期的思想家,例如欧塞尔的威廉(William of Auxerre)和总理菲利普(Philip总理),是第一个区分自然对上帝的爱和慈善的人,慈善是恩典的辅助。托马斯·阿奎那(Thomas Aquinas)处理此问题的方法是原创的。托马斯认为,由于人类既是政治整体的一部分,又是善良是上帝的整体的一部分,因此,人们天生就倾向于爱共同的善良和上帝,而不是自己。虽然托马斯的立场和对亚里士多德的相应解释得到了枫丹白露的戈弗雷和罗马的吉尔斯的拥护,但维特博的詹姆士对此却提出了严厉的批评,他们认为这部分总是在寻求自己的利益。约翰·邓斯·斯科特斯(John Duns Scotus)对部分/整体论点也提出了同样的批评,尽管斯科特斯(Scotus)强调,人的意志可以自由地采取行动,反对自我完善的自然倾向。天蝎座清楚地将意志与自然区分开来。论文的结论认为,这场辩论预示着现代的转变已经从基于自然倾向的伦理学转向,以及现代的将道德理解为对自身利益的限制的趋势。此外,有人认为,现代托马斯主义者需要考虑托马斯最初对自然倾向的强调以及对共同利益的优先考虑。

著录项

  • 作者

    Osborne, Thomas M., Jr.;

  • 作者单位

    Duke University.;

  • 授予单位 Duke University.;
  • 学科 Philosophy.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2001
  • 页码 405 p.
  • 总页数 405
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 哲学理论;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号