康德與孟子自律倫理學之比較研究

南華大學機構典藏系統 > 人文學院 > 生死學系(生死學系碩士班,哲學與生命教育碩士班) > 博碩士論文-哲學與生命教育碩士班 > Item 987654321/17996

jsp.display-item.identifier=請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: http://nhuir.nhu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/17996

题名:	康德與孟子自律倫理學之比較研究
其它题名:	A comparative Study on the Autonomy Ethics of I. Kant and Mencius
作者:	楊哲睿 Yang, Che-jui
貢獻者:	哲學與生命教育學系陳士誠 Shih-chen Chen
关键词:	性善論;心;四端之心;自律;意志 autonomy;mind;theory of goodness of human nature;four begingings of moral mind;will
日期:	2012
上传时间:	2015-01-07 15:58:00 (UTC+8)
摘要:	本文主要從康德與孟子之自律倫理學與重要的相關研究來探討，並在文獻的蒐集、考察與綜合批判的過程中，歸納、比較出兩者的同異之處與理論之限制，期待獲取對推行品格教育的有益內容。本文架構採用以下的研究過程：在2. 中，筆者首先從康德《道德底形上學之基礎》之翻譯原典探討善的意志與義務的內涵，並進一步分析義務與道德價值的關係、義務的三個定理，並舉例加以說明。最後從道德情感之分析指出道德主體必是形式的而非感性的。在3. 中從道德律的分析，指出其先天性和適用的範圍，並說明令式的種類及可能性後，再敘定言令式的五個形式原理，最後歸納出自律是道德的最高原則，而意志的格律如非出於自我立法，只能成就他律道德。在4. 中先論自由為意志自律的關鍵，同時也是有理性者意志的特質之外，並從康德的雙重世界觀點來論證自由意志，最後說明法則所以可能，是因為自由使吾人超脫感性世界的決定因素，將合於法則的行為視為義務。在5. 中從《孟子》之若干篇章中說明孟子之重要主張，如：人性論、性善說、仁義內在說進行分析；而孟子「仁義內在說」所表示意義即是道德主體的自律。此外，在5.3. 與5.4. 中，筆者從牟宗三《心體與性體》與李明輝《儒家與康德》這兩本書中，指出兩學者對康德與孟子倫理學之理解與比較。最後，由於道德主體性架構之不同，使同屬於自律倫理學的康德與孟子倫理學對道德法則的要求有著不同的主張，前者強調純形式的原則，後者則將實質的四端之心(情)上提使心、理、情為一。同時，基於兩者主體架構之差異，分別說明其道德實踐的動力與限制，以期當作未來應用於道德教育之參考。　　In my paper I would like to discuss and compare the autonomy ethics of I. Kant with of Mencius and the related studies. The results obtained from this study are expected to provide beneficial materials for the character education and personality cultivation. The content of this thesis is organized as follows: Chapter 2 first discusses the good will and duty introduced in Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals by Kant, and is then followed by the analyses of the relationship between duty and the ethical value, as well as the three principles of duty. With the analytical cases of moral sentiment, this chapter proofs that the moral subject is indicated to be formal, rather than sensible. In Chapter 3, five principles of the categorical imperatives are described with the introduction of the scope and applicability of priori and the classification and possibilities of the imperative. This chapter also summarizes that autonomy occupies the highest priority of moral. The character of will can only act as heteronymous moral. Chapter 4 explains that freedom plays not only the key role in the autonomy of will but also the characteristics of the rational will. Kant’s intelligible and sensible worlds are further used to illustrate the free will. Freedom is indicated as the most influential determinant to transcend the sensible world and legal behaviors are therefore regarded as duty. Chapter 5 compares the viewpoints of ethics introduced by Kant and Mencius from 《Body of the mind and of human nature》by Mou Tsong-san and《Confucianism and Kant》by Lee Ming-huei. One of the Mencius’ theory of benevolence and righteousness inside our mind which means the autonomy of moral subject is indicated with a collection of his important viewpoints, such as separation grand behavior from humble behavior、theory of human nature、theory of goodness of human nature, etc. Due to the different schemes in the moral subjects, Kant and Mencius possessed variant explanation toward autonomy of ethics, in which purely formal is emphasized in Kant’s perspective while the Mencius combined mind、principle、emotion into the four ends. Based upon such the difference which introduces the restriction and driving factors of fulfillment of moral, the conclusion of this study can be the important reference and application to the moral education.
显示于类别:	[生死學系(生死學系碩士班,哲學與生命教育碩士班)] 博碩士論文-哲學與生命教育碩士班

文件中的档案:

档案	描述	大小	格式	浏览次数
100NHU05259025-001.pdf		808Kb	Adobe PDF	710	检视/开启
index.html		0Kb	HTML	358	检视/开启

在NHUIR中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.

TAIR相关文章

数据加载中.....