首页> 外文学位 >Deliberation, faith, and freedom in Alexander of aphrodisias and clement of Alexandria.
【24h】

Deliberation, faith, and freedom in Alexander of aphrodisias and clement of Alexandria.

机译:对亚历山大的春药和亚历山大的克莱门特的审议,信仰和自由。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This dissertation fits into the larger investigation of the historical development of the concepts of freedom and volition in antiquity. It is oriented toward a question addressed by Albrecht Dihle and Michael Frede concerning the origins of the concept of free will as either a Christian or a Stoic contribution.;As the concepts of freedom and volition are very broad, the present work does not attempt an exhaustive treatment. It does not claim to find any particular moment at which free will came into being as a usable concept, since Dihle and Frede have already established two very plausible starting points for use as markers of free will's development. Rather, this dissertation presents additional evidence for the better understanding of one particular chronological stage lying between Frede's Epictetus and Dihle's Augustine. I will focus on the head of the Alexandrian Christian intellectual circle, Clement, in comparison with the head of the imperially-funded Peripatetic Lyceum, Alexander of Aphrodisias, at the turn of the third century CE.;These authors bear two similarities to each other which in turn distinguish them from the model of freedom discussed by Dihle and Frede. First, Alexander and Clement each explain responsibility and moral progress in terms of a precognitive act, deliberation or faith respectively, by which a person is responsible for engaging or not engaging the intellect toward right conduct. Second, they both specify that whether one performs this precognitive act is not predetermined by any antecedent causes. In this they develop a distinct indeterminist notion of freedom to do otherwise that is a very different kind of freedom from that developed by Epictetus and Augustine.;These two authors are significant to this larger investigation of free will's provenance for two further reasons. One is the prominent use they make of Aristotle's texts in addition to their continued use of Stoic categories. The other is the fact that the Christian Clement and the Peripatetic Alexander each integrated Aristotelian and Stoic psychology into a fairly similar---and novel---account of human responsibility and moral progress at about the same time.
机译:本论文适合对古代自由与自愿概念的历史发展进行较大的考察。它是针对阿尔布雷希特·迪勒(Albrecht Dihle)和迈克尔·弗雷德(Michael Frede)提出的,关于自由意志概念的起源的问题,自由意志概念是基督教的还是斯多葛派的。由于自由和意志的概念非常广泛,因此本工作并未尝试详尽的治疗。它没有要求找到在任何时候将自由意志形成为可用概念的特定时刻,因为Dihle和Frede已经建立了两个非常合理的起点来用作自由意志发展的标志。相反,本文为进一步理解弗雷德的《诗人》和迪勒的《奥古斯丁》之间的一个特定的时间阶段提供了额外的证据。我将重点介绍亚历山大基督教知识界的领袖克莱门特(Clement),以及由帝国政府资助的公元三世纪初由君主制的peripatetic Lyceum(亚历山大·阿波罗狄西亚斯)领导的人;这些作者彼此之间有两个相似之处。这又将他们与Dihle和Frede讨论的自由模式区分开来。首先,亚历山大和克莱门特分别根据预知性行为,审议或信仰来解释责任和道德进步,由一个人负责使智力参与或不参与正确的行为。其次,它们都规定,任何先前的原因都不能预先确定一个人是否执行了这种预知行为。在这种情况下,他们提出了一个明确的自由决定权,即与其他人不同,这是与Epictetus和Augustine所发展的自由截然不同的自由。这两个作者对于大规模的自由意志起源调查具有重要意义,这有两个原因。一个是除了继续使用Stoic类别外,他们对Aristotle文本的突出使用。另一个事实是,克里斯蒂安·克莱门特(Christian Clement)和海妖派亚历山大(Peripatetic Alexander)都将亚里斯多德主义和斯多葛式的心理学融入了几乎同时的人类责任和道德进步的相当相似的小说中。

著录项

  • 作者

    Robinson, Daniel S.;

  • 作者单位

    Graduate Theological Union.;

  • 授予单位 Graduate Theological Union.;
  • 学科 Philosophy.;Religious history.;Ancient history.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2015
  • 页码 303 p.
  • 总页数 303
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 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