期刊文献+

快乐论者会过一种享乐的生活吗?——基于伊壁鸠鲁主义和居勒尼学派的比较考察 被引量:1

Is it Possible for Hedonists to Live a Dissolute Life?——Based on the Comparison between Epicureanism and the Cyrenaic School
下载PDF
导出
摘要 对于快乐论者来说,快乐是至善;但是他们对于什么是作为目的的善有不同看法。在快乐和明智的关系上,居勒尼学派认为对于快乐的选择并非总是通过明智的判断,而伊壁鸠鲁则认为快乐与明智两者不可分离。在快乐和节制的关系上,居勒尼学派否认作为目的的快乐必须受到节制,而伊壁鸠鲁认为作为目的的快乐必须受到节制。尽管居勒尼学派有可能陷入一种享乐的生活,但是伊壁鸠鲁主义不能被看成是一种享乐主义。 For the Hedonists , pleasure is the highest Good , but they disagreed on what kind of pleasure could be regarded as the highest aim .For the relation between pleasure and prudence , the Cyrenaic school thought that the choice of pleasure were not always made by prudent judgments , while Epicurus claimed that pleasure and prudence were inseparable .For the relation between pleasure and moderation , Epicurus held that the pleasure as the highest aim must be moderate , while the Cyrenaic school denied that proposition .Although it is possible for the Cyrenaic school to indulge in a dissolute life , Epicureanism could not be viewed as a hedonist as such .
作者 许欢
出处 《北京社会科学》 CSSCI 北大核心 2015年第10期111-118,共8页 Social Sciences of Beijing
关键词 快乐论 至善 明智 节制 伊壁鸠鲁主义 Hedonism the Good prudence moderation Epicureanism
  • 相关文献

参考文献9

  • 1唐土红,喻权良.伊壁鸠鲁的快乐论及其伦理反思[J].伦理学研究,2006(3):71-75. 被引量:6
  • 2罗念生,水建馥.古希腊语汉语词典[M]商务印书馆,2004.
  • 3(古希腊)亚里士多德(Aristotle)著,廖申白.尼各马可伦理学[M]商务印书馆,2003.
  • 4Fred Feldman.Pleasure and the Good Life. . 2004
  • 5James Warren.Epicurus and Democritean Ethics:An archaeology of ataraxia. . 2002
  • 6Jeffery.S.Purinton.’’Epicurus on the telos’’. Phronesis . 1993
  • 7FredFeldman.PleasureandtheGoodLife. . 2004
  • 8JamesWarren.EpicurusandDemocriteanEthics:Anarchaeologyofataraxia. . 2002
  • 9Jeffery.S.Purinton.’’Epicurusonthetelos’’. Phronesis . 1993

共引文献55

同被引文献9

引证文献1

二级引证文献6

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部