阿伦特、亚里士多德与行动

本文详细梳理了阿伦特的行动理论与亚里士多德的行动理论的关系。作者首先肯定了阿伦特对亚里士多德行动概念的借鉴,认为亚里士多德关于家庭与城邦的区分以及劳动、工作和行动的区分的运用,为阿伦特的行动理论以及对于积极生活的阐释提供了基本结构。阿伦特追随亚里士多德的观点,认为家庭和城邦的区别是私人领域与公共领域的区别的基础,也是自由和必然的区别的基础。政治是目的而不是手段。不这样思考政治,就剥夺了政治的神圣性。这个区别成为阿伦特政治理论的轴心。但是文章同时指出,阿伦特在政治的自足性问题上有异于亚里士多德,她抓住了亚里士多德政治理论的内在紧张,分析了位于其“实践”概念核心处的工具主义。在亚里士多德那里,政治家和公民的实践活动（即行动）最后仍然是通过其对国家正义——即共同善——的贡献得到评价的。行动的价值不在自身,而是在于实现国家的最终善的目的。因此,在亚里士多德那里,行动说到底还是手段。在这个意义上,亚里士多德对实践与制作的区分没有能够彻底告别伦理学和政治哲学的目的论框架。

This article elaborates the relationship between Arendt and Aristotle＇s action theories. The author first affirms that Arendt learns from Aristotle＇s concept of action, and believes that Aristotle＇s distinctions between family and state, between labor, work and action provide a basic framework for Arendt＇s action theory and her explanation for vitaactiva. Following Aris- totle, Arendt believes the difference between family and state is the basis to distinguish necessity. private Politics sphere and public sphere, and to distinguish freedom and is not the means but the end, or the sanctity of politics is deprived. This distinction is the core in Arendt＇s political theory. However the article also points out that, Arendt is different from Aristotle when discus- sing self-containedness. She feels the inner intension of Aristotle＇s political theory and investigates the instrumentalism in the core of his concept of ＂praxis＂ . As for Aristotle, praxis （action） by politicians and citizens is e- ventually evaluated by its contribution to the justice of the state, that common good. The value of action is not by itself but to achieve the good of the state. Therefore, action is still a method to Aristotle, wh is, the highest ose dis- tinction of praxis and poiesis does not jump out of the teleological box of ethics and political philosophy.