期刊文献+

柏拉图“高贵的谎言”的“高贵性”所在

Where the “Nobility” of Plato’s “Noble Lie” Lies
下载PDF
导出
摘要 柏拉图在《理想国》中用于教化城邦的“高贵的谎言”受到政治哲学上“专制主义”和“谎言的危害”的质疑,本文旨在回应质疑的同时,阐明“高贵的谎言”的高贵性所在。对于专制主义的回应,本文首先分析“高贵的谎言”的原则是否与专制政体的精神动力一致,其次探究其内涵究竟是指向某个特别政体还是为所有政体所普适,结论为“高贵的谎言”并非为专制主义张本;对于“谎言的危害”的回应,本文将谎言的定义拆分为柏拉图的定义下的谎言、日常伦理层面的谎言和存在主义哲学层面的谎言三层,逐一分析“高贵的谎言”是否符合这三层的定义,其次分析即使在事实判断上构成谎言,是否在价值判断上应该否定其价值,即“高贵的谎言”是否真正具有高贵性,结论为“高贵的谎言”只在日常伦理的层面可被定义为“谎言”,但其价值并不因此而受到否定。最后,本文将讨论“高贵的谎言”的高贵性究竟何在,通过分析其动机阐释“高贵的谎言”所代表的教育方式对城邦的意义和谎言对哲学和哲学家的保护作用。 Plato’s “Noble Lie” used to educate the city-state of Athens in The Republic is questioned by the “absolutism” at the level of political philosophy and “harm of lies”. The purpose of this article is to respond to the objections faced by “Noble Lie” and clarify the nobility of it. In response to the objection of authoritarianism, this paper will first analyze whether the principle of “Noble Lie” has the necessary mental condition of autocracy. Then whether the connotation of “Noble Lie” refers to a particular polity or is universal to all polities will be further explored. The conclusion will be drawn that “Noble lie” is not a pretense for authoritarianism. In response to the objection of “harm of lies”, this paper will divide the definition of lies into three categories: Plato’s definition of lies, lies at the daily conversation level and lies at the level of existential philosophy. The paper will analyze whether “Noble Lie” meets the definitions of these three categories one by one, and then analyze even if it constitutes a lie in terms of factual judgment, whether its value should be denied at the level of value judgment, that is, whether “Noble Lie” is truly noble. And the conclusion will be drawn that “Noble Lie” can only be defined as “lie” at the level of daily conversation, but its value cannot be denied because of it. Then, this paper will discuss the nobility of the “Noble Lie”. Through the analysis of its motivation, the meaning of the educational methods represented by “Noble Lies” to city-states and the protection to philosophers and philosophers will be illustrated.
作者 徐嘉扬
出处 《哲学进展》 2024年第1期128-133,共6页 Advances in Philosophy
  • 相关文献

二级参考文献12

  • 1陈晓平.功利与情感之间——评休谟的道德哲学[J].哲学研究,2003(2):75-80. 被引量:15
  • 2《国家篇》,载《柏拉图全集》第2卷,王晓朝译,北京:人民出版社,2003年版,第381、628-629页.
  • 3[英]凯斯·安塞尔一皮尔逊:《尼采反卢梭--尼采的道德一政治思想研究》,宗成河等译,华夏出版社,2005年,第20页.
  • 4[德]尼采:《超善恶:未来哲学序曲》,张念东、凌素心译,中央编译出版社,2000年,第214、222、202、228页.
  • 5[德]海德格尔:《面向思的事情》,陈小文译,商务印书馆,1996年,第70页.
  • 6[德]康德:《论永久和平》,《历史理性批判文集》,何兆武译,商务印书馆,1991年,第139页.
  • 7柏拉图:《柏拉图的《会饮)》,刘小枫译,华夏出版社,2003年,第47-53、68-7001-75.77,92页.
  • 8Plato, Republic, The dialogues of Plato, vol. III(3hird Edition). Translated by B. Jowett, Oxford University Press,1892,pp.205-206.
  • 9刘铁芳,樊杰.古典传统的回归与教养性教育的重建[J].高等教育研究,2010,31(11):35-40. 被引量:11
  • 10王坤庆.教师专业发展的境界:形成教师个人的教育哲学[J].高等教育研究,2011,32(5):22-28. 被引量:55

共引文献5

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