约翰·洛克与凯瑟琳·考伯恩谈个人身份

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY RIVISTA DI STORIA DELLA FILOSOFIA Pub Date : 2021-06-01 DOI:10.3280/sf2021-002001
Emilio Maria De Tommaso, Giuliana Mocchi
{"title":"约翰·洛克与凯瑟琳·考伯恩谈个人身份","authors":"Emilio Maria De Tommaso, Giuliana Mocchi","doi":"10.3280/sf2021-002001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"John Locke's account of personal identity (Essay 2.27) is one of his most discussed theories. Opposing the Cartesian ontology of mind, Locke argued that the soul does not always think - for thinking is simply one of its operations, but not its essence -, and that personal identity consists in consciousness alone. Against Locke, an anonymous commentator published the Remarks upon an Essay concerning Humane Understanding (1697-99) charging Locke's view with possible immorality. Catharine Cockburn rebuffed the Remarker's objections, in her Defence of Mr. Locke's Essay (1702), depicting his view as more dangerous for morality than Locke's. This paper shifts the focus from Cockburn's defence of Locke's moral thought, to her apology for his theory of personal identity, including his probabilistic arguments in favour of the immortality of the soul. This shift of focus yields an alternative account of Cockburn's originality: first, because she offered a non-substance interpretation of Locke's theory of personal identity, that, for its time, was unusual, and remains relevant for contemporary philosophical debates over Locke; and second, because, following Kristeller, in the very act of defending and articulating anew Locke's theory, Cockburn in some sense appropriated it.","PeriodicalId":42923,"journal":{"name":"RIVISTA DI STORIA DELLA FILOSOFIA","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"John Locke and Catharine Cockburn on Personal Identity\",\"authors\":\"Emilio Maria De Tommaso, Giuliana Mocchi\",\"doi\":\"10.3280/sf2021-002001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"John Locke's account of personal identity (Essay 2.27) is one of his most discussed theories. Opposing the Cartesian ontology of mind, Locke argued that the soul does not always think - for thinking is simply one of its operations, but not its essence -, and that personal identity consists in consciousness alone. Against Locke, an anonymous commentator published the Remarks upon an Essay concerning Humane Understanding (1697-99) charging Locke's view with possible immorality. Catharine Cockburn rebuffed the Remarker's objections, in her Defence of Mr. Locke's Essay (1702), depicting his view as more dangerous for morality than Locke's. This paper shifts the focus from Cockburn's defence of Locke's moral thought, to her apology for his theory of personal identity, including his probabilistic arguments in favour of the immortality of the soul. This shift of focus yields an alternative account of Cockburn's originality: first, because she offered a non-substance interpretation of Locke's theory of personal identity, that, for its time, was unusual, and remains relevant for contemporary philosophical debates over Locke; and second, because, following Kristeller, in the very act of defending and articulating anew Locke's theory, Cockburn in some sense appropriated it.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42923,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"RIVISTA DI STORIA DELLA FILOSOFIA\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"RIVISTA DI STORIA DELLA FILOSOFIA\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3280/sf2021-002001\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RIVISTA DI STORIA DELLA FILOSOFIA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3280/sf2021-002001","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

约翰·洛克关于个人身份的论述(论文2.27)是他讨论最多的理论之一。洛克反对笛卡尔的心灵本体论,认为灵魂并不总是思考——因为思考只是它的操作之一,而不是它的本质——个人身份只存在于意识中。针对洛克,一位匿名评论员发表了《论一篇关于人道理解的文章》(1697-99),指责洛克的观点可能是不道德的。Catharine Cockburn在《为洛克先生的散文辩护》(1702年)中驳斥了这位杰出人物的反对意见,将他的观点描述为比洛克的更危险的道德观。本文将焦点从考伯恩对洛克道德思想的辩护转移到她对洛克个人身份理论的道歉,包括他支持灵魂不朽的概率论。这种焦点的转移产生了对科克伯恩独创性的另一种解释:首先,因为她对洛克的个人身份理论进行了非实质性的解释,这在当时是不寻常的,并且仍然与当代关于洛克的哲学辩论有关;第二,因为在克里斯特勒之后,在捍卫和阐述洛克理论的过程中,科克伯恩在某种意义上挪用了洛克的理论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
John Locke and Catharine Cockburn on Personal Identity
John Locke's account of personal identity (Essay 2.27) is one of his most discussed theories. Opposing the Cartesian ontology of mind, Locke argued that the soul does not always think - for thinking is simply one of its operations, but not its essence -, and that personal identity consists in consciousness alone. Against Locke, an anonymous commentator published the Remarks upon an Essay concerning Humane Understanding (1697-99) charging Locke's view with possible immorality. Catharine Cockburn rebuffed the Remarker's objections, in her Defence of Mr. Locke's Essay (1702), depicting his view as more dangerous for morality than Locke's. This paper shifts the focus from Cockburn's defence of Locke's moral thought, to her apology for his theory of personal identity, including his probabilistic arguments in favour of the immortality of the soul. This shift of focus yields an alternative account of Cockburn's originality: first, because she offered a non-substance interpretation of Locke's theory of personal identity, that, for its time, was unusual, and remains relevant for contemporary philosophical debates over Locke; and second, because, following Kristeller, in the very act of defending and articulating anew Locke's theory, Cockburn in some sense appropriated it.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Fondata nel 1946 da Mario Dal Pra, La rivista di storia della filosofia si è presto distinta, in Italia e all’estero, per aver affrontato con novità di ipotesi e con rigoroso riscontro filologico, temi e problemi dell’intera tradizione storica del pensiero occidentale. Ha dedicato fascicoli monografici al pensiero di Dewey, Russel, Carnap, Vailati, Hobbes , Hume, Aristotele, Epicuro, Abelardo, Husserl, Kant e Hegel; ha pubblicato e pubblica studi sui problemi di maggiore interesse della storia del pensiero; rende noti testi inediti e documenti; affronta l’esame degli aspetti più significativi del dibattito filosofico contemporaneo.
期刊最新文献
Libri ricevuti Recensioni Spinoza e la temporalità plurale. Dalla teoria del tempo alla teoria della storia Spinoza nel XXI secolo: la nuova edizione critica dell'Ethica e l'orizzonte delle ricerche spinoziane tra Francia e Italia Tra sociniani e impostori: Spinoza e l'Islam. Alcuni appunti
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1