休谟关于道德原则和人的全部义务的探究

IF 0.4 0 PHILOSOPHY Journal of Scottish Philosophy Pub Date : 2020-06-01 DOI:10.3366/jsp.2020.0263
E. Kroeker
{"title":"休谟关于道德原则和人的全部义务的探究","authors":"E. Kroeker","doi":"10.3366/jsp.2020.0263","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I examine, in this paper, the contents of one of the most famous religious texts of the early modern period, The Whole Duty of Man, and I show that Hume's Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Man is an attempt to reappropriate and replace the Anglican devotional with his own moral philosophy. Hume would reject the devotional's general methodology, its claims about the foundation of morality, and its list of duties. However, a careful reading of The Whole Duty of Man reveals that Hume shares its author's evaluation of pride and humility, and its insistence on utility and pleasure. Hume, I argue, would not think of this book as mortifying or monkish. Given the popularity of The Whole Duty of Man and Hume's desire to push religion back into the closet together with his passion for literary fame, we have good reasons to conclude that Hume was more envious than critical, and that the EPM was his own remastered version of what could be called ‘The Whole Merit of Man’.","PeriodicalId":41417,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scottish Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3366/jsp.2020.0263","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hume's Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals and The Whole Duty of Man\",\"authors\":\"E. Kroeker\",\"doi\":\"10.3366/jsp.2020.0263\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"I examine, in this paper, the contents of one of the most famous religious texts of the early modern period, The Whole Duty of Man, and I show that Hume's Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Man is an attempt to reappropriate and replace the Anglican devotional with his own moral philosophy. Hume would reject the devotional's general methodology, its claims about the foundation of morality, and its list of duties. However, a careful reading of The Whole Duty of Man reveals that Hume shares its author's evaluation of pride and humility, and its insistence on utility and pleasure. Hume, I argue, would not think of this book as mortifying or monkish. Given the popularity of The Whole Duty of Man and Hume's desire to push religion back into the closet together with his passion for literary fame, we have good reasons to conclude that Hume was more envious than critical, and that the EPM was his own remastered version of what could be called ‘The Whole Merit of Man’.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41417,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Scottish Philosophy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3366/jsp.2020.0263\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Scottish Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3366/jsp.2020.0263\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Scottish Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/jsp.2020.0263","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在本文中,我考察了近代早期最著名的宗教文本之一《人的全部义务》的内容,并表明休谟的《关于人的原则的探究》试图用他自己的道德哲学来重新利用和取代圣公会的虔诚信仰。休谟会拒绝灵修的一般方法论,它关于道德基础的主张,以及它的责任清单。然而,仔细阅读《人的全部义务》就会发现,休谟和作者一样,对骄傲和谦卑的评价,以及对功利和快乐的坚持。我认为,休谟不会认为这本书是一种羞辱或僧侣式的东西。鉴于《人的全部责任》的受欢迎程度,以及休谟对宗教的渴望,以及他对文学名声的热情,我们有充分的理由得出这样的结论:休谟更多的是嫉妒而不是批评,《EPM》是他自己重新制作的版本,可以被称为“人的全部优点”。
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
Hume's Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals and The Whole Duty of Man
I examine, in this paper, the contents of one of the most famous religious texts of the early modern period, The Whole Duty of Man, and I show that Hume's Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Man is an attempt to reappropriate and replace the Anglican devotional with his own moral philosophy. Hume would reject the devotional's general methodology, its claims about the foundation of morality, and its list of duties. However, a careful reading of The Whole Duty of Man reveals that Hume shares its author's evaluation of pride and humility, and its insistence on utility and pleasure. Hume, I argue, would not think of this book as mortifying or monkish. Given the popularity of The Whole Duty of Man and Hume's desire to push religion back into the closet together with his passion for literary fame, we have good reasons to conclude that Hume was more envious than critical, and that the EPM was his own remastered version of what could be called ‘The Whole Merit of Man’.
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
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊最新文献
Maximalising Providence: Samuel Rutherford's Augustinian Transformation of Scotist Scholasticism Archibald Pitcairne and the Newtonian Turn of Medical Philosophy Robert Balfour and William Chalmers on the Essence, Existence and Aptness of Accidents New Studies on Seventeenth-Century Scottish Philosophy Direct or Indirect Scotism? Seventeenth-Century Scottish Scholasticism and the Case of James Sibbald (1595–1647)
×
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