自由意志的根基及其限度——一種基于馬克思主義視角的闡釋
發(fā)布時間:2018-12-12 11:18
【摘要】:近十多年來,因腦神經(jīng)科學的介入,"人是否擁有自由意志"的古老爭論因其關(guān)系重大而成為哲學界的熱點問題,并出現(xiàn)了"否定"與"肯定"兩個話語陣營。然而爭論雙方的論證與探究活動皆遵循著相應(yīng)的規(guī)范本身,就體現(xiàn)著自由意志——若無自由意志,規(guī)范既無可能,也無必要。爭訟雙方之所以對此視而不見,只因二者皆陷入了一葉障目的思維誤區(qū),即雙方在探討自由意志時皆從無批判的既有理論和方法出發(fā)解構(gòu)了現(xiàn)實的人這一自由意志的根基,從而導(dǎo)致人擁有自由意志這一事實始終得不到合理解釋。立足于自由意志的根基,從現(xiàn)實的人出發(fā),我們看到盡管自由意志以生命與腦神經(jīng)組織的正常存續(xù)為必要條件,但卻是一種社會化的成就,因而既不可能被還原為腦神經(jīng)組織,亦不可能歸諸無人身的理性。同時,自由意志作為一種社會歷史性存在自有其限度。
[Abstract]:In the past ten years, because of the intervention of brain neuroscience, the ancient debate of "whether people have free will" has become a hot issue in philosophy because of its great importance, and there are two discourse camps of "negation" and "affirmative". However, the argumentation and inquiry activities of both sides of the argument follow the corresponding norms themselves, which embodies the free will-if there is no free will, the norm is neither possible nor necessary. The reason why the litigants have turned a blind eye to this is that both sides are caught in a blind thinking error, that is, both sides deconstruct the foundation of the free will of the realistic person from the existing theory and method without criticism when discussing the free will. Thus, the fact that man has free will has never been properly explained. Based on the foundation of free will, from the point of view of reality, we see that although free will is necessary for the normal existence of life and brain nerve tissue, it is an achievement of socialization and therefore cannot be reduced to brain nerve tissue. Nor can it be attributed to the absence of reason. At the same time, free will as a social historical existence has its limits.
【作者單位】: 浙江師范大學馬克思主義學院;
【基金】:國家社會科學基金重大招標項目“中國政治倫理思想通史”(項目號:16ZDA103) 教育部思政專項課題“高校思政課青年教師勝任力提升機制研究”(項目號:15JD710074)的階段性成果
【分類號】:D0
本文編號:2374467
[Abstract]:In the past ten years, because of the intervention of brain neuroscience, the ancient debate of "whether people have free will" has become a hot issue in philosophy because of its great importance, and there are two discourse camps of "negation" and "affirmative". However, the argumentation and inquiry activities of both sides of the argument follow the corresponding norms themselves, which embodies the free will-if there is no free will, the norm is neither possible nor necessary. The reason why the litigants have turned a blind eye to this is that both sides are caught in a blind thinking error, that is, both sides deconstruct the foundation of the free will of the realistic person from the existing theory and method without criticism when discussing the free will. Thus, the fact that man has free will has never been properly explained. Based on the foundation of free will, from the point of view of reality, we see that although free will is necessary for the normal existence of life and brain nerve tissue, it is an achievement of socialization and therefore cannot be reduced to brain nerve tissue. Nor can it be attributed to the absence of reason. At the same time, free will as a social historical existence has its limits.
【作者單位】: 浙江師范大學馬克思主義學院;
【基金】:國家社會科學基金重大招標項目“中國政治倫理思想通史”(項目號:16ZDA103) 教育部思政專項課題“高校思政課青年教師勝任力提升機制研究”(項目號:15JD710074)的階段性成果
【分類號】:D0
【相似文獻】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 張琳;自由的限度[J];中共中央黨校學報;2002年03期
2 錢昌照;錢勝愛;;自由意志探析[J];理論月刊;2007年12期
3 張中;;自由的譜系[J];中共四川省委黨校學報;2013年01期
4 黃義英;;君主政治格局內(nèi)人的自由意志與社會和諧問題[J];中華文化論壇;2010年02期
5 彭志敏;自由之理性規(guī)定及生存自由轉(zhuǎn)向[J];廣西社會科學;2005年09期
6 王功敏;自由視野中的民主——自由對民主的正負效應(yīng)[J];天中學刊;2005年03期
7 朱敏;;自由內(nèi)涵的再思考[J];法制與社會;2011年17期
8 張靖;陳俊;;自由及其限制[J];高等函授學報(哲學社會科學版);2011年06期
9 吳忠民;;自由新探[J];學術(shù)界;2010年08期
10 譚培文;;社會主義自由的張力與限制[J];中國社會科學;2014年06期
相關(guān)博士學位論文 前2條
1 包國祥;時間與自由[D];吉林大學;2008年
2 崔燕;朝向“真的自由”:李大釗自由觀研究[D];西南政法大學;2013年
相關(guān)碩士學位論文 前3條
1 張旭;財產(chǎn)成就自由[D];復(fù)旦大學;2010年
2 武掌華;論洛克的自由思想[D];湘潭大學;2006年
3 呂振濤;自由與受制[D];江西師范大學;2009年
,本文編號:2374467
本文鏈接:http://www.wukwdryxk.cn/shekelunwen/zhengzx/2374467.html
教材專著