意志與希望－多瑪斯與亞里斯多德倫理學的差異

Will and Wish-The Differences between Aquinas' and Aristotle's Ethics

童群霖(Qun-lin TONG)

多瑪斯 ； 亞里斯多德 ； 意志 ； 希望 ； 理智 ； 人的類型 ； 自然法 ； 倫理德性 ； 審慎 ； Thomas Aquinas ； Aristotle ； Will ； Wish ； Intellect ； Human Types ； Natural Law ； Moral Virtues ； Prudence

哲學與文化

46卷1期（2019 / 01 / 01）

169 - 183

繁體中文

多瑪斯將出自奧斯定傳統的意志概念引入亞里斯多德式的倫理學，取代其原有的希望概念。這造成了多瑪斯與亞里斯多德倫理學的何種差異，為學界所爭論。本文認為，多瑪斯的意志依託於理智，意志之為人性行為的始點，與理智相互包含，一同運作。引入意志概念後，多瑪斯對人性行為的解釋更為統一且更為理性化。亞里斯多德的希望則出自習常用語，它首要指對未來的籌畫，亦指籠統的欲求，作為理性欲求的希望並不總是倫理行為的始點。亞里斯多德更為強調不同類型的人的欲望品質有別。此外，多瑪斯的意志理論有其自然法思想作為支撐。律法的普遍自明性使多瑪斯更為強調倫理德性。亞里斯多德處沒有多瑪斯式的自然法，「好人的理智」而非律法是行為標準的最終權威。相應地，審慎在亞里斯多德的倫理學中有著更廣闊的空間。本文期待，在功利主義和義務論主導倫理學的當下，探討二位先聖對欲望問題的不同認識，可以助益我們反思現代人對心靈和善的理解。

Aquinas introduces the concept will into Aristotelian ethics which replaces the original concept wish. Academics have been debating what differences does it cause between their ethics. This article argues that Aquinas' will is interdependent with intellect and as the starting point of moral actions, it works together with intellect. With the introduction of will, Aquinas' interpretation of human behavior is more generalized and more rationalized. Aristotle's wish comes from common usage. It refers primarily to the planning of the future, and also desire in general. As rational desire, wish is not always the starting point of moral actions. Aristotle emphasizes the different qualities of desire of different types of people. Further, Aquinas' theory of will has its root in his idea of natural law. The universal self-evident nature of law makes Aquinas emphasis more on moral virtues. Aristotle doesn't have the Thomasian natural law. For him, The ＂the reason of good man＂ rather than the law is the ultimate authority of moral standard. Accordingly, prudence has more space in Aristotle's ethics. Under the domination of utilitarism and deontology in ethics, by showing the two sages' different views on desire, I hope, this article could help us to reflect on the modern understanding of soul and good.

1. 尤淑如(2003)。多瑪斯對倫理行為之分析。哲學與文化，30(8)
   連結：
2. 潘小慧(2011)。多瑪斯德行倫理學系統建構中的自然法。哲學與文化，38(4)
   連結：
3. Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologica, https://dhspriory.org/thomas/summa/index.html（檢索於 2018 年 12 月 19 日）.
4. Aquinas, Thomas,Foster, Kenelm(trans.),Humphries, Sylvester(trans.)(1951).Commentary on Aristotle's De anima.New Haven:Yale University Press.
5. Aquinas, Thomas,Litzinger, C. I.(trans.)(1993).Commentary on the Nicomachean Ethics.Notre Dame:Dumb Ox Books.
6. Aristotle,Bartlett, Robert C.(trans.),Collins, Susan D.(trans.)(2011).Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics.Chicago:The University of Chicago.
7. Augustine,Williams, Thomas(trans.)(1993).On Free Choice of the Will.Indianapolis:Hackett Publishing Company.
8. Burger, Ronna(2008).Aristotle's Dialogue with Socrates: On the Nicomachean Ethics.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.
9. Jaffa, Harry V.(1979).Thomism and Aristotelianism: A Study of the Commentary by Thomas Aquinas on the Nicomachean Ethics.Connecticut:Greenwood Press.
10. Kenny, Anthony(1979).Aristotle's Theory of the Will.London:Duckworth.
11. Polansky, Ronald(2007).Aristotle's De Anima.New York:Cambride University Press.
12. Shanley, Brian J.(1999).Aquinas on Pagan Virtue.The Thomist,63,553-577.
13. Westberg, Daniel(1994).Did Aquinas Change His Mind about the Will,?.The Thomist,58,41-60.
14. Westberg, Daniel(2002).Right Practical Reason: Aristotle, Action, and Prudence in Aquinas.Oxford:Clarendon Press.
15. 吉爾松,沈清松（譯）(2008).中世紀哲學精神.上海:上海人民出版社.
16. 多瑪斯,周克勤（譯）(2008).神學大全.臺南:碧岳學社.
17. 亞里斯多德,吳壽彭（譯）(1999).靈魂論及其他.北京:商務印書館.
18. 亞里斯多德,廖申白（譯）(2010).尼各馬可倫理學.北京:商務印書館.
19. 段德智(2014).中世紀哲學研究.北京:人民出版社.
20. 麥金太爾,宋繼傑（譯）(2011).追尋美德：道德理論研究.南京:譯林出版社.