1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. 文學院
  4. 學位論文
  5. Item

學術產出-學位論文

文章檢視/開啟

書目匯出

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

引文資訊

TAIR相關學術產出

題名 應對梅瑟爾對希克「愛任紐型神義論」的挑戰
Responding to Mesle’s challenge to Hick's Irenaean Theodicy
作者 劉秉正
Liu, Bing-Zheng
貢獻者 劉若韶
Liu, Ruo-Shao
劉秉正
Liu, Bing-Zheng
關鍵詞 希克
梅瑟爾
神義論
惡的問題
愛任紐
John Hick
C. Robert Mesle
theodicy
problem of evil
Irenaeus
日期 2025
上傳時間 1-四月-2025 11:40:00 (UTC+8)
摘要 哲學歷史上有許多關於神的惡的問題的討論，神的善與惡的存在之間的理論張力有許多哲學家都有提出，也有許多哲學家嘗試解決這個問題。其中最具代表的性的就就是普蘭丁格（Plantinga）的辯護理論，基本終結了惡的問題的邏輯矛盾問題。而希克（Hick）則是區別於歷史上的主流神義論理論，吸收了愛任紐的神學思想，提出了另闢蹊徑的愛任紐型神義論來嘗試解決惡的問題。愛任紐神義論認為，創造是一個分為兩個階段的過程：生物階段和倫理階段。通過這些階段，人在自由意志的基礎上逐漸成長為道德和靈性完善的個體。 本文分析了梅瑟爾的批評，梅瑟爾主要批判希克否定了世界上“真實的惡”，認為世界上的許多惡只是“表面惡”，其存在最終服務於神的更大善。梅瑟爾認為某些惡，例如納粹集中營、嬰兒夭折等，無法通過發展出美德和道德品質來正當化，這樣的惡純粹是無意義的痛苦，而不應成為神義論的辯護理由。 論文最後結合了希克對梅瑟爾批評的回應，希克認為梅瑟爾誤解了他的神義論，希克並未主張每個惡都是神直接安排的，而是這些惡在神創造的宇宙中偶然出現，最終仍服務於神的更大善。但是同時本文會更進一步找出希克和梅瑟爾的論述的漏洞，進一步完善愛任紐型神義論。
參考文獻 Aquinas, T. (1947). Summa Theologica. New York: Benziger Brothers, Inc. Aquinas, T. (2003). On Evil. Regan, R. (Trans.). (Davies, B. Ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Augustine. (1959) Of true religion. Burleigh, J. H. S. (Trans.). Henry Regnery Company. Augustine. (1998), Confessions, H. Chadwick (trans.), Oxford University Press. Augustine.(1887A) On the Nature of Good. Newman, A. H. (Trans.). Nicene and post-Nicene fathers, First series, Vol. 4 (P. Schaff, Ed.). Christian Literature Publishing Co. Augustine.(1887B) The city of god. Dods, M. (Trans.). Nicene and post-Nicene fathers, First series, Vol. 2 (P. Schaff, Ed.). Christian Literature Publishing Co. Augustine.(1887C) The Handbook on Faith, Hope and Love . Shaw, J. F. (Trans.). Nicene and post-Nicene fathers, First series, Vol. 3 (P. Schaff, Ed.). Christian Literature Publishing Co. Augustine.(2010)On the Free Choice of the Will. King, P. (Trans). On the Free Choice of the Will, On Grace and Free Choice, and Other Writings .(King, P. Ed.). Cambridge University Press. Bayle, P. (1965). Historical and Critical Dictionary: Selections. Popkin, H.R.(Trans. & Ed.). with assistance from Craig Brush. The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc. Chignell , A.(2021 ) Kinds and Origins of Evil .https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evil-kinds-origins. Davies, B. (2011). Thomas Aquinas on God and Evil. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press. Draper, P. (1989) Pain and Pleasure: An Evidential Problem for Theists. Noûs Vol. 23, No. 3 (Jun., 1989): pp 331-350 Farrer，A. (2007). Editor's introduction. Leibniz (2007). Theodicy. Huggard, E.M. (trans.). (Farrer，A. Ed.) BiblioBazaar. Fergusson, D. (2018) ，The Providence of God: A Polyphonic Approach， Cambridge University Press Frick, P. (1999) ，Divine providence in Philo of Alexandria. Mohr Siebeck. Hick, J. (1991). Response to Mesle. John Hick's Theodicy: A Process Humanist Critique. Plgrave Macmillan UK: pp. 115-134 Hick，J. (2010). Evil and the God of Love. Palgrave Macmillan UK. Hume, D. (2007). Dialogues concerning Natural Religion and Natural History of Religion. (Coleman, D. Ed.). Cambridge University Press. Inwagen, P. V. （1988）The Magnitude, Duration, and Distribution of Evil: A Theodicy. Philosophical Topics Vol. 16, No. 2, Philosophy of Religion (FALL 1988), pp. 161-187 Mackie, J.L. (1955). Evil and Omnipotence. Mind New Series, Vol. 64, No. 254. (Apr., 1955): pp.200–212. Mesle, C. R.（1993）. Process Theology: A Basic Introduction. Chalice presss. Mesle, C. R. (1991). John Hick's Theodicy: A Process Humanist Critique. Plgrave Macmillan UK. Nygren, A. (1953). Agape and Eros. Watson, P.S. (Trans.). The Westminster Press. O’Brien, D. (1996), Plotinus on matter and evil, The Cambridge Companion to Plotinus, L.P. Gerson (ed.), Cambridge University Press: pp. 171–195. Plantinga, A. (1977) God, Freedom, and Evil. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. Plato. (1997) Republic. Grube, G.M.A. (Trans.). Plato complete works. Cooper, J.M.(ed.). Hackett Publishing Company: pp. 971-1223 Plotinus. (1992). The six enneads. S. MacKenna & B. S. Page, (Trans.). Encyclopedia Britannica. Rowe, William L. (1979) The Problem of Evil and Some Varieties of Atheism. American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 16, No. 4 (Oct., 1979): pp 335-341 Stump, E. (1985) The Problem of Evil. Faith and Philosophy Vol. 2, No. 4(Oct., 1985): pp 392-423.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
哲學系
109154015
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109154015
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 劉若韶zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Liu, Ruo-Shaoen_US
dc.contributor.author (作者) 劉秉正zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (作者) Liu, Bing-Zhengen_US
dc.creator (作者) 劉秉正zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Liu, Bing-Zhengen_US
dc.date (日期) 2025en_US
dc.date.accessioned 1-四月-2025 11:40:00 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 1-四月-2025 11:40:00 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-四月-2025 11:40:00 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) G0109154015en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/156454-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 哲學系zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 109154015zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 哲學歷史上有許多關於神的惡的問題的討論，神的善與惡的存在之間的理論張力有許多哲學家都有提出，也有許多哲學家嘗試解決這個問題。其中最具代表的性的就就是普蘭丁格（Plantinga）的辯護理論，基本終結了惡的問題的邏輯矛盾問題。而希克（Hick）則是區別於歷史上的主流神義論理論，吸收了愛任紐的神學思想，提出了另闢蹊徑的愛任紐型神義論來嘗試解決惡的問題。愛任紐神義論認為，創造是一個分為兩個階段的過程：生物階段和倫理階段。通過這些階段，人在自由意志的基礎上逐漸成長為道德和靈性完善的個體。 本文分析了梅瑟爾的批評，梅瑟爾主要批判希克否定了世界上“真實的惡”，認為世界上的許多惡只是“表面惡”，其存在最終服務於神的更大善。梅瑟爾認為某些惡，例如納粹集中營、嬰兒夭折等，無法通過發展出美德和道德品質來正當化，這樣的惡純粹是無意義的痛苦，而不應成為神義論的辯護理由。 論文最後結合了希克對梅瑟爾批評的回應，希克認為梅瑟爾誤解了他的神義論，希克並未主張每個惡都是神直接安排的，而是這些惡在神創造的宇宙中偶然出現，最終仍服務於神的更大善。但是同時本文會更進一步找出希克和梅瑟爾的論述的漏洞，進一步完善愛任紐型神義論。zh_TW
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 5 第二章 希克的神義論 第一節 奧古斯丁傳統 29 第二節 希克對奧古斯丁傳統的挑戰 38 第三節 愛任紐型神義論 49 第三章 梅瑟爾的挑戰 第一節 天花問題 53 第二節 無知的選擇的問題 56 第三節 自由意志問題 58 第四節 認知自由與人對神的愛的回應的問題 59 第五節 自由的總是選擇善 60 第六節 實質惡和表面惡 62 第七節 不可知論的問題 65 第四章 理論省思 第一節 希克的回應 67 第二節 天花問題 73 第三節 自由意志問題，認知自由與人對神的愛的回應的問題 76 第四節 自由的總是選擇善的問題 79 第五節 無知的選擇的問題 80 第六節 表面惡和實質惡的問題 82 第七節 總結 83 參考文獻 85zh_TW
dc.format.extent 1522867 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109154015en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 希克zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 梅瑟爾zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 神義論zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 惡的問題zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 愛任紐zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) John Hicken_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) C. Robert Mesleen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) theodicyen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) problem of evilen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Irenaeusen_US
dc.title (題名) 應對梅瑟爾對希克「愛任紐型神義論」的挑戰zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Responding to Mesle’s challenge to Hick's Irenaean Theodicyen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Aquinas, T. (1947). Summa Theologica. New York: Benziger Brothers, Inc. Aquinas, T. (2003). On Evil. Regan, R. (Trans.). (Davies, B. Ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Augustine. (1959) Of true religion. Burleigh, J. H. S. (Trans.). Henry Regnery Company. Augustine. (1998), Confessions, H. Chadwick (trans.), Oxford University Press. Augustine.(1887A) On the Nature of Good. Newman, A. H. (Trans.). Nicene and post-Nicene fathers, First series, Vol. 4 (P. Schaff, Ed.). Christian Literature Publishing Co. Augustine.(1887B) The city of god. Dods, M. (Trans.). Nicene and post-Nicene fathers, First series, Vol. 2 (P. Schaff, Ed.). Christian Literature Publishing Co. Augustine.(1887C) The Handbook on Faith, Hope and Love . Shaw, J. F. (Trans.). Nicene and post-Nicene fathers, First series, Vol. 3 (P. Schaff, Ed.). Christian Literature Publishing Co. Augustine.(2010)On the Free Choice of the Will. King, P. (Trans). On the Free Choice of the Will, On Grace and Free Choice, and Other Writings .(King, P. Ed.). Cambridge University Press. Bayle, P. (1965). Historical and Critical Dictionary: Selections. Popkin, H.R.(Trans. & Ed.). with assistance from Craig Brush. The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc. Chignell , A.(2021 ) Kinds and Origins of Evil .https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evil-kinds-origins. Davies, B. (2011). Thomas Aquinas on God and Evil. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press. Draper, P. (1989) Pain and Pleasure: An Evidential Problem for Theists. Noûs Vol. 23, No. 3 (Jun., 1989): pp 331-350 Farrer，A. (2007). Editor's introduction. Leibniz (2007). Theodicy. Huggard, E.M. (trans.). (Farrer，A. Ed.) BiblioBazaar. Fergusson, D. (2018) ，The Providence of God: A Polyphonic Approach， Cambridge University Press Frick, P. (1999) ，Divine providence in Philo of Alexandria. Mohr Siebeck. Hick, J. (1991). Response to Mesle. John Hick's Theodicy: A Process Humanist Critique. Plgrave Macmillan UK: pp. 115-134 Hick，J. (2010). Evil and the God of Love. Palgrave Macmillan UK. Hume, D. (2007). Dialogues concerning Natural Religion and Natural History of Religion. (Coleman, D. Ed.). Cambridge University Press. Inwagen, P. V. （1988）The Magnitude, Duration, and Distribution of Evil: A Theodicy. Philosophical Topics Vol. 16, No. 2, Philosophy of Religion (FALL 1988), pp. 161-187 Mackie, J.L. (1955). Evil and Omnipotence. Mind New Series, Vol. 64, No. 254. (Apr., 1955): pp.200–212. Mesle, C. R.（1993）. Process Theology: A Basic Introduction. Chalice presss. Mesle, C. R. (1991). John Hick's Theodicy: A Process Humanist Critique. Plgrave Macmillan UK. Nygren, A. (1953). Agape and Eros. Watson, P.S. (Trans.). The Westminster Press. O’Brien, D. (1996), Plotinus on matter and evil, The Cambridge Companion to Plotinus, L.P. Gerson (ed.), Cambridge University Press: pp. 171–195. Plantinga, A. (1977) God, Freedom, and Evil. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. Plato. (1997) Republic. Grube, G.M.A. (Trans.). Plato complete works. Cooper, J.M.(ed.). Hackett Publishing Company: pp. 971-1223 Plotinus. (1992). The six enneads. S. MacKenna & B. S. Page, (Trans.). Encyclopedia Britannica. Rowe, William L. (1979) The Problem of Evil and Some Varieties of Atheism. American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 16, No. 4 (Oct., 1979): pp 335-341 Stump, E. (1985) The Problem of Evil. Faith and Philosophy Vol. 2, No. 4(Oct., 1985): pp 392-423.zh_TW