世代間倫理のダイナミックス : D.キャラハンの<義務>とH.ヨーナスの<責任>を補完する
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
第1章. 「モラルのダイナミックス」の概要第2章. 「世代間倫理のダイナミックス」の概念としての「恩」 第1節. 問題の所在 第2節. K.S.シュレーダー-フレチェットは「恩」を再発見したか? 第3節. R.ベネディクトの「恩」解釈の適正性とD.キャラハンの誤解第3章. H.ヨーナスにおける「責任」「恐れ」「希望」の批判的検討 第1節. ヨーナスの責任倫理学の骨子 第2節. 「責任」と「恐れ」と「希望」第4章. 世代間倫理の新しい標語The purpose of this paper is to develop Moral Dynamics which deals with the moving forces acting on our moral lives in the intergenerational Ethics. More exactly, it is to present On and Hope as the moving forces through complementing the work of Daniel Callahan and Hans Jonas, respectively. Callahan writes in his article "What Obligations Do We Have to Future Generations": "From our obligations to the past stems our obligation to the future". Obligation of the former is an English translation of on by Ruth Benedict, with a meaning of indebtedness. Obligation of the latter is used to mean the duty of repayment, its first priority being to provide the future generations with possibility of life and survival. However, while Benedict writes as "One makes part payment on on to one's parents by giving equally good or better things to posterity", Callahan made an erroneous citation as "past payment". This erroneous citation implies that Callahan overlooks the idea of "Repaying One-Ten-Thousandth", which means that benefit from the past can enerzize the lives of repayment persistently because of its infiniteness. Therefore, On should be reconstructed as the concept of Moral Dynamics. Jonas writes in his work "Imperative of Responsibility" that his future-oriented ethics is not devoid of hope but gives fear its rightful place. Nevertheless, he expresses his idea on hope ambivalently in an interview in the "Spiegel". On the one hand, he states that one of the requisites to avoid catastrophe is not to abandon hope. This statement implies that he accepts the hope as a moral dynamic to bear the responsibility. On the other hand, he states that he finds a paradoxical hope in the situation that persons learn a lesson from catastrophe. Hope of this sort, however, can never be a force capable of rendering ethics feasible. In conclusion, ethics for future generations need not only the force of hope which pulls us towards the future, but also the one of on which pushes us based on the past.
- 慶應義塾大学の論文
著者
関連論文
- 倫理学専攻のこれまでとこれから(文学部創設百周年記念論文集I)
- 倫理学の基本文献
- マルセルの希望の哲学と医学・看護学 : 現代医療・医学における希望問題 その2
- 動物への配慮と環境問題(第7回日本生命倫理学会年次大会 : ワークショップ総括)
- 倫理学の基本文献
- 世代間倫理のダイナミックス : D.キャラハンのとH.ヨーナスのを補完する
- のへ向けて(100集記念号)
- 現代医療・医学における希望問題 : デス・エデュケーション,ターミナル・ケア,精神神経免疫学
- 〈責任負担力としての希望〉の〈原点〉(文学部創設百周年記念論文集I)
- 「倫理徳としての希望」の可能性
- 希望のための存在論と論理学
- E.ブロッホのの宗教哲学