克尔凯郭尔宗教思想中理性与信仰的关系探究

发布时间：2018-06-26 21:52

本文选题：克尔凯郭尔 + 理性与信仰　；参考：《西南交通大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：欧洲的宗教改革运动兴起,欧洲大陆经历了漫长的论战和战争,教派之间互相攻讦,这不仅动摇了教会的权威,甚至动摇了神学的基础,削弱了正统的确定性。原本坚不可摧的信仰开始摇摇欲坠,习惯于顺从权威的普通群众战战兢兢而无所适从。为了结束这种状况,人们迫切需要寻找一个可以得到普遍认同的标准。在这种氛围下理性主义兴起,理性的地位逐渐提高,甚至成为了审判信仰的最高法庭。但是理性的盲目膨胀,让有识之士焦虑。卢梭为理性注入了情感与意志的因素,为康德的道德宗教奠定了基础。休谟则站在经验论的角度质疑了理性的能力与界限。康德在卢梭和休谟的基础上,为挽救理性提出理性的三大批判,在纯粹理性批判中对理性的认识能力进行分析,批判以往的理性宗教是对理性的滥用,宗教最终的出路在于道德领域。而稍晚一些的思辨哲学的集大成者黑格尔则建构了一种思辨神学,将宗教纳入到了思辨的体系中并最终扬弃了它。在克尔凯郭尔生活的丹麦,黑格尔主义大行其道。克尔凯郭尔的著作多半都应视为一种推翻黑格尔神学之理性主义主张的努力。本文试图抓住悖谬这个克尔凯郭尔宗教思想的核心概念,从信仰对象、信仰主体、信仰方式三个方面梳理其该问题。信仰的对象是道成肉身的耶稣基督,这在理性的眼中是个绝对悖谬,表现为绝对差异与绝对平等的悖论以及永恒的历史化和历史的永恒化的悖论;信仰的主体原本是处于非真理中而不自知的,悖谬的存在是一个契机,面对悖谬,理性或者表达他的非真理的观点进行抵制,或者意识到自己处于非真理中,原来是个谬误,从而为信仰准备条件。信仰的方式就是信仰主体面对悖谬、与悖谬相处的方式。上帝道成肉身的悖论挑战着人类的理解能力,在面对耶稣基督的神人悖谬时,理性本能的挣扎,试图从先验证明和经验证明两种思路为之提供确证和基础,毫无疑问最后失败了。克尔凯郭尔从根本上否定这种理性论证上帝存在的必要。但他认为这是正常的,因为面对悖谬时,理性就会感到冒犯,如果不能借助跳跃,则永远无法达到信仰。从冒犯到信仰没有理性铺成的梯子,只能跳跃。跳跃之后获得的信仰不是理性普遍同意的客观真理,而是与人的生存直接相关的内在的主观真理。所以最重要的不是耶稣基督这个神人悖谬是不是客观上普遍有效的,而是这个悖谬在多大程度上与人的生活发生联系,改变人的生命。最后对经典的误解进行说明并尝试予以回应。
[Abstract]:The rise of the Reformation Movement in Europe, the long debate and war on the continent, and the criticism among the sects not only shook the authority of the church, but also weakened the foundation of theology and weakened the certainty of orthodoxy. The unbreakable faith began to falter, and the ordinary people, accustomed to obedience to authority, trembled and were at a loss. In order to put an end to this situation, there is an urgent need to find a universally accepted standard. In this atmosphere, the rise of rationalism, the status of rationality gradually improved, and even become the Supreme Court of trial faith. But the blind expansion of reason makes people of insight anxious. Rousseau injected emotion and will into reason and laid a foundation for Kant's moral religion. Hume questioned the ability and boundary of reason from the perspective of empiricism. On the basis of Rousseau and Hume, Kant put forward three criticisms of reason in order to save rationality, and analyzed the cognitive ability of reason in the critique of pure reason. Criticizing the rational religion in the past is the abuse of reason. The ultimate outlet of religion lies in the field of morality. Later, Hegel, the aggregator of speculative philosophy, constructed a speculative theology, incorporated religion into the speculative system and eventually abandoned it. In Denmark, where Kierkegaard lives, Hegel doctrine prevails. Most of Kierkegaard's works should be seen as an effort to overthrow Hegel's rationalism in theology. This paper attempts to grasp the core concept of the paradox of Kierkegaard's religious thought and comb it from three aspects: the object of belief, the subject of belief and the mode of belief. The object of faith is Jesus Christ, who is the body of the Tao, which is an absolute paradox in the eyes of reason, which is manifested in the paradox of absolute difference and absolute equality, as well as the paradox of eternal history and history. The subject of belief was originally in the untruth without knowing himself, and the existence of the paradox was an opportunity to resist the paradox, reason or express his non-truth view, or realize that he was in the non-truth, which turned out to be a fallacy. Thus preparing the conditions for faith. The way of belief is the way that the subject of belief faces the paradox and gets along with the paradox. The paradox of God's way into flesh challenges the ability of human understanding. In the face of the paradox of the divine man of Jesus Christ, the rational instinct struggles to provide proof and foundation for it from two ways of thinking: transcendental proof and empirical proof. There is no doubt that it failed in the end. Kierkegaard fundamentally denied the necessity of this rational argument for the existence of God. But he thinks it's normal, because in the face of paradox, reason is offended, and if you can't jump, you can never achieve faith. Ladders made of no reason from offence to faith can only jump. The belief obtained after jumping is not the objective truth which is generally agreed by reason, but the inner subjective truth which is directly related to human existence. Therefore, the most important thing is not whether the paradox of Jesus Christ is objectively universal, but the extent to which the paradox is connected with human life and changes human life. Finally, the classic misunderstanding is explained and an attempt is made to respond to it.
【学位授予单位】：西南交通大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：B920

【相似文献】