生活的意義/手段/目的

生活的意義

探求生活的意義是一個古老的哲學問題,也是一個核心的哲學問題。一些哲學家論證說,生活之外的任何東西都不能賦予生活以意義。在另一些人看來,除了生活別無他物,而生活是沒有意義可言的還有一種觀點認為,那種由我們傾向於選擇的總體計劃或最終目標,賦予了生活以意義。在一些看法中,計劃和目標必定是更大方案的一個部分,或是由一個根源派生的,在那裡,這種方案或根源伸展到生活以外,並讓位於對生活的信奉。對可以賦予生活以意義的方案或根源是什麼,是上帝、不朽、傳統還是理性,人們有不同的看法。對生活意義的主觀性或客觀性問題也有爭論。如果生活的意義是一種客觀的事物,那生活似乎可以通過熱情的程度、協調和滿足而獲得意義,而不是真正具有意義。承認生活有意義,會導致對一個人應如何生活的思考。

「生活的意義:一個人根據某種總體計劃來設計他的生活,就是他賦予其生活的意義的方式;只有有能力這樣設計他的生活的人,才能具有或力求有意義的人生。」—諾齊克:《無政府狀態、國家與烏托邦》,1974年,第50頁。

Meaning of life

An ancient and central philosophical question asks what is the meaning of life. Some philosophers argue that nothing outside of life could give it meaning. For others, there is nothing but life, and it is meaningless. Another view is that an overall plan or ultimate goal, preferably chosen by us gives life its meaning. In some versions, the plan and goal must be part of a larger project or derived from a source, where the project or source extends beyond the life and gives Place to the commitments of the life. There are different views about the projects or sources which could give meaning to life, with candidates including God, immortality, tradition and rationality. There are also debates over the objectivity or subjectivity of the meaning of life. If the meaning of life is an objective matter, a life can seem to have a meaning through passionate, intensity, coherence and satisfaction, without really having meaning. Accepting that there is a meaning in life leads to consideration of how one should live

"[the] meaning of life: A person"s shaping his life inaccordance with some overall plan is his way of givingmeaning to his life; only a being with the e capacity to so shapehis life fe can have or strive for meaningful life. "-Nozick,Anarchy, State and Utopia, 1974,p. 50.

手段/目的

某些事之被做是為了實現進一步的目標或意圖,因而它們是實現目的的手段。如果一件事之被做不是為了這件事本身之外的某一目的,而是為了其本身,那它本身就是目的,不過,個目的也可以是一個更高目的的手段。與這一推理相一致,很多哲學家推斷存在一個終極的或最終的目的,即一個絕對意義上的目的。這種手段一一目的的推理被稱做目的論的方法或目的論的分析[源自希臘文 tolos,目的],它既被用於目的論,也被用於倫理學。一些哲學家認為,合理性是被限於選擇作為工具的手段去實現特定的不合理的目的的。而其他哲學家則認為,對目的選擇也是合理性的問題。以功利主義為代表的現代目的論倫理學認為,行為應以它們的後果來評判,這些後果包括它們實現的目的。道義論則認為,對行為的評價應根據它們的動機或責任,而不是它們的後果。它根據康德的絕對命令即要求我們把理性的人看做目的而不僅僅是手段,也運用了對手段和目的的區分亞里士多德對手段一目的關係有另一種看法。手段不僅僅是工具性的,它可構成目的,或是目的的一個主要組成部分。這後一個看法對理解亞里士多德的幸福概念很重要。關於善的目的能否為惡的手段辯護的問題,人們一直存有爭議。

「一種手段是一種利益的對象,這種利益不對稱地依賴於一個終極的利益,後者的對象乃是目的。」—一佩里:《價值王國》,1954年,第79頁。

Means/end

Some things are done to achieve a further goal orpurpose and are means to ends. If a thing is done not forsome purpose outside itself but for its own sake, it is an endin itself, but an end can also be a means to a higher end. Inline with this reasoning, many philosophers infer that this an ultimate or final end, which is an end in an abssense.Such means-end reasoning, called a teleologicalapproach or analysis [from Greek: telos, end], is applied inboth theology and ethics. Some philosophers hold thatrationality is restricted to selecting means as instruments toachieve ends that are given non-rationally, while others holdthat the selection of ends is also a matter for reason. Modernteleological ethics, represented by utilitarianism, claims thatacts should be judged by their consequences, including theends they realise. Deontology, which holds that acts shouldbe judged according. totheir motive or duty rather than bytheir consequences, also uses the distinction between meansand ends. with Kant"s Categorical Imperative requiring thatwe treat rational beings as ends rather than merely as means.Aristotle had another conception of the means-ends relation.Rather than being merely instrumental, a means can beconstitutive of an end or be a major component of the end.This later conception is important for understandingAristotle"s notion of happiness. There has been muchcontroversy whether good ends can justify evil means.

"A means is the object of an interest which isasymmetrically dependable on an ulterior interest whoseobject is the end. "---Perry, Realms of Value, 1954, p.79.

喜歡這篇文章嗎？立刻分享出去讓更多人知道吧！