Relativism相對論

Advanced Information 先進的信息

Totalistic relativism is (1) an epistemological theory denying any objective, universally valid human knowledge and affirming that meaning and truth vary from person to person, culture to culture, and time to time; (2) a metaphysical theory denying any changeless realities such as energy, space, time, natural laws, persons, or God and affirming that all conceivable meaning rests on activities, happenings, events, processes, or relationships, in which observers are changing participants; and (3) an ethical theory denying any changeless moral principles normative for all people in every situation and so of limited validity. 整體性相對 ( 1 )認識論的理論否認有任何客觀的,普遍有效的人類知識,並申明的意義和真理因人而異,文化,以文化,不時; ( 2 )形而上學的理論否認有任何不變的現實,如能源,空間,時間,自然法則,人,神,並申明所有可以想像的意義在於活動,事件,活動,流程,或關係,在這種變化的觀察員參加;和第( 3 )道德理論否認有任何不變的道德規範的原則,所有的人在各種情況下和有限的有效性。 From these three fields relativism pervades every field of meaningful human experience and knowledge.來自這三個領域相對滲透各個領域的有意義的人的經驗和知識。

Limited relativism considers totalistic relativism self-contradictory and wrong in its absolute denials of any absolute truth, and yet accurate in its assertion that much human knowledge is conditioned and slanted by innumerable variables. 相對論認為, 有限的整體性相對自相矛盾和錯誤的,其絕對否認任何絕對真理,但在其準確的說法,許多人類知識的條件和傾斜了無數的變數。 However, general divine revelation makes clearly known to all people the changeless truths about God's nature and particularly God's changeless plans for changing people in changing cultures in history.然而,一般神聖的啟示很清楚使全體人民的不變的真理對上帝的性質,尤其是上帝的計劃不變改變人,改變文化的歷史。 Although finite, fallen people may not be able to invent changeless truths, they can discover and receive them through divine revelation and enablement.雖然有限,倒下的人可能無法發明不變的真理,他們可以發現和接受他們通過神聖的啟示與支持。 In this way they can know not only changeless principles, plans, and purposes but also the meaning of unique, once-for-all events with objective validity.這樣,他們可以知道不僅不變的原則,計劃和目的,而且還具有獨特的意義,一旦為所有活動的客觀有效性。

BELIEVE Religious Information Source web-site相信宗教信息來源
Our List of 2,300 Religious Subjects我們所列出的2300名宗教科目
E-mail電子郵件
Human cognition does take place in the midst of countless cultural variables: subjectively (Kierkegaard), economically (Marx), politically (Reinhold Niebuhr), historically (H. Richard Niebuhr, W. Dilthey), educationally (Dewey), religiously (Cobb, Starcke, Watts), anthropologically (Kraft), and stylistically (Ricoeur).人類的認知確實發生在中間的無數文化變量:主觀(果) ,經濟(馬克思) ,政治(萊因霍爾德尼布爾) ,歷史(閣下理查德尼布爾,美國狄爾泰) ,教育(杜威) ,宗教(科布, Starcke ,瓦) , anthropologically (卡夫) ,以及風格(利科) 。 As a result of the kaleidoscopic impact of these and other influential variables, totalistic relativists have denied any invariable, absolute truth about things in themselves.由於千變萬化的影響這些問題和其他有影響力的變數,整體性relativists已否認有任何不變的,絕對真理的事情本身。

Increased consciousness of these cultural variables has generally been of significant value to the fields of interpretation and communication. To grasp the meaning of people from other cultures interpreters now realize how crucial it is to seek sympathetic identification with them in terms of their own presuppositions and historical roots.提高意識,這些文化因素通常是具有重要價值的領域的解釋和溝通。要把握的意義的人來自其他文化的口譯知道現在的關鍵是尋求同情的身份與他們在自己的前提和歷史的根源。 Such cross-cultural understanding is equally indispensable if one seeks to communicate to those of other cultures in terms of their own categories of thought and verbal expressions.這種跨文化的理解同樣是必不可少的,如果之一力求傳達給那些對其他文化方面的各類自己的思想和語言表達。 Improved ways of grasping and communicating meaning, however, do not settles issues of objective validity.改進方式抓和溝通的含義,然而,不解決問題的客觀有效性。

Agreement has not been reached in regard to the degree of influence the cultural variables bring to bear upon human knowers.協議還沒有達成關於程度的影響變數的文化帶給人類施加knowers 。 According to determinists, given a specific set of conditions present to a person's brain, nothing else could happen.據determinists ,因為一組特定的條件下向一個人的大腦,沒有別的可能發生。 All knowledge is relative to and determined by these situations (Skinner).所有的知識是相對的,並確定這些情況(斯金納) 。 For others, although all of human knowledge and behavior is predisposed to habitual responses by given sets of stimuli, this conditioning "falls somewhat short of total determination."對於其他人來說,儘管所有的人類知識和行為習慣傾向於給予答复兩套刺激,這種空調“屬於有點短總額的決心。 ” All propositional assertions are nevertheless held to be time- and culture-bound (Kraft).所有命題的說法卻是舉行時間和文化的約束(卡夫) 。

Others view persons not only as physical organisms but also as minds, souls, or spirits, with the powers of self-determination and self-transcendence.另一些人認為不僅是有形的生物體,而且頭腦,心靈,或精神,與權力的自決和自我超越。 Hence their knowledge is not all time-bound and they are agents responsible for their own actions (Thomas Reid, J. Oliver Buswell, Jr.).因此,他們的知識還不是全部有時限的,他們代理人負責自己的行動(托馬斯雷德,美國奧利弗Buswell ,小) 。 Existentialists affirm that mankind is free from both external determination and internal self-determination by a self with a given, unchangeable nature. Existentialists申明,人類免受外部的決心和內部自決的自我某一,不可改變的性質。 To be authentically free a person must, in fact, exercise an arbitrary freedom independent of cultural predispositions and past habitual choices.要真正自由的人必須事實上,任意行使自由獨立的文化傾向和過去慣常的選擇。 It seems more likely that some knowledge is predisposed by one's cultural influences and creative knowledge simply occasioned by one's situation.它似乎更有可能,有些知識是傾向於通過一個人的文化影響和創造性的知識所引起的只是一個人的情況。

Totalistic Relativism整體性相對

Wheter the cultural and psychological variables determine, predispose, or occasion certain metaphysical beliefs, totalistic relativists know little about the nature of persons or things as terms or entities in themselves, and much about relationships, functions, and processes. Wheter的文化和心理因素確定,易,或某些場合形而上學的信仰, relativists整體性知之甚少的性質的人或事物作為條件或實體本身,許多有關的關係,功能和過程。 Things and persons are what they do.事情的人他們所做的事情。 Distinct, unique persons are reduced to influences, relations, events, or happenings (Arthur F. Bentley).獨特的,獨特的人減少到影響,關係,活動或事件(阿瑟樓本特利) 。 Relational theology also intends to free people from the tyranny of absolutes, but may diminish the value of a person as such.關聯神學還打算從自由人的暴政絕對的,但可能會減少的價值等人。

In Eastern monistic relativism persons are not real, but mere maya insofar as they are distingishable from the One.在東部一元的相對人是不是真正的,但僅僅是馬亞只要distingishable的一個。 Differentiations of distinct persons with whom to have relationships are said to be made, not by nature, but by human conceptual assertions distinguishing subjects from predicates.區別不同的人,並與他們有關係的說是取得,而不是自然,而是人類的概念斷言區分主體謂詞。 Hence all propositions are illusory and relative to the viewpoints of those who assert them.因此,所有主張虛幻的和相對的觀點的人誰主張他們。 In "reality" persons, like dew drops, slip into the shining sea, the part never again to be differentiated from the whole.在“現實”的人,像露水下降,陷入了光輝的大海,永遠不會再一部分是有區別的整體。 Since all that can be conceived is relative, no permanent objective remains for which to strive and nihilism results.由於所有的,可以設想的是相對的,沒有常任理事國的目標仍然是為爭取和虛無主義的結果。 No self-nature can stand by itself, and no lasting distinction can be made between right and wrong.沒有自我的性質可以由本身的立場,並沒有持久的區別,可之間的正確和錯誤的。 Moral conflicts are a sickness of the mind which should have cultivated a bland indifference.道德衝突是一種疾病的頭腦應該培育了乏味冷漠。 Decisions are to be made without having the faintest understanding of how one decides (Alan Watts).決定作出,而不必最暗的了解一個決定(艾倫瓦) 。

Totalistic relativism, relationalism, or contextualization ends in amorality, "Asiatic fatalism," meaninglessness, and nihilism. Furthermore radical relativism is self-contradictory.整體性相對的關係,或語境結束道德, “亞細亞宿命論” ,虛和虛無主義。此外激進的相對論是自相矛盾。 Every human assertion is said to be time-bound and culture-bound, but the assertion that "all is relative" is taken to be universal and necessary.每個人斷言據說是有時限的和文化的約束,但斷言“是相對”是具有普遍性的和必要的。 Total relativism absolutely denies any absolutes, and it absolutizes relativity.共計相對絕對否認有任何絕對的,它absolutizes相關。

Limited Relativism相對有限公司

Less reductive and more open approaches to meaningful human existence acknowledge not only differences among cultures but also similarities.減還原和更加開放的辦法,人類生存的意義不僅承認不同文化之間的差異,而且相似之處。 Kraft alludes to over seventy-three constants in human societies in a chapter on human commonality, but concludes the chapter with only one criterion for evaluating cultural systems: their efficiency or adequacy in meeting people's personal, social, and spiritual needs.卡夫提到了73常數人類社會的一章,對人類的共同性,但最後一章只有一個標準,評價文化系統:其效率或是否足以滿足人民的個人,社會和精神需要。 The forms of a culture, including the Christian missionary's culture, are judged solely in terms of their pragmatic usefulness.各種形式的文化,包括基督教傳教士的文化,是判斷而言,其務實的效用。 Usefulness for what?有用為了什麼? It sounds good to say, "for properly relating human beings to God."這聽起來不錯說, “適當有關人類的上帝。 ” But having held that a hundred percent of human conceptual thought is time-bound, Kraft has no changeless criteria by which to distinguish counterfeit religious experience from authentic conversion to Christ.但是,舉行了一個百分之百的人類概念的想法是有時限的,卡夫沒有不變的標準,來區分假冒宗教的經驗,真正轉化為基督。 Apparently dynamically equivalent experiences may be of Satan, who changes himself into an angel of light.顯然動態等值的經驗可能是撒旦,誰改變自己成為一個天使的光。

The tests of authentic Christian experience, according to Scripture, include conceptually equivalent assertions about the nature of Christ, the eternal Word who became flesh (John 1:1-18; 20:31; I John 4:1-3; II John 9).測試真正的基督教的經驗,根據聖經,其中包括相當於斷言概念的性質基督,永恆的詞誰成了肉身(約翰1:1-18 ; 20:31 ,我約翰4:1-3 ;二約翰9日) 。 Relational and functional theologians, succumbing to relativism, undermine the changeless conceptual validity of God's universal revelation in nature and special revelation in the teaching of the incarnate Christ and inspired prophetic and apostolic spokesmen.關係和功能的神學家而言,屈服於相對,破壞不變的概念有效性老天爺的普遍啟示的性質和特殊的啟示教學中的基督的化身和啟發先知和使徒的代言人。

What transcultural truths, then, are known through general revelation? (1) People are human.什麼跨文化的真理,那麼,被稱為一般啟示? ( 1 )人民的人權。 Persons everywhere in all cultures have been, are, and will be human.世界各地的人在所有文化中一直是,將人類。 Dehumanizing and depersonalizing tendencies to the contrary, persons are subjects, not mere objects, and as agents responsibly participate in communities to achieve common, objective goals.非人和depersonalizing的趨勢相反,人是主體,而不僅僅是對象,並作為負責任的代理人參加社區以實現共同的,客觀的目標。 (2) People have inalienable human rights and responsibilities. However different physically, economically, educationally, politically, socially, or religiously, people have a right to equal concern and respect. ( 2 )人民有不可剝奪的人權,權利和責任。然而不同的身體,經濟,教育,政治,社會,或宗教,人民有權平等地關注和尊重。 (3) People deserve justice. ( 3 )人民應該繩之以法。 Whatever the situation, and whenever people are treated unjustly, they cry out against injustice. (4) Unjust people need a just amnesty and forgiving, holy love.無論是什麼情況,只要人民受到不公正的對待,他們大聲疾呼反對非正義。 ( 4 )不正當人民需要一個公正赦免和寬恕,神聖的愛。 (5) People ought to be intellectually honest and faithful to the given data of reality. ( 5 )人民應該理智誠實和忠實於特定數據的現實。 They ought not bear false witness against others.他們不應該承擔偽證對他人。 (6) If human society, mutual trust, and communication is to be meaningful, people ought to be logically noncontradictory in their thought, speech, and writing. ( 6 )如果人類社會,相互信任,溝通是有意義的,人們應該在邏輯上noncontradictory在其思想,言論,並書面答复。 Human knowledge and experience are related not only to cultural variables but also to these invariables of mortality, fact, and logic.人類的知識和經驗是不僅涉及文化的變數,而且這些invariables死亡率,事實上,和邏輯。

To argue for but one absolute, love, as did Joseph Fletcher, is to ignore the breadth of the Creator's intelligence and wisdom.為了主張只有一個絕對的,愛情一樣,約瑟夫弗萊徹,是忽視的廣度造物主的情報和智慧。 To argue for the absoluteness of factual data alone, as with scientism and positivism in their varied forms, overlooks the faithful words of the Logos regarding morality, sin, and salvation, and his own integrity as one who cannot deny himself or contradict himself.爭論的絕對化的事實數據,僅與科學主義和實證主義的各種形式,忽視了忠實的話,就理性道德,罪惡,和拯救,以及他自己作為一個完整誰可以不否認自己或違背本人。 But to argue for logical absolutes alone, as rationalists may, blinds one to the given data of experience, the danger of autism, injustice, and irresponsibility in a day of nuclear proliferation.但是,主張合乎邏輯的絕對獨立,作為理性主義,可窗簾一給定的數據的經驗,危險的自閉症,不公正,不負責任和在一天內的核擴散。

The Need for Absolutes需要絕對

Claims to truth, as distinct from mere uninformed opinion, must be justified on the basis of something more than subjective or community feelings of certitude.要求真相,有別於僅僅是不了解民意,必須合理的基礎上,多一些主觀或社區感情的肯定。 As Gordon Kaufman has argued, any claim to truth involves the claim to objective validity.正如戈登考夫曼也認為,任何索賠真理涉及索賠客觀有效性。 Although hesitating to affirm belief in absolutes, Kaufman admits the objectively valid knowledge transcends actual thinking and feeling in three directions, givenness, universality, and logical interconnectedness.雖然猶豫申明信仰絕對,考夫曼承認,客觀有效的知識超越了實際的思想和感情在三個方向, givenness ,普遍性,和合乎邏輯的相互關聯。 These he calls "functioning absolutes."這些他稱之為“絕對的運作。 ” Since they function as absolutes along with justice and love, intellectual honesty, and human worth to make life possible and meaningful, why not call them absolutes?因為它們的功能絕對與正義,愛好,智力誠實,和人的價值,使生活盡可能和有意義的,為什麼不叫他們絕對?

To acknowledge changeless truths in the midst of changing human experiences, as Augustine realized, is to acknowledge their changeless source and referent, ontologically.承認不變的真理處於改變人類的經驗,為實現奧古斯丁,是承認其不變的來源和參照, ontologically 。 Paul Tillich also saw that all such absolutes point beyond themselves to an all-inclusive Absolute. Unfortunately, Tillich's concept of Being itself depersonalized the living and dynamic Logos of Scripture.保羅蒂里希還認為,所有這些絕對點以後自己一個包容各方的絕對。不幸的是,蒂利希的概念本身存在人格化的生活和動態標誌的聖經。

The most coherent account of both the variables and the invariables in meaningful human experience, Christians may argue, is the personal, living, moral, just, loving, faithful, and true God revealed not only in the world, history, and human nature, but even more significantly in the Jesus of history and the teachings of Scripture.最連貫的帳戶都變量和invariables有意義的人類經驗,基督教徒可以說,是個人,生活,道德,公正,友愛,忠誠,和真正的上帝發現不僅在世界上,歷史和人類的本性,但更重要的在歷史上的耶穌和聖經的教義。 Although finite, fallen people may not discover objectively valid, normative truths for themselves, as divine image bearers they may be enabled by common or special grace to receive them.雖然有限,倒下的人可能無法發現客觀有效,規範自己的真理,作為神聖的形象旗手,他們可能會啟用的共同或特殊的寬限期來接待他們。 Through general revelation from the absolute God, people find out about God's moral principles for justice in society and, through special revelation, about God's loving plans and purposes for unjust people.通過一般性啟示絕對的上帝,人們了解上帝的道德原則,在社會正義,並通過特殊的啟示,對上帝的愛的計劃和目的,不公正的人。 The living God is not determined by the relative processes of time, space, energy, and humanity.上帝的生活並不取決於相對進程的時間,空間,能源和人類。 People and nature are relative to, dependent upon, and conditioned by God.人與自然是相對的,以,依賴和受制於上帝。

It is commonplace for radical religious relativists to affirm that people can experience God even though no conceptual or propositional truth about God is possible.這是司空見慣的激進的宗教relativists申明,人們可以體驗上帝即使沒有概念或命題真相,上帝是有可能的。 Even the words of Jesus and the Bible, they hold, are time-bound and culture-bound.即使是的話耶穌和聖經,他們舉行,是有時限的和文化的約束。 They can be taken only noncognitively, as pointers.他們可以採取的唯一noncognitively ,因為三分球。 Such religious relativism, however pious, misses the mark because it fails to take adequate account of mankind's creation in the image of God and renewal in the divine image to know God conceptually (Col. 3:10).這種宗教的相對論,但虔誠的,忽略了商標,因為它未能充分考慮到人類的創造的形象,上帝和振興的神聖形象知道上帝概念(上校3:10 ) 。 Because they are created to know and commune with the Creator and Redeemer who is changeless in essence, attributes, and plans for space and time, humans in a sea of relativism can receive some effable absolutes by divine revelation and illumination.因為他們知道,建立和社區的創建和救世主誰是不變的本質,屬性,和計劃的空間和時間,人類在海上的相對可以得到一些effable絕對的神聖的啟示和光照。

Denials of propositional revelation may also result from a failure to grasp the relatedness of everything in changing and changeless experience to the Logos of God (John 1:1-3).否定命題的啟示也可能是由於沒有掌握相關的一切變化和不變的經驗,理性的上帝(約翰1:1-3 ) 。 The divine Logos is eternal and distinct from the universe but not limited to an intellectually other eternity as in Eastern mysticism.神聖的標誌是永恆的和獨特的來自宇宙但不僅限於一個永恆智力其他東歐的神秘主義。 The divine Logos is immanent, governing nature and people, but not limited to natural processes as in liberalism.神聖的標誌是內在的,執政的性質和人民,但不僅限於自然過程中的自由主義。 The divine Logos became incarnate as a truly human person but is not limited to noncognitive personal encounters as in neo-orthodoxy.神聖的標誌成為體現作為一個真正的人,但並不局限於非認知個人在遇到新的正統。 The divine Logos was inscripturated, but is not limited to a mere biblicism as in some extreme fundamentalism.神聖的標誌是inscripturated ,但不局限於僅僅biblicism在一些極端的原教旨主義。 In sum, the Logos of God is transcendent and immanent, incarnate, and inscripturated as in classical orthodox theology.總之,理性的上帝是超驗的和內在的,體現,並inscripturated在古典正統的神學。

A verificational apologetic for the absolutes of the divine Logos, general revelation, incarnate revelation, and inscripturated revelation is not itself another absolute.阿verificational道歉的絕對神聖標誌,一般的啟示,體現公開,並inscripturated啟示本身並不是另一個絕對的。 It is not necessary to be divine or an inerrant spokesman for God to verify God's wisdom, power, and morality in the world, divine sinlessness in Christ, or divine revelation in Scripture.這是沒有必要的神聖或inerrant發言人上帝來驗證上帝的智慧,力量,道德的世界,神在基督清白,或神的啟示聖經。 The Israelites did not make themselves autonomous by distinguishing between true and false prophets.以色列人並沒有使自己的自主區分真假先知。 To check the credentials of one's surgeon is not to presume oneself more wise and capable in practicing surgery than the specialist.如果要檢查的憑據之一的外科醫生是不假定自己更多的智慧和實踐能力比手術的專家。 Acquainted with the countless variables every human knower faces, we are not surprised that Christian apologists frankly claim no more than an overwhelming probability beyond reasonable doubt.結識了無數的變數能知每個人的面孔,我們並不感到驚訝,基督教辯護士坦率地聲稱不超過絕大多數概率無可置疑。

Similarly, Christians claim only degrees of probability for their interpretations and applications of divinely revealed propositional truths.同樣,基督徒聲稱只有程度的概率為他們的解釋和應用的神聖命題揭示的真理。 To affirm the absoluteness of God's understanding in eternity is not to affirm the absoluteness of any believer's understanding of revelation at any given time in his growth in knowledge and grace. Precisely the opposite result follows.申明絕對上帝的理解,永恆不是絕對申明,任何信仰的認識,啟示在任何特定時間在增長知識和寬限期。恰恰是相反的結果如下。 To assert the absoluteness of divine revelation in terms of its intended purpose and the standards of accuracy when written for that end is to deny absoluteness to the pronouncements of governments, public schools, the United Nations, and religious institutions.要的絕對化斷言的神聖啟示而言,其預定的目的和標準的準確性時,書面為此目的是不讓絕對化的言論政府,公立學校,聯合國和宗教機構。 Divine illumination does not result in inerrancy.神照度不會導致inerrancy 。

Although no interpretation of the Scriptures as given can be regarded as absolute, some interpretations are better informed than others by relevant data, valid hermeneutical principles, and sound criteria of truth.雖然沒有解釋聖經給出可以被視為絕對的,有些解釋是更好地了解比其他的相關數據,有效的詮釋原則,健全標準的真理。 The most reliable checks and balances upon varied interpretive hypotheses are criteria drawn from the invariables found in general revelation: its grammar, literary context, author's purpose, historical and cultural setting, and broader theological context.最可靠的制衡機制對不同的詮釋假設是標準取自invariables中發現一般性的啟示:它的語法,文學方面,作者的目的,歷史和文化背景,以及更廣泛的神學背景。 Furthermore, one must be able to live by that interpretation with integrity while treating people as persons, not things, respecting their rights, treating them justly, and forgiving their injustices.此外,一個必須能夠生活的這一解釋與完整性,同時治療的人,而不是事物,尊重他們的權利,公正地對待他們,並寬恕他們的不公正現象。

Untold harm has been done in the name of Christianity by people who have absolutized their relative interpretations of life or of Scripture.無盡的傷害已經完成的名義基督教的人誰也絕對化的相對解釋生命或聖經。 Presumptuous prophets who claimed to speak God's word to people, without divine authorization, in the OT administration were subject to the most severe penalities.狂妄聲稱誰先知說上帝的話的人,沒有神聖的授權,在加時賽管理受到最嚴重的penalities 。 May God deliver evangelicals today from prophetic ministries not validly drawn from divine revelation.願上帝帶來福音預言今天沒有有效的部委從神的啟示。 This case for revealed absolutes must not be taken to justify absolutizing merely human ideas, however good.這起案件的發現絕對不能採取正當absolutizing只是人類的想法,但是良好。

Similarly, inestimable damage has been done the cause of Christ and Scripture by those who relativize divinely revealed absolutes, which have objective validity for all people of all cultures.同樣的,不可估量的損害已經完成的事業耶穌和聖經的人誰相對絕對神聖發現,其中有客觀有效性的所有各族人民的文化。 Either Christianity is true for all people, or it is true for no one.要么是真正的基督教為所有人民,或者是真的沒有人。 We can be assured of our view of the major doctrines of Christianity and the realities to which they refer when our interpretations are based on numerous relevant and extensive passages of Scripture, supported by interpreters throughout the history of the church, and attested to us personally by the internal witness of the Holy Spirit to the teaching of the Word.我們可以放心,我們認為主要的基督教理論和現實它們是指當我們的解釋是根據許多相關性和廣泛的段落聖經的支持下,口譯員在整個歷史的教堂,並證明了我們親自內部的見證聖靈的教學的Word 。 Then we can confidently relate to the realities designated and preach the great doctrines of the faith with joy.然後我們可以滿懷信心地涉及到現實和說教指定的偉大學說的信仰與喜悅。

In a day when radical relativism reigns, disciples of the Lord, who is the same yesterday, today, and forever, stand guard against attacks upon the cognitive faith once for all entrusted to the saints (Jude 3) with gentleness, respect, and a clear conscience (I Pet. 3:15-16).在一天相對激進的時期,門徒的主,誰是相同的昨天,今天和永遠站在防範攻擊的認知信仰一旦所有委託給聖人(裘德3 )與溫柔,尊重,和一個問心無愧(一寵物。 3:15-16 ) 。

GR Lewis受體劉易斯

Bibliography 目錄
AF Bentley, Relativity in Man and Society; GW Bromiley, "The Limits of Theological Relativism," CT, May 24, 1968, 6-7; JB Cobb, Jr., Christ in a Pluralistic Age; RJ Coleman, Issues in Theological Conflict; BA Demarest, General Revelation; JW Dixon, Jr., The Physiology of Faith: A Theory of Theological Relativity; CFH Henry, Christian Personal Ethics; G. Kaufman, Relativism, Knowledge and Faith; CH Kraft, Christianity in Culture; M.自動對焦本特利,相對論在人與社會;毛重Bromiley說: “神界限相對”的CT , 5月24日, 1968年, 6-7 ;巴頓科布小,基督在一個多元化的時代;雷諾科爾曼,神學問題的衝突;廣管局德馬雷斯特,一般的啟示;京華迪克遜小生理學信仰:一個神學理論的相對論; CFH亨利,基督教個人倫理;灣考夫曼,相對論,知識和信仰;的CH卡夫,基督教文化;先生 Kransz and JW Meiland, eds., Relativism Cognitive and Moral; GR Lewis, "Categories in Collision?" Kransz和金威Meiland合編。 ,相對認知與道德;受體劉易斯, “分類中的碰撞? ” in Perspectives on Evangelical Theology, and Testing Christianity's Truth-Claims; F. Schaeffer, How Should We Then Live?在展望福音神學,並測試基督教真理索賠;樓舍,我們應該如何接著生活? BF Skinner, Back to Freedom and Dignity; JS Spong, "Evangelism When Certainty Is an Illusion," CCen, Jan. 6-13, 1982, 11-16; W. Starcke, The Gospel of Relativity; P. Tillich, My Search for Absolutes; D. Turner, The Autonomous Man.高爐斯金納,回到自由和尊嚴;江蘇朋“ ,使團當確定性是一種幻想, ” CCen ,一月6號至13號, 1982 , 11-16 ;總統Starcke ,福音的相對論;體育蒂利希,我的搜索為絕對; D.特納,自治區人。


Relativism相對論

Catholic Information 天主教新聞

Any doctrine which denies, universally or in regard to some restricted sphere of being, the existence of absolute values, may be termed Relativism.任何學說否認,普遍或對某些領域的限制目前存在的絕對價值,可稱為相對。

Thus one form of Relativism asserts that we are conscious only of difference or change (Hobbes, Bain, Höffding, Wundt. Cf. Maher, "Psychology", 6th ed., p. 91).這樣一種形式相對論斷言,我們意識到只有差異或變更(霍布斯,貝恩, Höffding ,馮特。參閱。馬赫, “心理學” ,第6版。 ,第91頁) 。

Another asserts that truth is relative, either (a) because judgments are held (i) to have no meaning in isolation and (ii) to be subject to indefinite modification before they can become embodied in the one coherent system of ideal truth (Joachim and Hegelians generally), or else (b) because truth is conceived as a peculiar property of ideas whereby they enable us to deal with our environment more or less successfully (Pragmatists).另一個聲稱,真理是相對的,無論是(一) ,因為判斷舉行( i )將是毫無意義的孤立和(二)受到無限期的修改,才可以成為體現在一個連貫的系統的理想真相(約阿希姆和黑格爾派普遍) ,或者( b )由於真相被認為是一種特殊的財產觀念,使他們使我們能夠解決我們的環境,或多或少成功(實用主義者) 。

A third affirms moral worth to be essentially relative and to emerge only when motives are in conflict (Martineau).第三申明道德價值是相對的,基本上是出現只有當動機發生衝突(馬蒂諾) 。 (See ETHICS, PRAGMATISM, TRUTH.) The term Relativism, however, is more commonly applied to theories which treat of the nature of knowledge and reality, and it is in this sense that we shall discuss it here. (見職業道德,務實,求真。 )一詞相對然而,更普遍適用於治療理論的性質的知識和現實,這是在這個意義上,我們將在這裡討論。

The Relativity of Knowledge相關知識

Whatever may be the real and primary significance of Protagoras's famous dictum, "Man is the measure of all things" (anthropos metron panton kai ton syton kai ton me onton, Plato, "Theæt.", 152 A; in "Mind", XIX, 473, Mr. Gillespie maintains that the dictum has an ethical significance), it has ordinarily been understood in an epistemological sense, and a statement of the relativity of all human knowledge, of the impossibility of penetrating beyond the appearances of things.無論是真正的和首要的意義普羅塔哥拉著名的格言, “人是衡量一切事物” ( anthropos metron潘頓偕偕噸syton噸箱onton ,柏拉圖, “ Theæt 。 ” , 152甲;在“心” ,第十九, 473先生,吉萊斯皮堅持認為,判詞有道德意義) ,它通常被理解的認識論意義,並說明相關的所有人類的知識,不可能穿透超越了外表的東西。 And this interpretation is in conformity with the general tendency of the age in which Protagoras lived.這個解釋是符合一般趨勢的年齡在普羅塔哥拉生活。 Heraclitus's doctrine of a perpetual and universal flux, Parmedides's view that plurality and change are but the semblance of reality, futile attempts to explain the nature of sense-perception and to account for illusion and false judgment, together with a dawning consciousness (evident in Democritus) of a subjective factor in the perceptual process - all this tended to make philosophers distrust the deliverances of their senses and rely solely upon reason or intelligence.赫拉克利特的學說的一個永久和普遍通量, Parmedides的觀點,即多元性和變化,但現實的假象,徒勞的試圖解釋的性質意義的認識和考慮到虛假的幻想和判斷,同時到來的意識(體現在德謨克利特)的主觀因素的感知過程-所有這一切往往使哲學家信任d eliverances其意識和僅僅依靠各國的理由或情報。 Reflection, however, soon made it clear that rational theories were no more consistent than the data of perceptional experience, and the inevitable result of this was that the Relativism of Protagoras and his followers eventually passed into the Scepticism of the Middle Academy (see Scepticism).反思,但很快就清楚地表明,合理的理論,沒有比更加一致的數據知覺經驗和必然結果,這是相對的普羅塔哥拉和他的追隨者最終通過到懷疑論的中東學院(見懷疑論) 。

Modern Relativism, on the other hand, though it too tends to pass into Scepticism, was in its origin a reaction against Scepticism.現代相對論,另一方面,雖然它也往往進入懷疑論,是在其原產地的反應對持懷疑態度。 To dispel the doubt which Hume had cast on the validity of universal judgments of a synthetic character, Kant proposed that we should regard them as arising not from any apprehension of the nature of real things, but from the constitution of our won minds.為了消除懷疑該休了演員的有效性普遍判斷的綜合性,康德提議,我們應該把它們作為不產生任何逮捕的性質,真正的東西,而是來自我們的憲法贏得心中。 He maintained that the mental factor in experience, hitherto neglected, is really of paramount importance: to it are due space, time, the categories, and every form of synthesis.他認為,心理因素中的經驗,以前被忽視的,確實是至關重要的:它是由於空間,時間,類別,以及各種形式的合成。 It is the formal element arising from the structure of the mind itself that constitutes knowledge and makes it what it is.這是正式的因素引起的結構牢記自己的主張,構成知識,使它是什麼。 Hume erred in supposing that knowledge is an attempt to copy reality.休謨錯誤的假設,知識是一種嘗試複製的現實。 It is nothing of the kind.這是什麼樣的。 The world as we know it, the world of experience, is essentially relative to the human mind, whence it derives all that it has of unity, order and form.世界因為我們知道,世界上的經驗,基本上是相對人的心靈,它源於何處所有,它的團結,秩序和形式。 The obvious objection to a Relativism of this kind is the outstanding thing-in-itself, which is not, and can never become, and object of knowledge.最明顯的反對相對論的這種是懸而未決的事情本身,這是不是,也永遠不會成為和對象的知識。 We are thus shut up with a world of appearances, the nature of which is constituted by our minds.因此,我們關閉了一個世界上露面,其性質是由我們的腦海中。 What reality is in itself we can never know.什麼現實,這本身就是我們永遠不能知道。 Yet this is, as Kant admitted, precisely what we wish to know.然而,這是,康德承認,正是我們想知道的。 The fascination of Kant's philosophy lay in the fact that it gave full value to the activity, as opposed to the passivity or receptivity of mind; but the unknowable Ding-an-sich was an abomination, fatal alike to its consistency and to its power to solve the problem of human cognition.的魅力康德哲學在於它的價值給予了充分的活動,而不是被動或接受的心態;但不可知的定安自身是一個令人深惡痛絕,同樣致命的一致性,並在其權力解決這個問題的人的認知。 It must be got rid of at all costs; and the simplest plan was to abolish it altogether, thus leaving us with a reality knowable because knowledge and reality are one, and in the making of it mind, human or absolute, plays an overwhelmingly important part.它必須擺脫不惜一切代價和最簡單的計劃是完全取消,從而使我們提供了一個現實的可知的,因為知識和現實是,在製作它牢記,人類的或絕對的,發揮了重要的壓倒性部分。

The Relativity of Reality相關的現實

The relativity of reality, which thus took the place of the relativity of knowledge, has been variously conceived.相對的現實,從而取代了相關的知識,已經不同程度的構想。 Sometimes, as with Fichte and Hegel, Nature is opposed to Mind or Spirit as a twofold aspect of one and the same ground - of Intelligence, of Will, or even of unconscious Mind.有時候,與費希特和黑格爾,自然是反對心靈或精神的雙重方面的同一個理由-智力,意志,甚至是無意識的心靈。 Sometimes, as with Green and Bradley, Reality is conceived as one organic whole that somehow manifests itself in finite centers of experience, which strive to reproduce in themselves Reality as it is, but fail so utterly that what they assert, even when contradictory, must be held somehow to be true - true like other truths in that they attempt to express Reality, but are subject to indefinite reinterpretation before they can become identical with the real to which they refer.有時候,作為綠色和布拉德利,現實是作為一個有機的整體,某種程度上體現在有限中心的經驗,努力把自己複製現實,因為它是,但不完全如此,他們聲稱,即使矛盾,必須定於不知是真實的-真正的像其他的真理,因為他們企圖表達現實,但受到無限期重新解釋,才可以成為相同的實際它們提及。 Still more modern Absolutists (eg, Mackenzie and Taylor), appreciating to some extent the inadequacy of this view, have restored some sort of independence to the physical order, which, says Taylor (Elem. of Metaph., 198), "does not depend for its existence upon the fact of my actually perceiving it," but "does depend upon my perception for all the qualities and relations which I find in it".然而更多的現代Absolutists (例如,麥肯齊和泰勒) ,升值在一定程度上的不足,這種觀點認為,恢復了某種獨立的物理秩序,其中說,泰勒( Elem.的Metaph 。 , 198 ) , “不取決於其存在的事實,我國實際感知它“ ,但”並不取決於我的感覺所有的素質和我的關係中找到它。 “ In other words, the "what" of the real world is relative to our perceiving organs (ibid.); or, as a recent writer (Murray in "Mind", new series, XIX, 232) puts it, Reality, anterior to being known, is mere hyle (raw material), while what we call the "thing" or the object of knowledge is this hyle as transformed by an appropriate mental process, and thus endowed with the attributes of spatiality and the like.換言之, “什麼”現實世界是相對的,以我們的感知器官(同上) ; ,或作為最近作家(穆雷的“心” ,新系列, 19 , 232 )所說的那樣,現實的,前向目前已知的,僅僅是hyle (原材料) ,而我們所說的“事”或對象的知識這是作為轉變hyle由一個適當的心理過程,從而賦予的屬性空間等。 Knowing is, therefore, "superinducing form upon the matter of knowledge" (J. Grote, "Explor. Phil.", I, 13).知,因此, “ superinducing形式對此事的知識” (學者格羅特, “ Explor 。菲爾。 ” ,我13 ) 。 Riehl, though usually classed as a Realist, holds a similar view.瑞爾,但通常歸類為一個現實主義者,持有類似的觀點。 He distinguishes the being of an object (das Sein der Objekte) from its being as an object (Objektsein).他與眾不同的是一個對象(之盛之Objekte )由它被作為一個對象( Objektsein ) 。 The former is the real being of the object and is independent of consciousness; the latter is its being or nature as conceived by us, and is something wholly relative to our faculties (cf. Rickert, "Der Gegenstand der Erkenntnis", 2nd ed., pp. 17 sq., where the inconsistency of this view is clearly indicated).前者是真正的福祉的目的和獨立意識;後者是其正在或性質,我們所設想的,是完全相對的東西我們學院(參見李凱爾特, “明鏡對象之知識” ,第二版。 ,頁。 17平方米,其中不一致的這一觀點是明確指出) 。

The relativity of Reality as thus conceived really involves a return to the position of Kant, except that for the thing-in-itself with its unknowable character and properties is substituted a kind of materia prima, without qualities, attributes, or determinations, and therefore as unknowable as the thing-in-itself, but unknowable now because there is nothing to be known.相對現實的設想從而真正涉及回到康德的立場,但對事情本身的不可知的性質和屬性取代一種材料表面,沒有素質,屬性,或裁定的,因此因為不可知的事情本身,但現在不可知的,因為沒有什麼可眾所周知的。 On this point modern Idealism is at one with Pragmatism or Humanism, which also insist that reality must be regarded epistemologically as raw material, wholly propertyless and wholly indeterminate.關於這一點現代的唯心主義是一個實用主義或人文,這也堅持認為,現實必須被視為認識論為原料,完全propertyless和完全不確定的。 The difference between the two views lies in this, that for the Idealist, form is imposed upon matter by the very act by which we know it, while for the Pragmatist, it is imposed only after a long process of postulation and experiment.兩者之間的差額的看法是,這個為理想主義者,形式強加於問題的非常行為,我們知道這一點,而對於實用主義,這是只有經過長期進程的任命和實驗。

Criticism批評

M. Fonsegrive in his "Essais sur la connaissance" has discussed the question of Relativism at considerable length, and is opinion that we must in some sense grant that knowledge is relative to our faculties. Fonsegrive先生在他的“文集拉河畔connaissance ”討論的問題相對在相當長,並且認為,我們必須在某種意義上補助金,知識是相對的,以我們的學院。 But, while in principle he grants this universally, as a matter of fact in his own theory it is only our knowledge of corporeal objects that is regarded as strictly relative.但是,儘管他在原則上補助這一普遍,其實在他自己的理論,只有我們的知識的有形物體,被視為是相對嚴格。 We can know other minds as they really are, because we ourselves are thinking beings, and the external manifestation of our mentality and theirs is similar in character.我們可以知道其他頭腦因為他們真的是,因為我們自己的想法存在,以及外部表現,我們的心態和他們類似的性質。 But "we do not know the essence of things, but the essence of our relations with things; of the laws of nature in themselves we know much less than we do of our dealings with nature" (pp. 85, 86).但是, “我們不知道的本質的東西,但我們的本質與事物;的自然規律本身,我們知道遠低於我們的交往與自然” (第85 , 86 ) 。 "Whatever we know, is known in terms of the self" (p. 125; cf. pp. 184 sq.). “無論我們知道,被稱為是在自我” (第125頁;比照。頁。 184平方米) 。 The principal argument upon which this Relativism rests, is fundamentally the same as that used by Berkeley in his famous "Dialogue between Hylas and Philonus".主要論點賴以這個相對在於,基本上是一樣,所用伯克利分校在其著名的“許拉斯之間的對話和Philonus ” 。 As stated by Fonsegrive, it si as follows: "the concept of an object which should be at the same time in-itself and an object of knowledge is clearly contradictory. . . For 'object of knowledge' means 'known', . . . but it is quite evident that the known, qua known, is not in-itself, since it is qua known" (p. 186).正如Fonsegrive ,它州市如下: “的概念,一個對象應在同一時間在自己和一個對象的知識顯然是矛盾的。 。 。對於'對象的知識'是指'知道' , 。 。 。但很明顯,眾所周知,已知條件,是不是本身,因為它是已知的條件“ (第186頁) 。 Hence what we know is never the object as it is in itself, but only as it is in our knowledge of it.因此,我們所知道的是從來沒有的對象,因為它本身,而只是因為它是我們知識的。 Of course, if the notions "being in itself" and "being as known" are mutually exclusive, the above argument is valid; but as conceived by the Realist or the anti-Relativist, this is not so.當然,如果概念“被本身”和“已知”是相互排斥的,上述論點是有效的,但所設想的現實主義或反相對論,情況並非如此。 Being in-itself merely means being as it exists, whether it be known or not.正在本身只是手段,因為它是存在的,不論它是已知或沒有。 It implies therefore that the nature and existence of being is prior to our knowledge of it (a fact which, by the way, Fonsegrive stoutly maintains); but it does not imply that being as it exists cannot be known.這意味著因此,性質和目前存在的是前我們所知它(這個事實,順便說一下, Fonsegrive堅決維護) ;但它並不意味著目前存在的,因為它不能被稱為。 Forsegrive's argument proves nothing against the view that the real nature of objects is knowable; for, though in the abstract the thing qua existent is not the thing qua known, in the concrete there is no reason why its really existing nature cannot become known, or, in other words, why it cannot be known as it is. Forsegrive的論據證明並不反對認為,真正性質的對象是可知的;的,但在抽象的東西條件是不存在的東西條件眾所周知,在混凝土沒有任何理由其真正現有的性質不能成為已知或換句話說,為什麼不能被稱為是。

The argument by which absolutists seek to prove the relativity of Reality is precisely similar to the above.這個論點,其中absolutists設法證明相對論的現實恰恰是類似以上。 We cannot thing of real things, says Taylor ("elem. of Metaph.", 23, 69, 70; cf. Bradley, "Appearance and Reality", 144-45), except as objects of experience; hence it is in connection with mind that their reality lies.我們不能真正的事外,說泰勒( “元素。 Metaph的。 ” , 23 , 69 , 70 ;比照。布拉德利, “外觀與現實” , 144-45 ) ,除物體的經驗,因此這是連接與銘記,他們的現實的謊言。 Surely this argument is fallacious.當然,這種說法是荒謬的。 All that it proves is that things must either be or else become objects of experience in order to be thought of by mind, not that they must be of their very essence objects of experience.所有這一切證明的是,事情必須是要么成為對象的經驗,以便被認為是由記住,這並不是說它們必須是他們的本質物體的經驗。 Unless reality is intelligible and can enter into experience, it cannot become the object of thought; but in no other sense does the possibility of knowing it suppose its "connection with mind".除非現實情況是可以理解的,並可以進入的經驗,它不能成為對象的思想,但在沒有其他意義上的可能性並不知道它假設了“關於牢記” 。 True, to conceive anything is "eo ipso to bring it into consciousness", but from this it follows merely that to be conceivable things must be capable of becoming objects of consciousness. Psychological considerations force us to admit that Reality, when it enters experience, becomes, or better is reproduced as psychical fact; but we cannot conclude from this that Reality itself, the reality which is the object of experience and to which our experience refers as to something other than itself, is of necessity psychical fact.的確,想像什麼是“ 13224當然,使其意識” ,而是來自這一點,如下只是,這是可以想像的事情必須是能夠成為對象的意識。心理因素迫使我們承認現實,當它進入的經驗,成為,或更好轉載心理事實;但我們不能得出結論,這個現實本身,這是現實對象的經驗和我們的經驗是指以以外的本身,是精神的必要性事實。 Experience or perception is doubtless a condition without which we could not think of things at all, still less think of them as existing, but it is not a condition without which things could not exist.經驗或看法無疑是沒有的條件,我們不能認為在所有的事情,更何況他們認為現有的,但它並不是一個條件沒有這種事情不可能存在。 Nor again, when we think, do we ordinarily think of things as objects of experience; we think of them simply as "things", real or imaginary, and the properties which we predicate of them we think of as belonging to them, not as "superinduced by our minds".也再次,當我們認為,我們通常認為的事情作為對象的經驗;我們認為他們只是“東西” ,真實或虛構的,和性能,我們上游的他們,我們認為是屬於他們的,而不是作為“ superinduced我們的頭腦” 。

Our natural way of thinking may, however, conceivably be wrong.我們自然的思維方式,可但是,可以想像是錯誤的。 Granted that what "appears" is reality, appearances may none the less be fallacious.想當然地認為是“似乎”是現實,可能沒有露面較少是荒謬的。 It is possible that they are due wholly or in part to our minds, and so do not reveal to us the nature of reality, but rather its relation to our perceiving selves, our faculties and our organs.可能是由於它們全部或部分,以我們的腦海中,所以不會透露給我們的性質現實,而是關係到我們的自我感知,我們學院和我們的器官。 Most of the arguments advanced in support of this view are based on psychology, and though the psychology is good enough, the arguments are hardly conclusive.大部分的論點,以支持這一觀點是基於心理學,但心理學是不夠好,理由是很難定論。 It is urged, for instance, that abstraction and generalization are subjective processes which enter into every act of knowledge, and essentially modify its content.這是敦促,例如,抽象和概括是主觀的過程,進入每一個行為的知識,而且基本上是修改其內容。 Yet abstraction is not falsification, unless we assume that what we are considering in the abstract exists as such in the concrete - that is, exists not in connection with and in mutual dependence upon other things, but in isolation and independence just as we conceive it.然而,不是抽象的偽造,除非我們認為,我們正在考慮在抽象的存在,例如在具體的-也就是說,不存在與和相互依存對其他的事情,但在孤立和獨立正如我們想像它。 Nor is generalization fallacious, unless we assume, without proof, that the particulars to which our concept potentially applies actually exist.也不是荒謬的概括,除非我們假設,沒有證據,認為其中的詳情,我們的概念可能適用於實際存在的。 In a word, neither these nor any other of the subjective processes and forms of thought destroy the validity of knowledge, provided what is purely formal and subjective be distinguished, as it should be, from what pertains to objective content and refers to the real order of causes and purposes.總之,無論是這些或任何其他主觀進程和各種形式的思想銷毀的正確性知識,提供了純粹是正式的和主觀的區別,因為它應該是,從涉及到的內容和目標指的是真正的秩序的原因和目的。

A further argument is derived from the alleged relativity of sensation, whence in the Scholastic theory all knowledge is derived.另一種論點是來自所謂的相關性的感覺,何處在學術理論上,所有的知識,推導出。 The quality of sensation, it is said, is determined largely by the character of our nervous system, and in particular by the end-organs of the different senses.質量的感覺,這是說,在很大程度上決定了我們的特點中樞神經系統,尤其是年底機構的不同感覺。 It is at least equally probable, however, that the quality of sensation is determined by the stimulus; and in any case the objection is beside the point, for we do not in judgment refer our sensation as such to the object, but rather as qualities, the nature of which we do not know, though we do know that they differ from one another in varying degrees.這是至少同樣可能的,然而,質量的感覺是由刺激;和在任何情況下,反對是毫無意義的,因為我們沒有判斷我們的感覺是指這樣的目標,而是作為素質的性質,我們不知道,但我們不知道,他們從一個不同的另一種程度的不同。 Even granted then that sensation is relative to our specialized organs of sense, it by no means follows that the knowledge which comes through sensation in any way involves subjective determination.即使當時給予的感覺是相對我們專門機關的意義,它決不是如下的知識,感覺是通過以任何方式涉及主觀的決心。 Secondly, sense-data do not give us merely qualitative differences, but also spatial forms and magnitudes, distance, motion, velocity, direction; and upon these data are based not only mathematics but also physical science, in so far as the latter is concerned with quantitative, in distinction from qualitative, variations.其次,感覺數據沒有給我們只是質的差別,而且還空間形式和程度,距離,運動,速度,方向;並根據這些數據不僅基於數學,而且物理科學,只要後者是有關與定量,在質的區別,差異。

Thirdly, sense-data, even if they be in part subjective, suppose as their condition an objective cause.第三,意義數據,即使他們中的一部分是主觀的,假設其客觀條件的事業。 Hence, a theory which explains sense-data satisfactorily assigns to them conditions which are no less real than the effects to which in part at least they give rise.因此,一種理論解釋意義的數據令人滿意分配給他們的條件是不實際的效果比這部分至少他們產生。 Lastly, if knowledge really is relative in the sense above explained, though it may satisfy our practical, it can never satisfy our speculative strivings.最後,如果知識的的確是相對的意義上述解釋,但它可能滿足我們的實際,使它永遠不能滿足我們的投機奮鬥。 The aim of speculative research is to know Reality as it is.其目的的投機性研究是知道現實,因為它是。 But knowledge, if it be of appearances only, is without real meaning and significance, and as conceived in an Idealism of the a priori type, also it would seem without purpose.但是,知識的,如果它是唯一出場,是沒有真正的意義和重要性,並設想在一個理想主義的先驗的類型,也似乎沒有目的。

Experience as a System of Relations經驗作為一個系統的關係

It is commonly taught by neo-Kantians that relation is the Category of categories (cf. Renouvier, "Le perdisguise (Caird, "The Phil. of Kant", 329; Green, "Prolegom.", 20). Matter and motion "consist of" relations (Prolegom., 9). In fact Reality, as we know it, is nothing but a system of relations, for "the nature of mind is such that no knowledge can be acquired or expressed, and consequently no real existence conceived, except by means of relation and as a system of relations" (Renouvier, "Les dilemmes de la metaph.", 11). This form of Relativism may be called objective to distinguish it from the Relativism which we have been discussing above, and with which, as a matter of fact, it is generally combined. Primarily it is a theory of the nature of knowledge, but with Green and others (eg, Abel Rey, "La théorie de la physique", VI, 2), who identify knowledge and reality, it is also a metaphysic. Such a view supposes a theory of the nature of relation very different from that of the Scholastics. For the latter relation is essentially a pros ti schesis, an ordo ad, which implies (1) a subject to which it belongs, (23) a special something in that subject on account of which it is predicated, and (3) a term, other than itself, to which it refers. A relation, in other words, as the moderns would put it, presupposes its "terms". It is not a mysterious and invisible link which somehow joins up two aspects of a thing and makes them one. A relation may be mutual; but if so, there are really two relations (eg, paternity and sonship) belonging to different subjects, or, if to the same subject, arising from different fundamentals. True, in science as in other matters, we may know a relation without being able to discover the nature of the entities it relates. We may know, for instance, that pressure and temperature vary proportionately in a given mass of gas and which the volume is kept constant, without knowing precisely and for certain the ultimate nature of either pressure or temperature. Nevertheless we do know something about them. We know that they exist, that they each have a certain nature, and that it is on account of this nature that the relation between them arises. We cannot know a relation, therefore, without knowing something of the things which it relates, for a relation presupposes its "terms". Hence the universe cannot consist of relations only, but must be composed of things in relation.這是教授的新Kantians的關係範疇的類別(見Renouvier , “樂perdisguise (凱爾德說: ”菲爾。康德“ , 329 ;綠色” , Prolegom 。 “ 20 ) 。物質和運動”由“關係( Prolegom. , 9 ) 。事實上現實,因為我們知道這一點,只不過是一個系統的關係,促進”性質的心靈是沒有這種知識可以獲取或表達,因此,沒有真正的存在設想,除由有關的手段和作為一個系統的關係“ ( Renouvier , ”法國dilemmes德拉魯阿metaph 。 “ 11 ) 。這種形式的相對可稱為客觀的區分從相對的,我們一直在討論上述情況,並與其中,事實上,這是一般的總和。首先它是一個理論性知識,但與綠色和其他(例如,阿貝爾雷伊, “香格里拉理論德拉魯阿體質” ,六, 2 ) ,誰確定的知識和現實,它也是一個形而上學。這種觀點的理論假設的性質,關係非常不同於Scholastics 。對於後者的關係基本上是一種鈦schesis利弊,一個秩序的廣告,這意味著( 1 )一個主題它所屬, ( 23 )一個特殊的東西在這一問題上考慮到它的前提是, ( 3 )任期,除本身,它是指。關係,換言之,作為現代人將所說的那樣,其先決條件“條款。 ”這不是一個神秘的和無形的聯繫某種程度上加入了兩個方面的事情,使他們的。關係可能是相互,但如果是的話,真的有兩個關係(例如,父親和sonship )屬於不同的主題,或者,如果同一主題,從不同所引起的基本面。誠然,在科學中的其他事項,我們可以知道關係不能夠發現的性質,它涉及的實體。我們可能知道的,例如,壓力和溫度各不相同比例在某一大規模的天然氣和該卷是保持不變,不知道準確和某些最終的性質,不是施加壓力或溫度。然而我們知道他們的東西。我們知道他們存在,他們都有一定的性質,這是考慮到這一性質,它們之間的關係問題。我們無法知道有關係,因此,不知道的東西的事情,它關係,為其關係的先決條件“條款” 。因此,宇宙不能組成不僅關係,但必須由有關的事情。

Publication information Written by Leslie J. Walker.出版信息撰稿萊斯利學者沃克。 Transcribed by Jim McCann. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XII.轉錄的吉姆麥肯。天主教百科全書,卷十二。 Published 1911. 1911年出版。 New York: Robert Appleton Company.紐約:羅伯特阿普爾頓公司。 Nihil Obstat, June 1, 1911. Nihil Obstat , 1911年6月1日。 Remy Lafort, STD, Censor.雷米Lafort ,性病,檢查員。 Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York認可。 +約翰法利樞機主教,大主教紐約

Bibliography目錄

Epistemological and Metaphysical - Caird, The Critical Philosophy of Kant (Glasgow, 1889); Fonsegrive, Essais sur la connaissance (Paris, 1909); Green, Prolegomena to Ethics (3rd ed., Oxford, 1890); Grote, Exploratio philosophica (Cambridge, 1900); Hamilton, Discussions (London, 1854); Idem, Metaphysics (London, 1871); Herbart, Metaphysics (Leipzig, 1850); Hobhouse, The Theory of Knowledge (London, 1896); Mill, Examination of Hamilton (4th ed., London, 1872); Prichard, Kant's Theory of Knowledge (Oxford, 1910); Renouvier, Les dilemmes de la metaph.認識論和形而上學-凱爾德,關鍵康德哲學(格拉斯哥, 1 889年) ; F onsegrive,拉河畔文集c onnaissance(巴黎, 1 909年) ;綠色,緒論倫理(第3版。 ,牛津, 1 890年) ;格羅特, E xploratio哲學(劍橋, 1900 ) ;漢密爾頓,討論(倫敦, 1854年) ;同上,形而上學(倫敦, 1871年) ;赫爾巴特,形而上學(萊比錫, 1850年) ;豪斯,理論知識(倫敦, 1896年) ;軋機,考試漢密爾頓(第4次版。 ,倫敦, 1872年) ;普里查德,康德的知識論(牛津, 1910 ) ; Renouvier ,法國dilemmes德拉魯阿metaph 。 pure (Paris, 1891); Idem, Le personnalisme (1903); Ray, La Théorie de la physique (Paris, 1907); Rickert Der Gegenstand der Erkenntnis (2nd ed., Tübingen, and Leipzig 1904); Riehl, Der philosoph.純(巴黎, 1891年) ;同上,樂personnalisme ( 1903年) ;線,香格里拉理論德拉魯阿的體魄(巴黎, 1907年) ;凱爾特明鏡對象之知識(第二版。 ,蒂賓根大學,萊比錫和1904年) ;瑞爾,德國哲學。 Kriticismus (Leipzig, 1887); Schiller, Humanism (London, 1903); Idem, Studies in Humanism (1907); Seth, Scottish Philosophy (London, 1885); Simmel, Philosophie des Geldes (Leipzig, 1890); Spencer, First Principles (6th ed., London, 1900); Veitch, Knowing and Being (Edinburgh, 1889); Walker, Theories of Knowledge (London, 1910). Psychological - Bain, Mental and Moral Science (3rd ed., London, 1884); Höffding, Outlines of Psychology (London, 1891); Maher, Psychology (6th ed., London, 1905); Wundt, Human and Animal Psychology, tr. Kriticismus (萊比錫, 1887年) ;席勒,人文(倫敦, 1903年) ;同上,人文研究( 1907年) ;塞思,蘇格蘭哲學(倫敦, 1885年) ;齊美爾,哲學Geldes (萊比錫, 1890年) ;斯賓塞,第一原理(第6版。 ,倫敦, 1900年) ;維奇,認識和作為(愛丁堡, 1889年) ;沃克,理論知識(倫敦, 1910年) 。心理-貝恩,精神和道德科學(第3版。 ,倫敦, 1 884年) ; Höffding ,心理學綱要(倫敦, 1891年) ;馬赫,心理學(第6版。 ,倫敦, 1905年) ;馮特,人類與動物心理學,文。 (London, 1894); Idem, Grundzüge d. (倫敦, 1894年) ;同上, Grundzüge d. physiologischen Psychologie (5th ed., Leipzig, 1903). physiologischen心理學(第5版。 ,萊比錫, 1903年) 。


This subject presentation in the original English language本主題介紹在原來的英文


Send an e-mail question or comment to us: E-mail發送電子郵件的問題或意見給我們:電子郵箱

The main BELIEVE web-page (and the index to subjects) is at主要相信網頁(和索引科目),是在