“纯粹”意识的难题:Sāṃkhya二元论本体论

IF 0.5 2区 哲学 0 RELIGION
Karen O’Brien-Kop
{"title":"“纯粹”意识的难题:Sāṃkhya二元论本体论","authors":"Karen O’Brien-Kop","doi":"10.1017/s0034412523000410","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article addresses the theme of ‘death and immortality’ from the perspective of consciousness, and takes as its starting point a root text of Hindu philosophy, the Sāṃkhyakārikā by Īśvarakṛṣṇa (c. fourth century ce). The text posits a dualist ontology in which consciousness is separate and autonomous from a material reality that includes body and mind. The goal is to be ontologically situated in a ‘pure’ consciousness (non-objective), which signifies existential liberation. There are mundane ways to understand this claim, such as referring to cognitive states that produce affective dissociation, or more radical interpretations, such as a post-death state. This article explores the question of what Sāṃkhya's consciousness is like: it is said to be immortal, plural, individuated, and contentless. What is the motivation for and implication of engagement with a system that describes an existential freedom that may only be known in a dualist reality or after death? And how can Sāṃkhya's concepts be brought into conversation with contemporary investigations into mind–body questions? Sāṃkhya rationality counters the argument of eternal oblivion or of consciousness as an illusion confined to the brain. Yet there are resonances with Chalmers's notion of consciousness as fundamental. This article concludes that contemporary Anglo-American philosophy of religion can be enhanced by adding Sāṃkhya thought to its purview.","PeriodicalId":45888,"journal":{"name":"RELIGIOUS STUDIES","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The hard problem of ‘pure’ consciousness: Sāṃkhya dualist ontology\",\"authors\":\"Karen O’Brien-Kop\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s0034412523000410\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This article addresses the theme of ‘death and immortality’ from the perspective of consciousness, and takes as its starting point a root text of Hindu philosophy, the Sāṃkhyakārikā by Īśvarakṛṣṇa (c. fourth century ce). The text posits a dualist ontology in which consciousness is separate and autonomous from a material reality that includes body and mind. The goal is to be ontologically situated in a ‘pure’ consciousness (non-objective), which signifies existential liberation. There are mundane ways to understand this claim, such as referring to cognitive states that produce affective dissociation, or more radical interpretations, such as a post-death state. This article explores the question of what Sāṃkhya's consciousness is like: it is said to be immortal, plural, individuated, and contentless. What is the motivation for and implication of engagement with a system that describes an existential freedom that may only be known in a dualist reality or after death? And how can Sāṃkhya's concepts be brought into conversation with contemporary investigations into mind–body questions? Sāṃkhya rationality counters the argument of eternal oblivion or of consciousness as an illusion confined to the brain. Yet there are resonances with Chalmers's notion of consciousness as fundamental. This article concludes that contemporary Anglo-American philosophy of religion can be enhanced by adding Sāṃkhya thought to its purview.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45888,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"RELIGIOUS STUDIES\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"RELIGIOUS STUDIES\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1095\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0034412523000410\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RELIGIOUS STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1095","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0034412523000410","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文从意识的角度探讨了“死亡与不朽”的主题,并以印度哲学的一个基本文本为出发点,Sāṃkhyakārikā by Īśvarakṛṣṇa(约公元四世纪)。这篇文章假设了一个二元论的本体论,在这个本体论中,意识是独立的,独立于包括身体和精神在内的物质现实的。目标是在本体论上处于“纯粹”意识(非客观)中,这意味着存在的解放。有一些世俗的方法可以理解这一说法,比如指产生情感分离的认知状态,或者更激进的解释,比如死后状态。这篇文章探讨了Sāṃkhya的意识是什么样子的问题:据说它是不朽的、多元的、个性化的、无内容的。参与一个描述存在主义自由的系统的动机和含义是什么,这种自由可能只在二元论的现实中或死后才知道?如何将Sāṃkhya的概念与当代对身心问题的研究结合起来?Sāṃkhya理性反驳了永恒遗忘或意识是局限于大脑的幻觉的观点。然而,查尔默斯关于意识是根本的概念也有共鸣。本文的结论是,当代英美宗教哲学可以通过在其范围内增加Sāṃkhya思想而得到加强。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The hard problem of ‘pure’ consciousness: Sāṃkhya dualist ontology
This article addresses the theme of ‘death and immortality’ from the perspective of consciousness, and takes as its starting point a root text of Hindu philosophy, the Sāṃkhyakārikā by Īśvarakṛṣṇa (c. fourth century ce). The text posits a dualist ontology in which consciousness is separate and autonomous from a material reality that includes body and mind. The goal is to be ontologically situated in a ‘pure’ consciousness (non-objective), which signifies existential liberation. There are mundane ways to understand this claim, such as referring to cognitive states that produce affective dissociation, or more radical interpretations, such as a post-death state. This article explores the question of what Sāṃkhya's consciousness is like: it is said to be immortal, plural, individuated, and contentless. What is the motivation for and implication of engagement with a system that describes an existential freedom that may only be known in a dualist reality or after death? And how can Sāṃkhya's concepts be brought into conversation with contemporary investigations into mind–body questions? Sāṃkhya rationality counters the argument of eternal oblivion or of consciousness as an illusion confined to the brain. Yet there are resonances with Chalmers's notion of consciousness as fundamental. This article concludes that contemporary Anglo-American philosophy of religion can be enhanced by adding Sāṃkhya thought to its purview.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
RELIGIOUS STUDIES
RELIGIOUS STUDIES RELIGION-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
33.30%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Religious Studies is an international journal devoted to the problems of the philosophy of religion as they arise out of classical and contemporary discussions and from varied religious traditions. More than 25 articles are published each year, and the journal also contains an extensive book review section.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信