非对偶逻辑的生态学意义

IF 1.7 2区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES
Ann A. Pang-White
{"title":"非对偶逻辑的生态学意义","authors":"Ann A. Pang-White","doi":"10.4312/as.2023.11.2.175-200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores the relationship between language and reality and the ecological implications of dualism, categorical logic, and the Aristotelian three laws of logic, on humans’ attitude toward the natural world. The paper engages in a comparative analysis of two traditions: one from the West (Neo-Platonism) and one from the East (Daoism). It argues that while both Neo-Platonism (as represented by Plotinus’ Enneads) and Classic Daoism (as represented by the Daodejing and the Zhuangzi) are successful in debunking rigid dualistic logic, Plotinus’s Oneness emanation theory in the end falls short of supporting an inclusive ecological ethics in a comprehensive manner. Still mired in dualism, Plotinian Neo-Platonism treats nature and the physical world as recalcitrant matter—an evil best to be avoided rather than embraced. By contrast, Classic Daoism’s non-dual multi-universe perspective of the world has much to offer with regard to creating a new eco-philosophy and ethics that supports a healthy, sustainable, ecology.","PeriodicalId":46839,"journal":{"name":"Critical Asian Studies","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ecological Implications of the Logic of Non-Duality\",\"authors\":\"Ann A. Pang-White\",\"doi\":\"10.4312/as.2023.11.2.175-200\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper explores the relationship between language and reality and the ecological implications of dualism, categorical logic, and the Aristotelian three laws of logic, on humans’ attitude toward the natural world. The paper engages in a comparative analysis of two traditions: one from the West (Neo-Platonism) and one from the East (Daoism). It argues that while both Neo-Platonism (as represented by Plotinus’ Enneads) and Classic Daoism (as represented by the Daodejing and the Zhuangzi) are successful in debunking rigid dualistic logic, Plotinus’s Oneness emanation theory in the end falls short of supporting an inclusive ecological ethics in a comprehensive manner. Still mired in dualism, Plotinian Neo-Platonism treats nature and the physical world as recalcitrant matter—an evil best to be avoided rather than embraced. By contrast, Classic Daoism’s non-dual multi-universe perspective of the world has much to offer with regard to creating a new eco-philosophy and ethics that supports a healthy, sustainable, ecology.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46839,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Asian Studies\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Asian Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4312/as.2023.11.2.175-200\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Asian Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4312/as.2023.11.2.175-200","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了语言与现实的关系,以及二元论、直言逻辑和亚里士多德逻辑三定律对人类对自然世界态度的生态影响。本文对西方(新柏拉图主义)和东方(道教)两种传统进行了比较分析。本文认为,虽然新柏拉图主义(以普罗提诺的《恩尼德》为代表)和古典道家(以《道德经》和《庄子》为代表)都成功地揭穿了僵化的二元论逻辑,但普罗提诺的合一发散理论最终未能全面支持包容性的生态伦理。仍然深陷二元论的泥潭,普罗提尼的新柏拉图主义把自然和物质世界视为一种难以抗拒的东西——一种最好避免而不是拥抱的邪恶。相比之下,经典道家的非二元多宇宙世界观在创造支持健康、可持续生态的新生态哲学和伦理方面大有作为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ecological Implications of the Logic of Non-Duality
This paper explores the relationship between language and reality and the ecological implications of dualism, categorical logic, and the Aristotelian three laws of logic, on humans’ attitude toward the natural world. The paper engages in a comparative analysis of two traditions: one from the West (Neo-Platonism) and one from the East (Daoism). It argues that while both Neo-Platonism (as represented by Plotinus’ Enneads) and Classic Daoism (as represented by the Daodejing and the Zhuangzi) are successful in debunking rigid dualistic logic, Plotinus’s Oneness emanation theory in the end falls short of supporting an inclusive ecological ethics in a comprehensive manner. Still mired in dualism, Plotinian Neo-Platonism treats nature and the physical world as recalcitrant matter—an evil best to be avoided rather than embraced. By contrast, Classic Daoism’s non-dual multi-universe perspective of the world has much to offer with regard to creating a new eco-philosophy and ethics that supports a healthy, sustainable, ecology.
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
Critical Asian Studies
Critical Asian Studies AREA STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
3.80%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: Critical Asian Studies is a peer-reviewed quarterly journal that welcomes unsolicited essays, reviews, translations, interviews, photo essays, and letters about Asia and the Pacific, particularly those that challenge the accepted formulas for understanding the Asia and Pacific regions, the world, and ourselves. Published now by Routledge Journals, part of the Taylor & Francis Group, Critical Asian Studies remains true to the mission that was articulated for the journal in 1967 by the Committee of Concerned Asian Scholars.
×
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