根拠律の四つの根について
- 言語:
- 英語
- 状態:
- 完全な作品
- 著者性:
- 著者自身による
- テキストの状態:
- 良好なテキスト
- 分量:
- 約 150,000 語 · 725 節
この作品を引用
- APAアルトゥル・ショーペンハウアー. (n.d.). 根拠律の四つの根について. SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/schopenhauer/on-the-fourfold-root-of-the-principle-of-sufficient-reason-and-on-the-will-in-n
- MLAアルトゥル・ショーペンハウアー. "根拠律の四つの根について." SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/schopenhauer/on-the-fourfold-root-of-the-principle-of-sufficient-reason-and-on-the-will-in-n.
- Chicagoアルトゥル・ショーペンハウアー. 根拠律の四つの根について. SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/schopenhauer/on-the-fourfold-root-of-the-principle-of-sufficient-reason-and-on-the-will-in-n.
何についての本か
ショーペンハウアーの学位論文、一八一三年。彼自身が、自分を理解しようとする者の通らねばならぬ戸口とみなしたものであり、ここでは後年の『自然における意志について』と一冊に合わされている。
背景と歴史
論文の主張はこうだ。充足理由律——すべてには「なぜ」がある——は一つのものではなく、哲学が混同してきた四つの別々のものである。すなわち、物体的な出来事の原因、論理的な結論の根拠、数学的真理の「なぜ」、そして行為の動機である。これらを混ぜることから、形而上学の誤解の大半が生じる。ショーペンハウアーは終始、これを先に読まずに『意志と表象としての世界』を読む者には理解できまい、と言い張った。『自然における意志について』は一八三六年、はるかに後年の、主題も異なる書である。そこでは同時代の諸科学のうちに自分の形而上学の裏づけを探している。年代の大きく隔たった別々の二作であることは、知っておくとよい。
これは編集上の背景であり、引用できる典拠ではありません。作品本文の一節とは異なり、これらの記述はコーパスで検証できません。
knowledge to be the indispensable condition for a right comprehension of his meaning. So far as I am aware, neither the "Fourfold Root" nor the "Will in Nature" have as yet found a translator; therefore, considering the dawning interest which has begun to make itself felt for Schopenhauer's philosophy in England and in America, and the fact that no more competent scholar has come forward to do the work, it may not seem presumptuous to suppose that this version may be acceptable to those who wish to acquire a more than superficial knowledge of this remarkable thinker, yet whose acquaintance with German does not permit them to read his works in the original. Now although some portions of both the Essays published in the present volume have of course become antiquated, owing to the subsequent development of the empirical sciences, while others--such as, for instance, Schopenhauer's denunciation of plagiarism in the cases of Brandis and Rosas in the beginning of Physiology and Pathology[2]--can have no interest for the reader of the present day, I have nevertheless given them just as he left them and refrained from all suppression or alteration. And if, on the whole, the "Will in Nature" may be less indispensable for a right understanding of our philosopher's views than the "Fourfold Root," being merely a record of the confirmations which had been contributed during his lifetime by the various branches would thus be more readily understood. As however he uses the word '_idea_' everywhere else exclusively in its original (Platonic) sense, I have preferred to avoid needless confusion by adhering to his own declaration and definition. Besides, many English writers of note have protested against any other sense being given to it, and modern German philosophers have more and more returned to the original meaning of the term. [4] See p. 113, § 34 of the original, and p. 133 of the present translation.…