 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
On the Good in Aristotle and Early Buddhism: A Response to Abraham Vélez |
|
|
|
| Author |
Keown, Damien (著)
|
|---|
| Source |
Journal of Buddhist Ethics
|
|---|
| Volume | v.24 |
|---|
| Date | 2017 |
|---|
| Pages | 97 - 115 |
|---|
| Publisher | Department of History & Religious Studies Program , The Pennsylvania State University |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
https://history.la.psu.edu/
|
|---|
| Location | University Park, PA, US |
|---|
| Content type | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| Language | 英文=English |
|---|
| Note | Damien Keown, University of London, Goldsmiths |
|---|
| Abstract | In an earlier publication I compared Aristotelian and Buddhist concepts of the consummate good. Abraham Vélez de Cea has claimed I misrepresent the nature of the good by restricting it to certain psychic states and excluding a range of other goods acknowledged by Aristotle and the Buddha. My aim here is to show that my understanding of the good is not the narrow one Vélez suggests. The article concludes with some observations on the relationship between moral and non-moral good in Buddhism. |
|---|
| Table of contents | Abstract 97
Introduction 98
I. Eudaimonia and External Goods 99
II. Eudaimonia and Nirvāṇa 102
III. Conceptual Clarification 104
(i) Moral and non-moral good 105
(ii) The psychological criterion of the right 106
(iii) The right and the good 108
IV. Buddhism and Non-moral Goods 109
Conclusion 113
Abbreviations 113
Bibliography 114 |
|---|
| ISSN | 10769005 (E) |
|---|
| Hits | 254 |
|---|
| Created date | 2017.05.05 |
|---|
| Modified date | 2022.01.27 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
