摘要
亚里士多德在《尼各马可伦理学》和《欧德伦理学》中讨论了政治友爱(homonia,或译为“同心”),关于这种友爱在亚里士多德的友爱三分法中所处的位置,学术界存在持续的争论。主要争议在于,这种友爱是利益型友爱、品格型友爱,还是一种不同于三种基本友爱类型的独立类型,或仅仅是好意而非友爱。亚里士多德的文本中有充分的证据表明,政治友爱属于利益型友爱。相反的观点或多或少地误解了亚里士多德对政治友爱的定位。尽管政治友爱被归类为利益型友爱,但这并不妨碍它在政治共同体的塑造中扮演至关重要的角色,也不妨碍在此基础上发展出品格型的友爱。亚里士多德的“政治友爱”观念可以延伸到斯多亚学派的“世界公民”思想,体现了两种思想的延续性及斯多亚学派对亚里士多德思想的发展。
Aristotle,in both of his ethical treatises,Nicomachean Ethics and Eudemian Ethics,discusses friendship within a political context and identifies a special kind of friendship called“political friendship”(often referred to as homonoia or concord).The classification of political friendship within the three basic categories of friendship(utility friendship,pleasure friendship,and character or virtue friendship)has become a controversial question among interpreters.Some scholars argue that it is utility friendship due to Aristotle s explicit statement in the Eudemian Ethics and the notion that political communities arise because individuals are not self-sufficient and thus need each other.Others believe that Aristotle changes his view in the Nicomachean Ethics and ultimately considers political friendship as a form of character friendship because political communities aim to cultivate similar virtues in individuals.Still others maintain that political friendship is sui generis and does not fit into any of the three categories of friendship(this view varies,with some considering political friendship unique to the constitution of polity,others viewing it as a mix of utility and character friendship,and some contesting the equivalence between political friendship and homonoia).This paper argues that the latter two views are mistaken in different ways and that Aristotle consistently holds that political friendship is the same as homonoia and can only be classified as utility friendship.All concerns regarding this identification are unwarranted.Its classification as utility friendship does not diminish the important role political friendship plays in unifying citizens within a political community,nor does this identification cause instability,as utility can also be stable.Most importantly,this classification explains why different constitutions require different kinds of friendship.The final section of the paper compares Aristotle s concept of political friendship with Stoic cosmopolitanism,highlighting both interesting continuities(such as the expansion of friendship to include strangers)and new developments(particularly the Stoic emphasis on virtue and friendship among individuals who have never met).
出处
《四川大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》
CSSCI
北大核心
2024年第4期45-52,207,208,共10页
Journal of Sichuan University：Philosophy and Social Science Edition
作者简介
刘玮,教育部伦理学与道德建设研究中心研究员、中国人民大学哲学院教授、北京大学外国哲学研究所兼职研究员(北京100872)。
