理論思考抑或德性活動整體？亞里斯多德論幸福

亞里斯多德在《尼各馬可倫理學》中探問：「什麼是幸福(εὐδαιμονία, eudaimonia)？」這一問題，並且探討我們如何能夠達到這種狀態。他從幸福的形式著手，透過目的論體系的建立與探討，他認為幸福會是一個「只因自身便受到追求」的目的，且符合兩種特質：完整性以及自足性。接著他進一步以功能論證來討論幸福的實質內涵。他認為人類的特徵性功能即是根據「理性」的活動，因此幸福就會是由表達出理性的德性活動來構成。不過在此便出現了「支配論」與「包容論」的兩種解釋。「支配論」認同亞里斯多德在第十卷的說法，認為幸福將由「理論思考」這個最高的理性活動來構成；「包容論」則較以亞里斯多德在第一卷的說法出發，主張幸福應是由理論思考以及其他諸多表達出理性的德性活動來組成。這兩派詮釋方法長期以來互有消長，而本文將從幾位促成包容論長足進展之學者的立論出發，來討論包容論如何漸漸發展成為亞里斯多德《尼各馬可倫理學》不亞於支配論的重要詮釋方法。首先是Ackrill對傳統上認為太過狹隘的亞里斯多德目的論架構做出重新詮釋，並重新討論τέλεια(teleia)這個字的意涵，使包容論獲得詮釋上的空間。Cooper則進一步將包容論的討論範圍延伸至第十卷，首次成功地詮釋傳統上認為包容論難以施展的地方。另外，本文也將討論Bostock以及Lear二位學者對於包容論之詮釋在文本上可能會遭遇到的問題，並嘗試提出回應。

關鍵字

亞里斯多德；幸福；包容論；支配論

並列摘要

In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle asks: what is eudaimonia? How can we achieve it? Through reconstructing the structure of telos, Aristotle takes eudaimonia to be something that “is pursued only because of its own sake,” which is characterized as being complete and self-sufficient. On the other hand, Aristotle takes the function argument to be conveying the content of eudaimonia. He argues that the characteristic feature of a human being is the activity of virtue which expresses the reason of human being. There are two main interpretations of eudaimonia, which are called dominant view and inclusive view. The dominant view is based upon the Book 10 of Nicomachean Ethics and argues that eudaimonia is constituted only by contemplation (theoria), which is the highest activity that expresses the human reason. By contrast, the “inclusive view’ is based upon the Book 1 in Nicomachean Ethics and argues that eudaimonia is constituted by not only contemplation but also other many activities of virtue that express the human reason. In this M.A. thesis I will focus on reviewing and analyzing the inclusive view, including J. L. Ackrill’s and John Cooper’s interpretations. I will look at some criticisms raised by David Bostock and Gabriel Richardson Lear, and will try to make some responses for defending the inclusive view.