博碩士論文 981404003 詳細資訊




以作者查詢圖書館館藏 以作者查詢臺灣博碩士 以作者查詢全國書目 勘誤回報 、線上人數:10 、訪客IP:34.239.170.244
姓名 李曉雲(Shiau-Yun Lee)  查詢紙本館藏   畢業系所 哲學研究所
論文名稱 什麼決定一個人的幸福——論個人幸福的基石
(What Makes a Life Good for the Person who Lives It)
相關論文
★ 論謝勒的情感現象學與人格理論— 一種文本詮釋的進路★ 佛教對「心身關係」中「心理疾病」本質的詮解 ──以廣義的心識哲學為中心
★ 康德的《單?理性限度?的宗教》之哲學研究★ 人格同一與道德責任:從初期佛教聖典對神經科學的挑戰的回應
★ 存在哲學諮商之探討─以歐文‧亞隆為例★ 德瓦Ruci的故事的意義, 根據哈吉Mutamakkin說 (Cebolek 書中的闡釋學研究及其與伊斯蘭教的關係)
★ 民族的身體-空間:以中國武術與漢文化民間信仰為核心的開展★ Imam Al-Ghazali的觀點下看家族學中的祖靈
★ 活用建築哲學★ 盧梭《愛彌兒》的教育理念在小學現場實踐的可能
★ 從羅爾斯的《正義論》探討在國小教育中的公平議題★ 泰王普美蓬的「適足經濟哲學」之研究---依據佛教倫理與中道思想來解析
★ THE MEANING OF MYSTICAL CULTURE IN THE KEJAWEN COMMUNITY ACCORDING TO R. NGANEHI RANGGAWARSITA′S SULUK SALOKA JIWA★ 從女性主義視野看商業代理孕母爭議
★ 台灣保全業經營者倫理思考之建構★ 尼采早期的歷史思想
檔案 [Endnote RIS 格式]    [Bibtex 格式]    [相關文章]   [文章引用]   [完整記錄]   [館藏目錄]   [檢視]  [下載]
  1. 本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
  2. 已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
  3. 請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。

摘要(中) 本博士論文要探討的是幸福基石的問題,即:是什麼決定一個人的幸福?當代西方哲學界多年來提出了形形色色的哲學幸福理論來嘗試回答這個問題。然而,這些幸福理論都無法為這個問題提出有說服力的解答,這不是因為它們理論有各自的局限,而是它們共享一些習而不察卻有問題的理論預設。本文指出,這兩大解題預設:把幸福元素當作幸福的基石;以及把幸福元素當作內在價值,使得這些哲學幸福理論一直陷入辯論不休的僵局,也是它們被詬病為理論解釋不力、實踐指導不力的真正根源,因為被當作解題方案的內在價值並不能承擔幸福基石的重任。

有鑒於前述的兩個解題預設既根深蒂固又弊病叢生,本文建議以非內在價值為研究進路的替代理論來取代以內在價值為研究重心的傳統哲學幸福理論。檢驗了學界最新的三大幸福替代理論之後,本文認為Alexandrova的中層理論應該被否決,而Tiberius的價值實現理論以及Bishop的幸福網絡理論則可以被保留和繼續發展。這兩個替代理論雖然優越於前述的傳統幸福理論,但是它們都沒有為價值的性質這個基本概念提出有系統性的論述,以致於他們的理論無法解釋背後的價值預設,也無法從中發展出幸福動態學。為此,本文提出一個新的哲學幸福理論,即連疊理論,除了為幸福基石的問題提供新的解題資源,也為前面的替代理論填補上價值性質這個失落的環節。

連疊理論以資源思想架構為理論的基礎,將價值定位為「可促進生命目的的資源」,價值的性質也因此被界定為「可被資源化」。連疊理論將價值的結構區分為價值質料與價值形式,並根據這三個價值形式:時間形式、空間形式與鑲嵌形式推展出幸福基石的論述。根據幸福連疊理論,一個人是否過得幸福取決於他或她是否以連疊的鑲嵌形式實現那些價值時空形式是累積性和擴展性的幸福核心價值。除了解答幸福基石的問題,本文也根據價值的性質與形式發展幸福動態學的基本雛形,以此說明決定每個價值形式運作機理背後的關鍵訊息。
摘要(英) This doctoral dissertation is to address the question of the ground of well-being, that is the question of what makes a life good for the person who lives it (hereafter, W). Contemporary western philosophy has put forward various philosophical well-being theories to answer W, yet none of them so far successfully offers a convincing answer to it, despite the question has been discussed over decades. Not only that, the existing philosophical well-being theories are stuck in a stalemate of endless debate and are rejected by many scholars because of their inability in resolving the theoretical and practical issues of well-being. This dissertation tends to show that the problems of philosophical well-being theories are not caused by their theoretical flaws, instead, the source of their problems lies in the two hidden and deep-rooted presuppositions shared by all philosophical well-being theories.

These two presuppositions, namely assuming the elements of well-being as the ground of well-being, and assuming the elements of well-being as the noninstrumental values, have directed the western philosophy of well-being to focus too much energy on noninstrumental values. Since noninstrumental values by their nature are unable to function as the ground of well-being, as a result, philosophical well-being theories fail to provide promising explanations and guidance to address ordinary as well as scientific well-being issues. It is thus concluded that the existing traditional philosophical well-being theories should be rejected and replaced by alternative theories which do not explore W via the noninstrumental values approach.

After examining the latest three alternative theories of well-being, this dissertation argues that Alexandrova′s Middle Theory should be rejected, while Tiberius′ Value Fulfillment Theory and Bishop′s Network Theory should remain and further developed. Although these two accepted alternative theories are superior to the aforementioned traditional well-being theories, neither of them proposes a systematic account of the nature of value, nor do they develop an account of well-being dynamics in their theories as well, and these two components are considered crucial for providing a comprehensive answer to W.

To fill in the gap, this dissertation proposes a new alternative philosophical well-being theory, namely Continuity and Accumulation Well-Being Theory (hereafter, CAT) which aims at providing a new approach to investigating W. CAT has not only developed a systematic account of the nature of value, it has also formulated the forms of value from which the ground and the dynamic of well-being could be further inferred and developed. According to CAT, values are defined as resources that contribute to personal well-being; and W is answered in this way: a person’s life is good for the person who lives it if and only if the person is continuously realizing and accumulating those well-being values, of which the value forms are cumulative over time and spatially extensive to other values.
關鍵字(中) ★ 價值
★ 幸福
★ 哲學幸福理論
★ 價值形式
★ 幸福元素
★ 幸福基石
關鍵字(英) ★ value
★ well-being
★ philosophical theories of well-being
★ value forms
★ the elements of well-being
★ the ground of well-being
論文目次 目錄
中文提要 i
英文提要 ii
第一章 導論 1
第一節 研究緣起與目的 1
第二節 論題的分析與釐清 2
第三節 現有學術研究成果的整理與分析 7
第三節 研究架構 18
第四節 研究步驟與章節安排 21
第一部分 傳統理論的問診與把脈 23
第二章 傳統理論的困境 23
第一節 成功幸福理論的標準 23
第二節 傳統理論問題的鑒定 29
第三節 傳統理論的問題根源及解題方案:前人觀點的駁斥 34
第四節 小結 42
第三章 傳統理論的困境根源 43
第一節 從上而下:從幸福哲學界如何理解W來追溯困境的根源 43
第二節 從下而上:從傳統理論的反對論證來反推傳統困境的根源 52
第三節 傳統理論的可能回應 54
第四節 對傳統研究模式和傳統理論的總結 59
第二部分 替代理論 61
第四章 三大替代理論 61
第一節 幸福中層理論 61
第二節 價值實現理論 67
第三節 幸福網絡理論 83
第四節 小結 91
第五章 連疊理論 93
第一節 連疊理論的理論參照系與前提條件 93
第二節 連疊理論的理論內涵 103
第三節 小結 140
第六章 連疊理論的檢驗與可能批評 141
第一節 成功幸福理論標準的檢驗 141
第二節 連疊理論的可能批評與回應 147
第三節 小結 157
第七章 結論 158
第一節 研究成果與學術貢獻 158
第二節 研究成果的檢討與後續研究之展望 159
第三節 總結 163
參考書目 164
參考文獻 Alexandrova, Anna. 2017. A Philosophy for the Science of Well-Being (New York: Oxford University Press).
Bentham, Jeremy. 2000. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (Kitchener: Batoche Books).
Bishop, Michael A. 2015. The Good Life: Unifying the Philosophy and Psychology of Well-Being (New York: Oxford University Press).
Bradford, Gwen. 2016. ′Perfectionism.′ in Guy Fletcher (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Well-Being (Routledge).
Bradley, Ben. 2015. Well-Being (Cambridge, UK: Polity Press).
Compton, William C., and Edward Hoffman. 2020. Positive Psychology : The Science of Human Flourishing (USA: SAGE Publications).
Crisp, Roger. 2013. ′Well-Being′, Accessed 2018/10/6. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/well-being/.
Fletcher, Guy. 2009. ′Rejecting Well-Being Invariabilism′, Philosophical Papers, 38: 21-34.
———. 2016a. The Philosophy of Well-Being: An Introduction (Routledge).
———. 2016b. The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Well-Being (Routledge).
Fredrickson, Barbara L. 2001. ′The Role of Positive Emotions in Positive Psychology: The Broaden-and-Build Theory of Positive Emotions′, American Psychologist, 56: 218-26.
Gladwell, Malcolm. 2008. Outliers : The Story of Success (New York: Little, Brown and Co.).
Griffin, James. 1986. Well-Being: Its Meaning, Measurement and Moral Importance (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
Heathwood, Chris. 2016. ′Desire-Fulfillment Theory.′ in Guy Fletcher (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Well-Being (Routledge).
Jay, Meg. Accessed 2020-10-26. https://www.ted.com/talks/meg_jay_why_30_is_not_the_new_20?language=en.
Johnson, Steven. 2010. Where Good Ideas Come From : The Natural History of Innovation (New York: Riverhead Books).
Kagan, Shelly. 2009. ′Well-Being as Enjoying the Good′, Philosophical Perspectives, 23: 253-72.
Kahneman, Daniel, and Jason Riis. 2005. ′Living, and Thinking about It: Two Perspectives on Life.′ in Felicia A. Huppert, Nick Baylis and Barry Keverne (eds.), The Science of Well-Being (New York: Oxford University Press).
Keller, Gary, and Jay Papasan. 2013. The One Thing : The Surprisingly Simple Truth Behind Extraordinary Results (Austin, Texas: Bard Press).
Lyubomirsky, Sonja, Laura King, and Ed Diener. 2005. ′The Benefits of Frequent Positive Affect: Does Happiness Lead to Success?′, Psychological Bulletin, 131: 803-55.
Martin, Mike. 2008. ′Paradoxes of Happiness′, Journal of Happiness Studies, 9: 171-84.
Maslow, A. H. 1943. ′A Theory of Human Motivation′, Psychological Review, 50: 370-96.
McMahon, Darrin M. 2014. ′The Pursuit of Happiness in History.′ in Susan A. David; Ilona Boniwell and Amanda C. Ayers (ed.), Oxford Handbook of Happiness (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press).
Moore, George E. 1903. Principia Ethica (Dover Publications).
Nozick, Robert. 1974. Anarchy, State, and Utopia (New York: Basic Books).
O’Neill, John. 1992. ′The Varieties of Intrinsic Value′, The Monist, 75: 119-37.
Parfit, Derek. 1984. Reasons and Persons (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
Raghavan, Ramesh, and Anna Alexandrova. 2015. ′Toward a Theory of Child Well-Being′, Social Indicators Research, 121: 887-902.
Raz, Joseph. 1986. The Morality of Freedom (New York: Oxford University Press).
Rodogno, Raffaele. 2015. ′Prudential Value or Well-Being.′ in David Sander and Tobias Brosch (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Value: The Affective Sciences of Values and Valuation (New York: Oxford University Press).
Rønnow-Rasmussen, Toni, and Michael J. Zimmerman. 2005. Recent Work on Intrinsic Value (Dordrecht: Springer).
Ross, W. D. 1930. The Right and the Good (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
Sartre, Jean-Paul, and Philip Mairet. 1948. Existentialism and Humanism (London: Methuen).
Seligman, Martin E. P. 2002. Authentic Happiness : Using the New Positive Psychology to Realize Your Potential for Lasting Fulfillment (New York: Free Press).
———. 2006. Learned Optimism : How to Change Your Mind and Your Life (New York: Vintage Books).
———. 2011. Flourish : A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-Being (New York: Free Press).
Seligman, Martin E. P., Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. 2000. ′Positive Psychology: An Introduction′, American Psychologist, 55: 5-14.
Shafer-Landau, Russ. 2007. Ethical Theory : An Anthology (Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.).
Sidgwick, Henry. 1981. The Methods of Ethics (Indianapolis: Hackett Pub. Co.).
Slote, Michael A. 1983. Goods and Virtues (New York: Oxford University Press).
Sonenshein, Scott. 2017. Stretch : Unlock the Power of Less-- and Achieve More Than You Ever Imagined (New York: HarperCollins).
Spiegelberg, Herbert. 1947. ′What Makes Good Things Good? An Inquiry Into the Grounds of Value′, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 7: 578-611.
′The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy′. https://plato.stanford.edu/.
Sumner, L. W. 1996. Welfare, Happiness, and Ethics (New York: Oxford University Press).
Tiberius, Valerie. 2013. ′Philosophical Methods in Happiness Research.′ in Susan A. David; Ilona Boniwell and Amanda C. Ayers (ed.), The Oxford handbook of happiness (United Kingdom: Oxford University Press).
———. 2015. ′Prudential Value.′ in Iwao Hirose and Jonas Olson (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Value Theory (New York: Oxford University Press).
———. 2018. Well-Being as Value Fulfillment: How We Can Help Each Other to Live Well (New York: Oxford University Press).
Velleman, J. David. 1991. ′Well-Being and Time′, Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 72: 48-77.
von Wright, Georg Henrik. 1963. The Varieties of Goodness (Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd).
Woodard, Christopher. 2015. ′Hybrid Theories.′ in Guy Fletcher (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Well-Being (Routledge).
謝伯讓(2016)。《大腦簡史:生物經過四十億年的演化,大腦是否已經超脫自私基因的掌控?》。臺北:貓頭鷹出版。
李曉雲(2015)。〈兩種時間向度幸福觀的比較〉,《朝陽人文社會學刊》,13,1:19-32。
藍偉瑩(2019)。《教學力:深化素養學習的關鍵》。臺北:親子天下。
指導教授 孫雲平(Yun-Ping Sun) 審核日期 2022-8-18
推文 facebook   plurk   twitter   funp   google   live   udn   HD   myshare   reddit   netvibes   friend   youpush   delicious   baidu   
網路書籤 Google bookmarks   del.icio.us   hemidemi   myshare   

若有論文相關問題,請聯絡國立中央大學圖書館推廣服務組 TEL:(03)422-7151轉57407,或E-mail聯絡  - 隱私權政策聲明