哈姆雷特: 伊比鳩魯學派的復仇者

、線上人數：59

、訪客IP：18.223.125.157

姓名	潘修平(Shiou-Ping Pan) 查詢紙本館藏	畢業系所	英美語文學系
論文名稱	哈姆雷特: 伊比鳩魯學派的復仇者 (Hamlet: The Epicurean Revenger)
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] 本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。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。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)	本論文是從伊比鳩魯學派的觀點來分析莎士比亞的《哈姆雷特》。《哈姆雷特》之所以非常出名是因為哈姆雷特王子本人的刻畫動人，而本人認為這刻劃深受伊比鳩魯學派影響。伊比鳩魯學派強調透過理性得到「安寧」(ataraxia)，一種沒有痛苦的狀態 (無論是身體的還是心靈的)並藉此達到一種身體與心靈無痛的極樂境界。因伊比鳩魯學派強調享樂，這個學派常常被批評是包裝過的享樂主義。儘管如此，有鑑於伊比鳩魯學派挑戰了柏拉圖、亞里斯多德、和基督教的主流思想，該流派在文藝復興時期廣受歡迎，並對後來西方文化的形塑有其影響性。本論文將聚焦伊比鳩魯學派與《哈姆雷特》之間的相互形塑，並藉此重新審視其主人翁的哲學底蘊，例如: 哈姆雷特王子對「安寧」(ataraxia)的追求、他對情感和慾望的接納、他對友誼的看法、和他與死亡保持的距離。雖然哈姆雷特王子一開始認為伊比鳩魯哲學與復仇背道而馳，但該矛盾在故事的推進當中開始逐漸收斂並融合，例如: 他在獨白中所運用的論證方法、他與母親的真誠言談、以及他在最後一幕因伊比鳩魯—基督教融合而產生的「安寧」(ataraxia)。透過重建伊比鳩魯學派與《哈姆雷特》之間的對話，本論文主張莎士比亞為其筆下悲劇英雄賦予了全新的視角，並藉此重新詮釋了文藝復興復仇劇。
摘要(英)	This thesis is an Epicurean reading of Shakespeare’s Hamlet, focusing on the influence of classical philosophy on English Renaissance revenge tragedy, itself born out of Seneca’s tragic tradition. Hamlet adheres to Senecan tragic conventions, which include influences from classical philosophy, specifically Stoic moral commentary. I argue Shakespeare’s characterization of Hamlet is also influenced by other schools of classical philosophy, specifically Epicureanism. As a non-mainstream school of philosophy, Epicureanism has a unique view on what it means to live a good life. Epicureanism emphasizes ataraxia (equanimity), a state without pain (both physical and psychological), which is seen as the basis of pleasure. It is often misunderstood as a hedonist philosophy due to its emphasis on pleasure, yet it stresses that correct knowledge (reason) is the only way a person can attain ataraxia to truly enjoy pleasure. Epicureanism had many critics throughout history, such as Platonism, Aristotelianism, Stoicism, and Christianity, who attacked Epicureanism for its hedonism, self-contradictory doctrines, political minimalism, and atheism. Even so, it generated great interest and genuine debate, especially after De Rerum Natura, an Epicurean treatise by Lucretius, was rediscovered in the Renaissance. The challenge posed by Epicureanism to the Platonic-Aristotelian-Christian mainstream revolutionized Western society, which can be glimpsed through Shakespeare’s Hamlet. This thesis argues that Prince Hamlet, though his characterization is still a matter of debate, is indubitably an Epicurean philosopher. I build upon existing arguments for Hamlet as an Epicurean, adding that many aspects of Epicureanism can be seen throughout the play—his pursuit of ataraxia, his acceptance of passions, his mode of friendship, and his materialist distance with death. Most importantly, my Epicurean reading of Hamlet adds a critical angle to the revenge tragedy genre, as it offers a solution to the dilemma between living morally and changing the world. Hamlet initially understands Epicurean philosophy to be at odds with revenge. However, Hamlet applies his philosophical training to the question of revenge, seen in his emotional reasoning and insistence on correct knowledge in the Hecuba soliloquy, his act of parrhesia (true speech) with Gertrude, his acknowledgment of human reason and the dangers of politics in the Fortinbras soliloquy, and his Epicurean-Christian ataraxia that he achieves at the end of the play. In turn, Hamlet’s Epicurean-Christian ataraxia facilitates his revenge against Claudius.
關鍵字(中)	★ 哈姆雷特 ★ 伊比鳩魯學派 ★ 復仇 ★ 安寧 ★ 莎士比亞 ★ 哲學	關鍵字(英)	★ Hamlet ★ Epicurean ★ Revenge ★ ataraxia ★ Shakespeare ★ philosophy
論文目次	Table of Contents Abstract ii Acknowledgments v Introduction 1 Chapter One. Epicureanism: The Peculiar Philosophy 5 1. The Tenets of Epicureanism 5 2. The Opponents of Epicureanism 11 3. Epicureanism During the Renaissance 16 4. The Importance of Epicureanism 18 Chapter Two. Prince Hamlet: The Peculiar Philosopher 21 1. The Stoic View 22 2. The Epicurean View 24 3. Evidence for an Epicurean Hamlet 27 3.1 The Pursuit of Ataraxia 27 3.2 The Acceptance of Passions 29 3.3 The Investment of Friendship 31 3.4 Hamlet’s Satire of Death 34 Chapter Three. Hamlet: The Peculiar Revenger 37 1. Revenge and Epicureanism 39 2. Conclusion 50 Works Cited 53
參考文獻	Aoiz, Javier, and Boeri, Marcelo D. "Cicero and his Clamorous Silences: was he Fair Enough with the Epicureans and their Ethical and Political Views?" Ciceroniana On Line, vol. 6, no. 1, 2022, pp. 55-89. Bakewell, Geoffrey. "The Philosophical Schools." The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Athens, edited by Jenifer Neils and Dylan K. Rogers, Cambridge UP, 2021, pp. 295-306. Bate, Jonathan. Soul of the Age : A Biography of the Mind of William Shakespeare. Random House, 2010. Braden, Gordon. “Senecan Tragedy and the Renaissance.” LITERAE HUMANIORES: Classical Themes in Renaissance Guise, vol. 8, no. 2, 1984, pp. 277-292. Broude, Ronald. “Revenge and Revenge Tragedy in Renaissance England.” Renaissance Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 1, 1975, pp. 38-58. Brown, Eric. "Politics and Society." The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism, edited by James Warren, Cambridge UP, 2009, pp. 179-96. Campbell, Lily B. “Theories of Revenge in Renaissance England.” Modern Philology, vol. 28, no. 3, 1931, pp. 281-296. Clay, Diskin. "The Athenian Garden." The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism, edited by James Warren, Cambridge UP, 2009, pp. 9-28. Cressy, David. Birth, Marriage, and Death: Ritual, Religion, and the life-cycle in Tudor and Stuart England. Oxford UP, 1997. Crosbie, Christopher. Revenge Tragedy and Classical Philosophy on the Early Modern Stage. Edinburgh UP, 2019. de Grazia, Margaret. ′Hamlet′ without Hamlet. Cambridge UP, 2007. Dunne, Derek. Shakespeare, Revenge Tragedy and Early Modern Law: Vindictive Justice. Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. Engel, William E. and Williams, Grant. “Introduction.” The Shakespearean Death Arts, edited by William E. Engel and Grant Williams, Palgrave Macmillan, 2022, pp. 1-25. Engberg-Pedersen, Troels. "Stoicism in Early Christianity." The Routledge Handbook of the Stoic Tradition, edited by John Sellars, Routledge, 2016, pp. 29-64. Erler, Michael. “Epicureanism in the Roman Empire.” The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism, edited by James Warren, Cambridge UP, 2009, pp. 46-64. Fletcher, Angus. "Partial Belief in Julius Caesar and Hamlet." Evolving Hamlet: Seventeenth-Century English Tragedy and the Ethics of Natural Selection, edited by Angus Fletcher, Palgrave Macmillan, 2011, pp. 39-66. Fothergill-Payne, Louise. "Seneca′s Role in Popularizing Epicurus in the Sixteenth Century." Atoms, Pneuma, and Tranquillity: Epicurean and Stoic Themes in European Thought, edited by Margaret J. Osler, Cambridge UP, 1991, pp. 115-34. Ghose, Indira. “Jesting with Death: Hamlet in the Graveyard.” Textual Practice, vol. 24, no. 6, 2010, pp. 1003-1018. Gibson, John. "On (Not) Making Oneself Known." Shakespeare′s Hamlet: Philosophical Perspectives, edited by Tzachi Zamir, Oxford UP, 2018, pp. 17-46. Gillies, John. "The Question of Original Sin in Hamlet." Shakespeare Quarterly, vol. 64, no. 4, 2013, pp. 396-424. Gillespie, Stuart. "Lucretius in the English Renaissance." The Cambridge Companion to Lucretius, edited by Philip Hardie and Stuart Gillespie, Cambridge UP, 2007, pp. 242-53. Gray, Patrick. "“Hide Thy Selfe”: Montaigne, Hamlet, and Epicurean Ethics." Shakespeare and Renaissance Ethics, edited by John D. Cox and Patrick Gray, Cambridge UP, 2014, pp. 213-36. Green, Jeffery Edward. "Solace for the Frustrations of Silent Citizenship: the Case of Epicureanism." Citizenship Studies, vol. 19, no. 5, 2015, pp. 492-506. Greenblatt, Stephen. The Swerve: How the World Became Modern. W. W. Norton & Company, 2011. Hershinow, David. Shakespeare and the Truth-Teller: Confronting the Cynic Ideal. Edinburgh UP, 2019. Hui, Andrew. "Horatio′s Philosophy in Hamlet." Renaissance Drama, vol. 41, no. 12, 2013, pp. 151-71. Kechagia-Ovseiko, Eleni. “Plutach and Epicureanism.” A Companion to Plutarch, edited by Mark Beck. John Wiley & Sons, 2014, pp. 104-120. Keisala, Antti. A Devil’s Labyrinth: A Rereading of Hamlet. 2010. U of Jyväskylä, MA Thesis. Kerrigan, John. Revenge Tragedy: Aeschylus to Armageddon. Oxford UP, 1997. Kilby, Karen. "Philosophy." The Cambridge Companion to the Summa Theologiae, edited by Denys Turner and Philip McCosker, Cambridge UP, 2016, pp. 62-73. Konstan, David. A Life Worthy of the Gods: The Materialist Psychology of Epicurus. Parmenides, 2008. Kottman, Paul A. "Self-Uncertainty as Self-Realization." Shakespeare′s Hamlet: Philosophical Perspectives, edited by Tzachi Zamir, Oxford UP, 2018, pp. 105-129. Lake, Peter. “Tragedies and Religion: Religion and Revenge in Titus Andronicus and Hamlet.” The Oxford Handbook of Shakespearean Tragedy, edited by Michael Neil and David Schalkwyk, Oxford, 2016, pp. 167–183. Landy, Jushua. "To Thine Own Selves Be True-ish: Shakespeare’s Hamlet as Formal Model." Shakespeare′s Hamlet: Philosophical Perspectives, edited by Tzachi Zamir, Oxford UP, 2018, pp. 154-187. Lévy, Carlos. "Cicero." Oxford Handbook of Epicurus and Epicureanism, edited by Phillip Mitsis, Oxford UP, 2020, pp. 476-86. Lewis, Rhodri. “Hamlet, Metaphor, and Memory.” Studies in Philology, vol. 109 no. 5, 2012, p.609-641. Maus, Katherine E, “Introduction.” Four Revenge Tragedies, edited by Katherine Eisaman Maus, Michael Cordner, Peter Holland, and Martin Wiggins, Oxford UP, 1995, pp. ix-xxxi. McCarthy, Andrew D. “Shakepeare’s Ars Moriendi.” The Shakespearean Death Arts, edited by William E. Engel and Grant Williams, Palgrave Macmillan, 2022, pp. 33-48. Morel, Pierre-Marie. "Epicurean Atomism." The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism, edited by James Warren, Cambridge UP, 2009, pp. 65-83. Morford, Mark. "The Stoic Garden." The Journal of Garden History, vol. 7, no. 2, 1987, pp. 151-175. Neill, Michael. Issues of Death: Mortality and Identity in English Renaissance Tragedy. Oxford UP, 1997. Nuttall, A. D. Shakespeare the Thinker. Yale UP, 2007. O’Keefe, Tim. “Action and Responsibility.” The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism, edited by James Warren, Cambridge UP, 2009, pp. 142-157. Otten, Willemien. "Christianity’s Content: (Neo)Platonism in the Middle Ages, Its Theoretical and Theological Appeal." Numen, vol. 63, no. 2-3, 2016, pp. 245-70. Pakaluk, Michael. Aristotle′s Nicomachean Ethics: An Introduction. Cambridge UP, 2005. Pollard, Tanya. “Tradegy and Revenge.” The Cambridge Compaion to English Renassiance Tragedy, edited by Emma Smith and Garret A. Sullivan Jr, Cambridge UP, 2010, pp. 58-72. Porter, Jean. “Happiness.” The Cambridge Companion to the Summa Theologiae, edited by Philip McCosker and Denys Turner, Cambridge UP, 2016, pp. 181-193. Prosser, Eleanor. Hamlet and Revenge. Stanford UP, 1971. Reeve, Michael. "Lucretius in the Middle Ages and Early Renaissance: Transmission and Scholarship." The Cambridge Companion to Lucretius, edited by Philip Hardie and Stuart Gillespie, Cambridge UP, 2007, pp. 205-13. Schalkwyk, David. “’Unpacking the Heart’: Why It Is Impossible to Say ‘I Love You’ in Hamlet’s Elsinore.” Shakespeare′s Hamlet: Philosophical Perspectives, edited by Tzachi Zamir, Oxford UP, 2018, pp. 188-221. Schofield, Malcolm. “Writing Philosophy.” The Cambridge Compaion to Cicero, edited by Catherine Steel, Cambridge UP, 2013, pp. 73-87. Sedley, David. "Epicureanism in the Roman Republic." The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism, edited by James Warren, Cambridge UP, 2009, pp. 29-45. Sellars, John. “Seneca’s Philosophical Predecessors and Contemporaries.” Brill’s Compaion to Seneca, edited by Andreas Heil and Gregor Damaschen, Brill, 2013, pp. 97-112. Semler, Liam. “A Proximate Prince: The Gooey Business of ‘Hamlet’ Criticism.” Sydney Studies in English, vol. 32, 2006, pp. 97-122. Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. Edited by Harold Jenkins, Arden Shakespeare, 1982. Shifflett, Andrew. "Shakespeare and Early Modern English Literature." The Routledge Handbook of the Stoic Tradition, edited by John Sellars, Routledge, 2016, pp. 174-207. Starkstein, Sergio. A Conceptual and Therapeutic Analysis of Fear. Palgrave Macmillan, 2018. Taub, Liba. "Cosmology and Meteorology." The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism, edited by James Warren, Cambridge UP, 2009, pp. 105-24. Tebo, Kyle. "Cicero as a Source for Epicurus." Undergraduate Humanities Forum 2016-2017: Translation, no. 1, 2017, https://repository.upenn.edu/uhf_2017/1. Accessed 9 May 2023. Thind, Rajiv. “For the common weal: Richard Tarlton and King Hamlet in Purgatory.” Cahiers Élisabéthains, vol 97, no. 1, 2018, pp. 69-83. Videbaek, Bente. “’To Be, or not to Be’: The Soliloquy Redefined.” This Rough Magic, vol. 1, no. 1, 2010, pp. 1-25. Watson, Robert. The Rest is Silence: Death as Annihilation in the English Renaissance. U of California, 1994. Warren, James. "Removing Fear." The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism, edited by James Warren, Cambridge UP, 2009, pp. 234-48. Wilson, Catherine. Epicureanism at the Origins of Modernity. Oxford UP, 2008. --- . “Epicureanism in Early Modern Philosophy.” Shakespeare′s Hamlet: Philosophical Perspectives, edited by Tzachi Zamir, Oxford UP, 2018, pp. 276-286. Wilson, Jeffery R. “’To be, or not to be’: Shakespeare Against Philosophy.” Shakespeare, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 341-359. Woodbridge, Linda. English Revenge Drama: Money, Resistance, Equality. Cambridge UP, 2010. Woodruff, Paul. "Staging Wisdom through Hamlet." Shakespeare′s Hamlet: Philosophical Perspectives, edited by Tzachi Zamir, Oxford UP, 2018, pp. 47-71. Woolf, Raphael. "Pleasure and Desire." The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism, edited by James Warren, Cambridge UP, 2009, pp 158-78. Zafirovski, Milan. The Enlightenment and Its Effects on Modern Society. Springer, 2011. Zamir, Tzachi. "Introduction." Shakespeare′s Hamlet: Philosophical Perspectives, edited by Tzachi Zamir, Oxford UP, 2018, pp. 1-16.
指導教授	吳育慶(Yu-Ching Wu)	審核日期	2024-4-8
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

博碩士論文 110122009 詳細資訊