【作者】 高原；

【导师】 王天成；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 外国哲学， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 康德的至善理论是康德哲学的重要组成部分。长期以来，康德的道德哲学尽管是显学，但人们往往更为注重对其中的自由理论的研究，而忽视对其至善学说的研究。其原因，主要在于人们普遍认为至善理论是康德哲学中保守落后的部分。其实，康德的至善学说以及与其结合的目的论思想和其自由理论是联系在一起的。甚至可以说，康德的至善学说更能够代表康德哲学所能达到的至高点，德国古典哲学的发展很大程度上继承了康德的至善学说。本文试图在将康德的至善学说与传统善的理论特别是至善理论进行比较的前提下，对康德的至善学说的基本理路、基本内容作一研究，共分四章。第一章主要介绍康德以前传统哲学中善的观念的历史，特别是至善观念的历史。传统哲学中的至善理念对康德来说具有双重意义，它既是康德继承的对象，同时也是康德批判的对象，它们对于理解康德的至善学说是至关重要的。所以，我们有必要对传统至善学说中的主要理论观点做以考察。这里的考察试图在全面介绍主要代表人物及其观点的前提下，突出两方面的内容：一个是康德所吸取的关于至善的不同规定，另一个就是康德对将至善看作外在的实体，并将其看作意志之决定根据的至善思想的批判。依照着康德批判目标的内在构成，即在第一批判中对至善（灵魂、世界整体和上帝）作为知识规定的批判与第二批判中对至善作为意志决定根据的批判，以及最终把至善确定为纯粹实践理性的最高客体——德性与幸福的统一，并把这种统一归结为神。我们把本章分为四个部分：一、主要在知识层面上来界定和理解至善的哲学传统，主要涉及苏格拉底、柏拉图以及亚里士多德；二、构成德性与幸福统一的至善内容在康德之前哲学中的体现，主要涉及伊壁鸠鲁和斯多亚学派；三、作为至善本身的神或上帝——中世纪的奥古斯丁和托马斯·阿奎那；四、在这种背景下康德的至善取向。第二章主要结合“三大批判”的相关文本介绍康德至善学说的基本思路。与传统至善理论比较，康德吸取了传统至善学说的某些内容，将这些内容安排在了以意志自由为基础的理路中，从而形成了从人的自由到至善的解释思路。通常在对康德至善理论的评价中，人们往往更为注重康德从内容上对传统至善理论的继承，由此认为康德提出至善理念是一种向神学形而上学的倒退。其实，康德尽管继承了传统形而上学包括神学形而上学关于至善的内容规定，但是已经把它们安排在了以自由为基础和出发点的思路中，至善在这里获得了新的意义。康德思考至善的基本思路可以概括为两个过程：第一个就是在批评传统形而上学以及一切将至善实体化、对象化的基础上，将至善回归为自由的过程，由此确立了自由是整个至善理论的基础；另一个过程就是从自由出发推演至善，从而导致了至善地位在整个系统中的转换。这种转换又贯穿着康德所具有的人学立场。在对这两个过程的分析中，我们还简要介绍了康德对经验主义“善”的理论的批判以及康德的至善观念在内涵规定与对象所指方面与传统“至善”观念的差别。第三章主要通过对《实践理性批判》、《单纯理性限度内的宗教》、《历史理性批判文集》以及《判断力批判》等几部著作的梳理，试图对康德至善的内容进行整理。参考学者们的研究，康德的“至善”包含三个层面：“个体的善”，“神性的善”，“共性的善”（也称共善）。“个体的至善”是有限的理性存在者具有的理念，包括“最高的善”（德性）和“完满的善”（德性与幸福的一致）。康德意识到德性与幸福的比配是无法在有限的理性存在者——人世间完成的，进而提出了更高意义的“本源的善”或“神性的善”，即作为至善的上帝。只有通过上帝这个至高条件，德性与幸福的统一才是现实的。由此就引申出了康德的道德神学。但是康德并未因此而止步，他进一步探讨了一种上帝之国在人间实现的可能性，即在上帝立法下的个体人的联合体的可能性，这也就是康德更深层次的作为共善的至善。文章最后探讨了这种共同的善或社会联合体的善，它是理想至善在现实中的具体体现。第四章主要介绍康德的至善理论的矛盾及其对思辨哲学方法的影响。康德至善学说的矛盾包括人和神、人学和神学立场的矛盾、知性式思维和目的论式思维的冲突。黑格尔通过消解知性方法，上升到思辨方法，吸取了康德的至善及合目的性的思想，形成了他的描述绝对理念发展的思辨哲学体系。更多还原

【Abstract】 Kant’s theory of supreme good is the important part of his theory. For a long time,though Kant’s moral philosophy is a famous doctrine, the theory of freedom attractsmore attention and theory of supreme good is neglected, due to the fact that it isgenerally believed that theory of supreme good is the backward part of Kant’s theory.In fact, Kant’s theory of supreme good,teleology and freedom theory are linkedtogether. It can almost say that Kant’s theory of supreme good can better represent thecommanding height of Kant’s philosophy, the development of German classicalphilosophy inherits Kant’s theory of supreme good to a large extent. This dissertation,on the basis of comparing Kant’s theory of supreme good with traditional theory ofgood, especially with traditional theory of supreme good, tries to research into theprocedure and basic content of Kant’s theory of supreme good, and the dissertationconsists of four chapters.The first chapter focuses on the history of good in traditional philosophy beforeKant, especially the history of supreme good. Supreme good in traditional philosophyhas double meaning for Kant, it is the object which Kant inherits, and at the same timeit is also the object which Kant criticizes, it is crucial for understand Kant’s theory ofsupreme good. Therefore, it is necessary for us to investigate into the main theoreticalperspectives in traditional theory of supreme good. The investigation here tries tohighlight two aspects on the basis of introducing main representatives and their theory.One is the different regulations about supreme good absorbed by Kant; another is thatKant recognizes supreme good as external entity, and as the criticism of supreme goodtheory which takes supreme good as the deciding factor of will. On the basis ofinternal structure Kant wants to criticize, that is criticism of supreme good (soul, thewhole world and God) in the first critical theory which is the knowledge regulation.The second criticism is criticism of supreme good which takes supreme good as thedeciding factor of will, and ensure supreme good as the highest object of purepractical reason, that is the unity of virtue and happiness, and attributing the unity toGod. This chapter is divided into four parts: the first is the tradition of philosophywhich defines and understands supreme good in the knowledge level, mainly involving Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. The second is the content of supreme goodwhich consists of virtue and happiness embodied in the philosophy before Kant,mainly involving Epicurus and the school of Stoics. The third is god which is supremegood itself, that is Augustine and Thomas Aquinas in middle ages. The fourth is ofKant’s orientation in supreme good in such context.The second chapter mainly introduces the basic thinking of Kant’s theory ofsupreme good on the basis of integrating related text of the three critical books.Compared with the traditional theory of supreme good, Kant absorbs some contents oftraditional theory of supreme good, arranging these contents in logic on the basis offree will, consequently forming the explanatory logic of from freedom to supremegood. Generally in the evaluation of Kant, people pay more attention to what Kantinherits from content, and thereby regard supreme good of Kant as a retrogress totheology metaphysics. In fact, though Kant inherits the content regulation aboutsupreme good in traditional metaphysics including theology metaphysics, he hasarranged it in logics on the basis of freedom, thus giving supreme good new meaninghere. The logic of Kant’s thinking can come down to two courses, the first course istaking supreme good back to freedom, on the basis of criticizing traditionalmetaphysics and all the theories taking supreme good as entity and object,conforming freedom as the basis of supreme good. Another course is deduce supremegood from freedom, leading to transformation of the position of supreme good in thewhole system. This transformation runs through Kant’s humanist position. In theanalysis on these courses, we also need to introduce Kant’s criticism of empiricalgood, and the difference between Kant’s supreme good and traditional supreme goodin the aspect of connotation object referent.The third chapter is to clear up Kant’s supreme good through combing Critiqueof Practical Reason, Religion in Pure Rational Limits, Historical Rational CriticismCorpus and so on. Kant’s supreme good contains three levels: the good of individuals,the good of God, the good of common. There are two goals of supreme good whichindividuals pursue, the highest good and perfect good. Kant realizes that thecombination between virtue and happiness is hard to completed in people restricted bysensibility, thus he puts forward more significant supreme good, that is original good,divine good, established by soul and God, and people realized the unity of virtue andhappiness in God. Therefore, next we will discuss God, as divine good as supremegood self. But Kant has not deterred, though he introduces supreme good into religion, the religion has exceeded theological significance. It is the unity of individuals underGod’s legislation, which is also supreme good in deeper level. Finally we will discussthe implement of supreme good, that is a kind of good of common or good of socialconsortium, embodiment of ideal in reality.The fourth chapter introduces contradictions in Kant’s theory of supreme goodand its influence on the speculative philosophy. Contradictions in Kant’s theory ofsupreme good include that between man and God, that between humanology andtheology, and conflict between intellectual-type of thinking and teleological thinking.Hegel, absorbing Kant’s supreme good and idea of purposiveness, through dissolvingintellectuality, went up to speculative method, forming system of speculativephilosophy describing development of absolute idea.更多还原