인문학
사회과학
자연과학
공학
의약학
농수해양학
예술체육학
복합학
개인구독
소속 기관이 없으신 경우, 개인 정기구독을 하시면 저렴하게
논문을 무제한 열람 이용할 수 있어요.
지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록·키워드
Paul Ricoeur dealt with the issue of evil through various works. Especially in this article, first, after suggesting three types of theodicy, I examined how he understood evil in Fallible Man and in The Symbolism of Evil. Second, I analyzed how he criticized theodicy and suggested new responses to the problems of evil in “Evil, a Challenge to Philosophy and Theology” and in “Memory of Suffering.” In the Fallible Man and The Symbolism of Evil, he showed that evil is an aporia which belongs to the realm of human responsibility and works beyond the boundary of human beings at the same time. Evil is evidently a human phenomenon which is both personal and communal, but the concrete experiences of evil witnessed and attested in symbols and myths of evil clearly refer to ‘already being there of evil’ and its cosmic structure. In the “Evil, a Challenge to Philosophy and Theology,” Ricoeur argued that in the Western theodicies all the issues of evil are understood within the boundary of human history following Augustine’s doctrine of original sin. That is why they have not properly responded to nor outspoken the concrete experiences of the reality of evil. In this regard, he suggested action, wisdom, and catharsis through the synthesis of feeling and wisdom as alternatives of those theodicies. Furthermore, in the “Memory of Suffering,” he showed that we can have the capacity to act and resist against evil when the wisdom meets memory of suffering. Considering the practical approach into the problem of evil by Paul Ricoeur, we need to re-think the way how we deal with the issues of evil.
본문·목차
인공지능 문자 인식 모델을 통해 추출된 텍스트로, 일부 오타나 오류가 포함될 수 있으나 지속적으로 개선 중입니다.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
최근 본 자료 전체보기
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2016-205-001075367