Please wait a minute...

Frontiers of Philosophy in China

Front Phil Chin    2011, Vol. 6 Issue (1) : 75-99     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11466-011-0126-6
research-article
Lao-Zhuang and Augustine on the Issue of Suspension in the Philosophy of Religion
HAO Changchi()
School of Philosophy, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China
Download: PDF(615 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

This paper addresses the question why the issue of reason and evidence as the central concern in the mainstream contemporary philosophy of religion has to be displaced by the issue of suspension according to Lao-Zhuang and the Augustine of Hippo. For both Lao-Zhuang and Augustine, in making room for the Other to appear at the core of the self’s being, it shows that there is an inseparable relationship of the self to the Other. In suspending its own understanding, admitting its own ignorance in humility, the subject is not in sheer darkness, but can follow a new light not generated from itself; in suspending its own will, the subject is not paralyzed, but follows the will of the Other. The selfhood of the subject is constituted in its relation to the Other.

Keywords suspension      reason      will      Laozi      Zhuangzi      Augustine     
Corresponding Author(s): HAO Changchi,Email:hao111@hotmail.com   
Issue Date: 05 March 2011
 Cite this article:   
HAO Changchi. Lao-Zhuang and Augustine on the Issue of Suspension in the Philosophy of Religion[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2011, 6(1): 75-99.
 URL:  
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fpc/EN/10.1007/s11466-011-0126-6
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fpc/EN/Y2011/V6/I1/75
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
HAO Changchi
Related articles from Frontiers Journals
[1] TAN Mingran. A Neo-Confucian Criticism of Daoism: Wang Fuzhi’s Contradictory Remarks on the Laozi[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2020, 15(1): 93-121.
[2] John Robert Williams. A Couple Nagging Interpretive Difficulties in Zhuangzi Studies vis-à-vis William James on the Ethics and Psychology of Belief[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(4): 593-611.
[3] JIANG Niling, ZHOU Jing. Ontological Epistemology: William James and the Chinese Traditional Philosophy of Experience[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(2): 342-356.
[4] XU Xiangdong. Luck, Control, and Contrastive Explanation[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(2): 303-321.
[5] Lisa Raphals 瑞麗. When Virtues, Roles and Duties Fail: Early Greek and Chinese Accounts of Akrasia[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(1): 29-46.
[6] Kwok Kui Wong. Hegel, Schelling and Laozi on Nothingness[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(4): 574-584.
[7] Marcel Brass, Derk Pereboom. Philosophy and Science Dialogue: Free Will[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(3): 361-376.
[8] Thalia Wheatley, Terence Horgan. Philosophy and Science Dialogue: Mental Causation[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(3): 349-360.
[9] Timothy O’Connor. Consciousness, Free Will, and the Sciences of the Mind[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(3): 394-401.
[10] Paul Thagard. Mind, Consciousness, and Free Will[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(3): 377-393.
[11] Ellen Y. Zhang. The Face/Facelessness of the Other—A Levinasian Reading of the Ethical of the Zhuangzi [J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(4): 533-553.
[12] CUI Xiaojiao. Paradoxes in the Textual Development of the Laozi: A Closer Examination of Chapters Eight and Twenty-Four[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(3): 393-407.
[13] ZHANG Weiwen. The Philosophy of “Naturalness” in the Laozi and Its Value For Contemporary Society[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(3): 340-357.
[14] SUN Ning. Natural Realism or Transactionalism: On the Relationships between Putnam and Two Pragmatists, James and Dewey[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(2): 295-305.
[15] Alan Fox. A Process Interpretation of Daoist Thought[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(1): 26-37.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed