Bradshaw David
University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, USA.
J Med Philos. 2018 Nov 17;43(6):650-666. doi: 10.1093/jmp/jhy028.
Despite its many strengths, Engelhardt's After God displays two surprising features: an affinity for voluntaristic ethics and a tendency to oppose Eastern Orthodoxy (as a purely revealed religion) to philosophy. Neither of these is in keeping with the mainstream of Eastern Orthodox tradition. Here, I offer a modest corrective. I begin with the figure of Socrates as presented in the Apology and Phaedo, highlighting the role that faith plays for Socrates and the reasons why he was widely admired by the early Church. I then describe more broadly the attitude of the Greek Church Fathers to philosophy, showing that, although they were cautious of its potential errors, they nonetheless embraced the ideal of philosophy as a way of life dedicated to the pursuit of wisdom. For many, in fact, Christianity is itself simply the true philosophy, an attitude that led many of the most eminent patristic and Byzantine theologians to draw extensively on philosophical sources. Finally, I discuss the Euthyphro dilemma, contrasting the voluntaristic approach favored by Engelhardt with the Platonic approach adopted by the mainstream of Orthodox tradition.
尽管恩格尔哈特的《上帝之后》有诸多优点，但它展现出两个令人惊讶的特点：对唯意志论伦理学的喜爱以及将东正教（作为一种纯粹的启示宗教）与哲学相对立的倾向。这两者都与东正教传统的主流不符。在此，我提出一个适度的修正。我从《申辩篇》和《斐多篇》中呈现的苏格拉底形象入手，强调信仰对苏格拉底所起的作用以及他受到早期教会广泛赞赏的原因。然后，我更广泛地描述希腊教父对哲学的态度，表明尽管他们对哲学可能存在的错误持谨慎态度，但他们仍然接受哲学作为一种致力于追求智慧的生活方式的理想。事实上，对许多人来说，基督教本身就是真正的哲学，这种态度使得许多最杰出的教父和拜占庭神学家广泛借鉴哲学资源。最后，我讨论欧绪弗洛困境，将恩格尔哈特所青睐的唯意志论方法与东正教传统主流所采用的柏拉图式方法进行对比。
