• search hit 6 of 33195
Back to Result List

A Study on Erich Fromm’s Theory of Faith [弗洛姆信仰理论研究], Doctoral dissertation, Foreign Philosophy, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zheijang, China 2016.

  • 对宗教、信仰的讨论是弗洛姆整体思想中的重要有机组成部分,但无论国内还是国外,有关这一主题的研究都存在较大局限。本文试图在考察弗洛姆思想发展脉络的基础上,借鉴国内信仰学的研究成果,运用>信仰主体——信仰行为——信仰客体<的动态逻辑框架系统重构弗洛姆相关理论,并将其置于伴随现代化进程而出现的>信仰危机<的历史背景下,通过横向与纵向比较发掘其理论之独特性,旨在为研究弗洛姆思想提供新的视角,也为当下社会信仰困境提供一定的启示。经历1926年放弃犹太教信仰与1937年扬弃正统弗洛伊德主义的两次思想转折后,弗洛姆形成无神论的>激进人道主义<思想,>人<成为弗洛姆研究宗教、信仰的逻辑起点和最终目的。>人的诞生<开始后,信仰主体作为一个处于自然、社会历史与生存两歧三个相互关联的维度中的身心、知情合一的人,其独特的多层次处境与生理-心理结构、机制,使其产生了追求生存意义、指向>谐一<的>x体验<,它在无意识层面构成了信仰的经验基础,其意识化与意识形态化都受到社会的制约,由于知性语言的社会过滤器作用和思虑作用,只有用普遍象征语言才能表达其丰富含义。信仰行为则是信仰主体对>x体验<的反应,不但是一种相信、信服的思想状态,更是信仰主体在具体的社会历史条件下全身心的、对自己生存答案的探索和践行。>同化过程<与>社会化过程<中形成的社会性格是信仰行为的基础。按照性格结构中创发性取向的多少,弗洛姆将信仰行为分为理性与分理性两种形式。弗洛姆将理性置于人格整体之中,剖析了理性、信仰、怀疑三者之间的辩证关系。理性信仰植根于人自己的体验,对自己思考力、观察力及判断力的了解与信赖,与理性怀疑相关联,它不仅体现在思考和判断领域,也体现在人的生活实践中。它促使人们怀着希望,进行一种持续的、积极的自我创造,有利于>人的诞生<。而非理性信仰是对某个神、某个人、某种思想或某种象征的盲目迷信,并非出于人自己的思想或情感的体验,而是以人对非理性权威的情感屈从和对现有意识形态的接纳为基础。如果社会宣扬的意识形态与社会性格之间具有差异,会造成人们思想与行为的分裂,形成>假信仰<现象。同时,弗洛姆还研究了自由意志与信仰选择的问题,作为温和决定论者,他为人们自由选择信仰的可能性留出了余地,并探讨了先知与禅师等理性权威的作用。信仰客体被弗洛姆视为> x体验<在不同社会历史文化结构中的概念系统呈现,按照>原始崇拜——母性人格神宗教——父性人格神宗教——理性一神论宗教——无神宗教——宗教消亡<的路线发展。在他看来,宗教演变是一个客观过程,与生产力水平、生产关系、人自身的心理状况、理性与情感能力等因素密切相关,并且在不同的阶段发挥着不同的历史功能,但这种发展并非后者取代前者的线性更迭,而是一种以某种宗教形态为主、显隐并存、进化和倒退交织并行的过程。根据社会条件所塑造的社会性格结构所导致的不同存在体验,弗洛姆将宗教分为权威主义和人道主义两种类型;根据它们对>人的诞生<的作用,分为积极和消极的宗教,但这些分类只是对其特征的分类,而不是对现实存在的宗教的分类,任何现存成体系宗教中,积极和消极、权威主义与人道主义均混合出现。最后,在呈现弗洛姆信仰理论的完整面貌后,本文指出了它的贡献与不足,并试图对其作出客观评价。
  • [The discussion around religion and faith is a crucial organic component of Erich Fromm’s thoughts, but both Chinese and western studies on this topic had their own limitations. This dissertation, take the evolution of Erich Fromm’s thought and the theories of domestic beliefology into account, tries constructing the theoretical system of Erich Fromm’s study on the religion and faith with a dynamic framework that is >subject of faith – practice of faith – object of faith<, and places it into the historical background of >faith crisis< which is emerging in the progress of modernization, in order to figure out its distinctiveness through the horizontal and vertical comparison. On one hand, that would offer a new perspective of interpretating Fromm’s thought, and on the other hand, bring the inspiration of solving the problem of faith in present society as a stone from the other hill. The atheistic >radical humanism< had been formed after Fromm’s two transitions of thought, which are his giving up Judaism in 1926 and sublating of the orthodox Freudianism in 1937, so human became the logical starting point and the final purpose of Fromm’s study on religion and faith. Since >man’s birth< begins, as a man who is an unity of body and mind, knowledge and emotion, the subject of faith is living in a situation composed of three interdependent dimensions: the natural dimension, the social and historical dimension and the existential contradictions dimension. Therefore, >x-experience< that pursued the significance of life and pointed to the >ONE< stems from the unique situation and physiological-psychological structure and mechanism of human. Being the experiential basis of faith in one’s unconsciousness, its consciouslization and ideologicalization are restricted by society. Only can the symbolic language express its abundant implication due to the social filter effect and the cerebration of intellectual language. Practice of faith is the subject’ s response to his >x-experience<, not only a mind state of believing and conviction, but also an exploration and practice of subject of faith with all his heart and soul for his own solution to the existential problem in the concrete social and historical conditions. The social character molded in the assimilating process and the associating process is the foundation of the practice of faith. Fromm divided the practice of faith into two sorts: rational and irrational, according to the proportion of productive orientation in the character structure. He analyzes the dialectic relationship between reason, faith and doubt by placing reason into the whole personality to. The rational faith roots from one’s understanding and trusting of his own experience, his ability to think, observe and judge, in conformity with the rational doubt. It is embodied not both in the one’s thinking and judging process and in every action of his daily life. Also, it prompts human to be self-creating continuously with hope, and that is helpful to >man’s birth<. On the contrary, irrational faith is a blindly worship to a God, a person, a thought or a symbol, stemming from the submission to a irrational authority and the reception to the leading ideology instead of one’s own experience of thinking or feeling. If there’s a gap between the popular ideology and the main social character, one’ s mind and behavior would fight against each other, so the fake faith arises. Meanwhile, Fromm discussed the freewill and the choice of faith. As a soft determinist, he admits the possibility of choosing faith, and discusses the function of rational authority such as prophets and Zen master. Object of faith is considered as the appearance of the conceptualized system of >x-experience< in different social historical cultural structure by Fromm. The track of their development would be >primary totems worship – matriarchal anthropomorphic God religion – patriarchal anthropomorphic God religion – rational mono¬theism religion – atheism religion – the end of religion<. Fromm holds that the evolution of religion is a objective process influenced by productive forces and relations, man’ s mental conditions and the capabilities of reason and sentiment, and the function of each type of religion changes in different historical period. Nevertheless, the development of religion is not a latter-replacing-former linear course, but a complicated process that a type of religion dominates while the others still exists inconspicuously, with both the progress and the degeneration. According to the experience caused by the social character structure which has been molded by the social conditions, Fromm divides all religions into authoritarian and humanistic religion, and according to their affect to >man’s birth<, progressive and negative religion, but that’s not the classification to the real religion, but to its features, for in any real religion, the authoritarianism and the humanism is mixed together.– Finally, this dissertation tries to point out the contribution as well as the deficiency of Fromm’s theory of faith on the base of elaborating and interpreting it thoroughly. [Author’s translation]

Export metadata

Additional Services

Share in Twitter Search Google Scholar
Metadaten
Author:Wen Zhou
Document Type:Dissertations
Language:Chinese
Year of first Publication:2016
Release Date:2019/03/04
Format:no download and copy possible
IdNo:Zhou_Wen_2016a
Writings about Erich Fromm (Secondary Literature):Dissertations / Dissertationen
Erich Fromm's Library and Erich Fromm Archive:Dissertations / Dissertationen
Licence (German):