Cette thèse est une recherche pluridisciplinaire sur le concept du pardon interpersonnel. Elle cherche à circonscrire la portée et la dynamique du pardon, entre autres en répondant à la question Pourquoi pardonner ? Jusqu’à récemment on trouvait peu d’écrits sur le pardon. Mais les deux dernières décennies ont vu un foisonnement de travaux de recherche sur le sujet de la part de psychologues éveillés à ses bienfaits thérapeutiques. Parallèlement, des philosophes et des théologiens se sont aussi intéressés à la question et ont commencé à publier leurs réflexions. Deux hypothèses marquent le parcours de notre recherche. La première porte sur la signification de la deuxième partie de l’énoncé biblique en Luc 23, 34 « Père, pardonne-leur car ils ne savent pas ce qu’ils font ». Elle avance que le « motif de l’ignorance » que cette parole affirme a une portée universelle et soutient que l’offenseur est en état d’ignorance inconsciente lorsqu’il fait le mal. Le pardon des offenses serait donc le pardon de cette ignorance inconsciente. La seconde hypothèse conjecture que le pardon interpersonnel s’inscrit dans une dynamique spirituelle même s’il a quitté ses amarres religieuses. Nous avançons que la relation pardon-spiritualité est significative et que sa compréhension peut aider à mieux saisir l’essence d’un pardon devenu séculier et à en permettre l’éclosion. Pour établir la valeur de cette hypothèse, nous devons étudier la dynamique d’une démarche de pardon de même qu’à déterminer le statut actuel de la spiritualité. La thèse se divise en trois parties. La première partie expose la pensée d’auteurs significatifs dans chacune des principales disciplines concernées par le pardon : philosophie, théologie, psychologie et spiritualité. Il y est question d’offense pardonnable ou impardonnable, de pardon conditionnel ou inconditionnel, de corrélats du pardon comme l’oubli, la colère, la culpabilité, le repentir et des résultats d’études empiriques psychothérapeutiques sur le pardon. Cette première partie se termine par une réflexion sur la spiritualité de façon à voir dans quelle mesure le pardon devient une dynamique spirituelle. La deuxième partie est consacrée à l’examen de l’hypothèse concernant le sens et la portée du « car ils ne savent pas ce qu’ils font ». Dans un premier temps on fait appel à l’expertise exégétique pour situer l’authenticité et la portée de ce passage. Nous explorons ensuite la pensée philosophique à travers l’histoire pour comprendre le véritable sens du libre-arbitre et son impact sur la conception de la faute. La remise en cause philosophique du libre-arbitre nous ramènera à la thèse socratique selon laquelle « Nul n’est méchant volontairement ». La théorie mimétique de René Girard vient démontrer que les persécuteurs sont fondamentalement inconscients de ce qu’ils font et la théologienne Lytta Basset identifie le fantasme de la connaissance du bien et du mal comme accroissant cette ignorance qui s’ignore. La troisième partie de la thèse intègre les réflexions et découvertes des deux premières parties, et les situent dans un parcours qui va de l’impardonnable à la guérison, tout en les conceptualisant avec une matrice de verticalité et d’horizontalité qui schématise leurs interactions. Nous découvrons que si « car ils ne savent pas ce qu’ils font » fournit la réponse logique à la question Pourquoi pardonner ?, il existe aussi une deuxième voie qui conduit au pardon, l’amour. L’amour est la clé du pardon basé sur le message évangélique, alors que l’empathie est celle de l’approche psychothérapeutique. Enfin, la comparaison entre le « pardon psychothérapeutique » et le « pardon évangélique » nous fait conclure qu’il y a deux modes d’accès majeurs au pardon : la raison et l’amour. / This thesis is a multidisciplinary approach to the concept of interpersonal forgiveness. Its purpose is to unearth the scope and dynamics of forgiveness, as it seeks to answer the question, Why forgive? Up until recently, there has been a dearth of literature on the subject of forgiveness. Then over the past 20 years, an escalation of psychotherapeutic research on forgiveness started to emerge as psychologists awakened to its healing benefits. Over the same time period, a number of philosophers and theologians also began publishing on the subject. Two hypotheses benchmark the research. The first one concerns the meaning of the second half of the biblical quote, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do,” found in Luke 23:34. This hypothesis claims that the “motive of ignorance” is universal in scope, and purports that the offender is ignorantly unaware of his wrongdoing. Forgiveness of an offense can thus be interpreted as the forgiveness of ignorance. The second hypothesis claims that interpersonal forgiveness can be understood as a spiritual dynamic, but with the loosening of its religious ties. We believe the forgiveness–spirituality relationship to be a significant one, and that a deeper understanding of it will bring us closer to the fundamental nature and gift of forgiveness, thereby facilitating its realization. However, to determine the value of this hypothesis, we must consider both the process of forgiveness, and the contemporary definition of spirituality. The thesis is divided into three parts. The first part depicts authors who discuss forgiveness through the lens of the four academic disciplines concerned with forgiveness: philosophy, theology, psychology, and spirituality. Issues that are covered include what is forgivable and what is not, and conditional versus unconditional forgiveness. Correlates of forgiveness, such as forgetting, anger, repentance, guilt, as well as results of psychotherapeutic empirical studies, are examined. A reflection on the concept of spirituality and how it relates to forgiveness concludes this first part. In the second part, we examine the hypothesis concerning the meaning and scope of the biblical quote “for they know not what they do,” and look at what the exegetic expertise has to say about its authenticity and meaning. This is followed by a historical interpretation of free will in major philosophical thinking in order to grasp its true sense, and its impact on the concept of personal responsibility. This philosophical questioning of free will brings us back to the Socratic thesis, “No one commits wrongdoing voluntarily.” Finally, the mimetic theory of René Girard contends that persecutors are fundamentally unaware and ignorant of what they are doing, and the theologian Lytta Basset argues that the illusion of knowing what is good and what is evil contributes to the ignorance that ignores itself. The third part of the thesis integrates the reflections and insights of the first two parts, as it brings forgiveness from the unforgivable endpoint to the healing endpoint. This is conceptualized in a schematic matrix of vertical and horizontal interactions. We discover that if the phrase “for they know not what they do” offers a reason-able answer to the question Why forgive? there is as well a second way that leads to forgiveness—love. Love is the key to forgiveness based on the evangelical message, while empathy is the primary means in the psychotherapeutic approach. Comparing “psychotherapeutic forgiveness” with “evangelical forgiveness” leads us to conclude that there are, in effect, two principal ways to access the gift of forgiveness—reason and love.

Ce mémoire propose une analyse de l'enfermement identitaire présent dans les romans Lullaby et Survivor de l'auteur Chuck Palahniuk et montré en rapport au rôle que les personnages tiennent dans leur famille et à leur pratique d'habitation. En utilisant les théories de Baudrillard et de Foucault, l'imposition d'une identité par la société moderne s'explique en relation à sa domination par le capitalisme de consommation et par la présence médiatique. Les univers romanesques de cet auteur s'inscrivent dans la tradition américaine où, par l'emploi du langage littéraire, sont développées les notions de liberté et de libre arbitre au coeur de l'identité nationale américaine rendant possible la lutte contre les différents dispositifs de contrôle présents dans cette société (m'inspirant du projet de Weinstein). Cette étude ne porte pas seulement sur l'enfermement identitaire, tant individuel que culturel des personnages, mais aussi sur les problématiques de l'identité masculine et de la passivité dans ces deux romans. L'auteur tente de solutionner lesdits problèmes en brisant la solitude de ses personnages que ce soit parce qu'ils réussissent à faire partie d'une communauté les reconnaissant comme un sujet unique, parce qu'ils établissent une connexion grâce au partage de leur histoire personnelle ou parce qu'ils retrouvent les sentiments d'appartenance et d'amour liés à la famille. / This thesis focuses on the internalization of identity in Chuck Palahniuk's novels Lullaby and Survivor in regards to each character's role within their respective families and surroundings (environments). Using both Baudrillard and Foucault's theories, we can demonstrate that one's identity, created by our modern society, can be explained by its domination by the capitalist mantra and the mediatic presence. The literary universes created by Palahniuk are in the American style where literary language is used to develop the notions of liberty and free will within the American national identity, enabling the main protagonists to fight against the various control methods present within this society (inspired by Weinstein's project). This study does not fucus solely on the internalization of identity, both individual and cultural, but also on the problems related to the masculine identity as well as the character's passivity in both novels. The author attempts to solve these problems by breaking its character's solitude either by way of integrating them in a community that recognizes them as unique individuals, by establishing a connection based on the retelling of their personal history or by reconnecting with the feelings of filial love and belonging.

The questions about the origin of evil in the world were often a secondary product of the great philosophical systems. One of the first thinkers to deal with that problem systematically was neoplatonic scholar Plotinus. He developed a theory which he considered to be only a continuation of Plato´s thinking. It became an original theory, which in its core, has influence to this day. This theory was, mostly thanks to St. Augustine, applied to christian theology and became the living doctrine. The goal of this thesis is to demonstrate in what Plotinus´ theory of evil was "christianized" through the hand of Augustin. In other words, how it trasformed from a pagan philosophy to a theological one and how it was preserved for rediscovery in the scholastic era and became a new-again topic of scholastic scholars.

This thesis examines the possibilities of linking the interest in a child (a participant in interest education in the field of education of leisure) with the interest in achieving the goals of various leisure education activities, as well as the goals being (co)determined by the child itself. The thesis strives to find the solution in a method in which an activity goal of the child is transformed into a goal of the tutor with the intention of encouraging the child's personal development. The thesis is divided into four chapters.The first chapter deals with educational goals and the goals of leisure education.The following chapter explores the goals of education as set by various pedagogical conceptions and alternative approaches to the isme. The third chapter acquaints the reader with the psychological potential of the target group.The last chapter is dedicated to the growth of child's potential, its ability of free choice and decision making, expressions of creativity, and the "flow" state.

[pt] O trabalho pretende lançar uma luz sobre o início dos tempos modernos abordando a riqueza das experiências de subjetividade na cultura renascentista. Suas complexidades são tematizadas no exame das complicadas relações entre o ideário humanista e o movimento das reformas religiosas, e suas respectivas evoluções. Destaca-se primeiro, nos primórdios da Renascença, um impulso pela interiorização do sentimento religioso, que aliado ao resgate dos valores da Antiguidade, se faz cerne do anseio por um cristianismo renovado, centrado na valorização do homem e do mundo, do poder do espírito em alcançar a salvação, sem a intermediação das instituições da Igreja. O movimento das reformas religiosas, fundado no anseio renovador humanista de homens como Nicolau de Cusa, Pico Della Mirandola e Erasmo de Rotterdã, não tardará entretanto em se apartar dele a partir de Lutero, numa religiosidade que condena o espírito humano e sua experiência mundana. O exame da discussão sobre o livre arbítrio entre Erasmo e Lutero nos mostra o embate entre duas concepções distintas sobre o homem, que surtirão conseqüências, não raro, inesperadas sobre a formação do mundo moderno. / [en] The study wants to iluminate the begining of modern times treating the richness of the subjectivity experiences in Renaissance culture. The complexities of that should be look in the analysis of the complicated relations between the humanistic ideals and the religious reformations movements and his respective evolutions. First, in the relief, emerges in primeval Renaissance, a impulse for interiozation of religious sentiment, which, in alliance with the rescue of the values of the Antiquity, makes itself in the roots of a new cristianity, centralize in the valorization of man and the world, in the power of the spirity in reaching the salvation, without the intermediation of institutions of the Church. The religious reformations movements, first in the roots of the humanistic renovator impulse of men like Nicholas de Cusa, Pico Della Mirandola and Erasmo de Rotterdã, should be, in a second time, aparted of him, since Lutero and his religious sentiment which condemn the human spirity and his mundane experience. The analyses of the discussion about the free arbitre between Erasmo and Lutero shows to us the confrontation of two diferent conceptions of man, which have their impact, many times imprevisible, in the formation of modern times.

This dissertation concentrates on those factors which form the doctrine of G-dly reward and punishment. In other words, the philosophical approach amongst Jewish thinkers from the Middle Ages to the above subject, which taken together give expression to the doctrine of reward and ptmishment, or at least to the possibility of determining such a doctrine. The definition of correct behaviour is not of interest for pwposes of this dissertation, nor is human judgement of behaviour, even according to a G-dly doctrine; only the A-lmighty's judgement and implementation thereof The following points are of note. Research into the specific approach of one individual philosopher is not the aim of this dissertation, but rather a collective crystallised viewpoint according to various different Jewish philosophers, in order to reach a harmonious formation of the desir~ goal. Hence the details are also important since they assist towards the goal. The views of the philsophers are of interest and not their source, viz. from whom these views were received or by whom the philosophers were influenced, as is usually the case in research. Nevertheless, this aspect is elaborated upon in the introduction to this dissertation, in the style of the customary academic research approach. An analytical comparison is made between the opinions of various authors, taking into account the finer points of their words, as well as between the differing opinions expressed by a single author in his various writings, and conclusions are drawn, the results of which are highly significant. Besides the fact that it is not within our power to adjudicate between the views of the great Jewish thinkers, this is even more true here, due to the metaphysical nature of the subject, which makes logical, rational-realistic judgement very difficult. Nevertheless, some criteria have been established for making such a decision. In summary, this dissertation is an attempt to research many diverse opinions in the treasury of Jewish thought from the Middle Ages, and to extract those opinions from which a complete system of the doctrine of reward and punishment can be built. / Religious Studies and Arabic / D.Litt et Phil. (Judaica)

Shakespeare's ideas about free will and moral choice, as illustrated in his play Macbeth, may have been influenced by Dante's Inferno. Dante was known to Shakespeare's contemporaries, and therefore most likely to the Bard himself. Current literature has not conclusively addressed this topic, and a focused examination is important, because it offers both an additional perspective on free will in Inferno, and adds to the understanding of free will in Macbeth. Read at face value, Macbeth seems to bear no responsibility for his actions because they were preordained by the fates. Dante believed in free will, and Macbeth bears more than one similarity to his Commedia. Read through a Dantean lens, Macbeth has free will - even if choosing not to exercise it. Through the mere contemplation of the four reasons for not killing Duncan, Macbeth recognizes that he has the choice whether to become a traitor, with the consequences of suffering contrapasso damnation. But Macbeth elects to disregard the wisdom passed down in Dante's Commedia, and knowingly commits a heinously immoral act. Shakespeare uses his predecessor Dante as a tool to advocate for human agency and moral choices in a text that would otherwise be fatalistic. Both then and now, Shakespeare sought to influence his audiences' understanding of their own free will. One first has to believe in possessing free will, in order to use it to make the best possible choices. Dante and Shakespeare reaffirm our possession of free will to help us avoid individual and societal tragedies.

An ontology of the intelligible world cannot explain the phenomenon of a „free will“, which is able to decide between good and evil. It follows that a Moralontologie also cannot explain an agents freely determining his actions as good or evil.

No description available.

Le philosophe et théologien saint Anselme de Cantorbéry (1033—1109) offre une pensée riche de la liberté qui a été influente au Moyen Âge. Katherin A. Rogers a récemment jugé bon de mettre Anselme en dialogue avec la philosophie contemporaine par rapport au débat sur le libre arbitre. La présente étude approuve ce projet, mais rejette le rapprochement que Rogers opère entre Anselme et Harry G. Frankfurt (1929—) avec son Interprétation Hiérarchique. Cette étude se donne pour tâche, dans un premier temps, de reprendre à zéro une étude historique sur la liberté chez Anselme en l’abordant par différents angles d’approche dans chacun de ses cinq chapitres, et dans un deuxième temps et de manière secondaire, de mener à bien une conversation entre Anselme et la philosophie contemporaine analytique sur le libre arbitre. À travers ces chapitres sur la pensée anselmienne, l’on verra : ce qui constitue le fondement de la morale, de la causalité, de la possibilité, et de la nécessité ; les distinctions et les concepts autour desquels s’articule le problème de la liberté, notamment la distinction entre faire sponte et naturaliter ; qu’Anselme se classe parmi les penseurs libertariens par rapport au libre arbitre, mais avec d’importantes qualifications ; le concept de la liberté du choix et sa force insurpassable ; les différents sens du mot « volonté », soit la volonté-instrument, la volonté-usus, et les affections de la volonté ; ainsi que la solution qu’Anselme apporte au problème de la possibilité du mal. Dans une conclusion, plutôt que de rapprocher Anselme de Frankfurt, on l’associera avec la théorie nommée agent-causation, dont Roderick M. Chisholm (1916—1999) est un des plus grands représentants. / The philosopher and theologian Saint Anselm of Canterbury (1033—1109) offers a rich framework for thinking about freedom that has been influential in the Middle Ages. Katherin A. Rogers has recently judged right to put Anselm in dialogue with contemporary philosophy with regard to the debate on free will. The present study approves this project, but rejects the attempt to link Anselm with Harry G. Frankfurt (1929—) that Rogers operates with her Hierarchical Interpretation. This study gives itself the task, firstly, to rework from scratch a historical study on freedom in Anselm by tackling the subject from different vantage points in each of its five chapters, and secondly as well as secondarily, to establish communication between Anselm and contemporary analytical philosophy on the topic of free will. Throughout these chapters on Anselm’s philosophy, the following will be seen: what constitutes the foundation of morality, causality, possibility, and necessity; distinctions and concepts around which the problem of freedom articulates itself, in particular the distinction between doing sponte and naturaliter; that Anselm can be classified as a libertarian thinker regarding free will, but with important qualifications; the concept of freedom of choice and its unsurpassable strength; the three different senses of the word “will”: instrument of the will, usus of the will, and the affections of the will; as well as the solution that Anselm gives to the problem of the possibility of evil. In a conclusion, instead of bringing Anselm closer to Frankfurt, it is with the so-called agent-causation theory that he will be associated with, of which Roderick M. Chisholm (1916—1999) is one of the main upholders.