In the early part of his philosophical career, Paul Ricoeur worked out
a general theory of symbols which he illustrated with the symbols of evil. He
subsequently explained this theory in several essays (his final major
statement on symbols can be found in Interpretation Theory: Discourse and
the Surplus of Meaning [1976]. After 1976, he did not return to the subject
again). Ricoeur's principle work on symbols, which appears in The
Symbolism of Evil (1960), was the result of a larger work on the will, in
which he explained his philosophy of the voluntary and the involuntary,
fallibility, and, finally, fault, expressed "symbolically." Ricoeur's interest in
the will and in fault is philosophical (rather than theological). This paper
presents a summary of the larger issues raised by the critics about Ricoeur's
theory of symbols and work on the symbols of evil, then closely analyzes the
symbols defilement, sin, and guilt (the symbols of evil in The Symbolism of
Evil), questioning their structures, their contents, and ultimately their validity
and relevance to philosophy, and claiming that, by elaborating on the rather
simple metaphors of stain, errancy, and burden, Ricoeur creates a new
symbolism of fault rather than elucidates an existing one. / Graduation date: 2002
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:ORGSU/oai:ir.library.oregonstate.edu:1957/29029 |
| Date | 16 November 2001 |
| Creators | Ritenour, Karen E. |
| Contributors | Daniels, Richard J. |
| Source Sets | Oregon State University |
| Language | en_US |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis/Dissertation |
Page generated in 0.0021 seconds