John Wesley’s Anthropology in the Light of Jaegwon Kim’s Supervenience Argument
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Was John Wesley a substance dualist, or a monist? In regard to this mind-body problem, it seems there have not been yet any distinguished, so-called, “received view” in Wesleyan theology. For instance, one of renowned wesleyan theologians, William Ragsdale Cannon seems to depict Wesley as a substance dualist, while another well-known wesleyan theologian, Young-tae Han seems to claim Wesley as a substance monist. Are they both wrong, or either of them is right? There is no way that both correct, logically. If John Wesley was a trialist, who stands for soul, spirit, and body, then none of Han and Cannon is correct. What is the reality of John Wesley’s anthropology in regard to the mind-body problem? That is the research question underlies at the bottom of this paper. In search for the answer to the question above, this article deals with John Wesley’s Anthrophology in the light of Jaegwon Kim’s supervenience argument, which is also known as exclusion argument. Kim’s well known reductive physicalism, along with criticisms against him, would give us a vantage point for reificating and re-envisioning of Wesley’s view on mind-body problem. To focus on and narrow down the research topic to the mind-body problem, this article intentionally exclude other theological sub-themes, which are not directly related to the main topic of this paper, in anthropology. This article is to clarify the reality of Wesley’s view on mind-body problem. First, if Wesley, as a monist, is a reductive physicalist or an epiphenomenalist is dealt. Secondly, if Wesley is a property dualist(or a non-reductive physicalist) or a substance dualist is dealt. Lastly, the reality of Wesley’s view on mind-body, if he is a trailist, is comprehensively examined. It is to argue that John Wesley’s Christian anthropology is, if “the intermediate state” is considered, neither dualism nor monism.
Abstract
Was John Wesley a substance dualist, or a monist? In regard to this mind-body problem, it seems there have not been yet any distinguished, so-called, “received view” in Wesleyan theology. For instance, one of renowned wesleyan theologians, William Ragsdale Cannon seems to depict Wesley as a substance dualist, while another well-known wesleyan theologian, Young-tae Han seems to claim Wesley as a substance monist. Are they both wrong, or either of them is right? There is no way that both correct, logically. If John Wesley was a trialist, who stands for soul, spirit, and body, then none of Han and Cannon is correct. What is the reality of John Wesley’s anthropology in regard to the mind-body problem? That is the research question underlies at the bottom of this paper. In search for the answer to the question above, this article deals with John Wesley’s Anthrophology in the light of Jaegwon Kim’s supervenience argument, which is also known as exclusion argument. Kim’s well known reductive physicalism, along with criticisms against him, would give us a vantage point for reificating and re-envisioning of Wesley’s view on mind-body problem. To focus on and narrow down the research topic to the mind-body problem, this article intentionally exclude other theological sub-themes, which are not directly related to the main topic of this paper, in anthropology. This article is to clarify the reality of Wesley’s view on mind-body problem. First, if Wesley, as a monist, is a reductive physicalist or an epiphenomenalist is dealt. Secondly, if Wesley is a property dualist(or a non-reductive physicalist) or a substance dualist is dealt. Lastly, the reality of Wesley’s view on mind-body, if he is a trailist, is comprehensively examined. It is to argue that John Wesley’s Christian anthropology is, if “the intermediate state” is considered, neither dualism nor monism.
참고문헌 (21)
- Block, Ned, "Do Causal Powers Drain Away?", Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 67, pp.133~150 (2003)
- Calvin, John, "Commentaries on the Epistle of Paul to the Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians", Christian Classics Ethereal Library, ~ (1851)
- Cannon, William Ragsdale, "The Theology of John Wesley: with Special Reference to the Doctrine of Justification" (1946), Abingdon Press
- Ebadi, Ahmad, "From the Emergent Property of consciousness to the Emergence of the Immaterial Soul or Mind's Substance", HTS Theological Studies, 77(4), pp.1~8 (2021)
- Han, Young-tae, "Systematic Theology in John Wesley" (1993), Sung Kwang Publishing Co
- Hasker, William, "Emergentism", Religious Studies, 18(4), pp.473~488 (1982)
- Kim, Jaegwon, "Emergence or Reduction?" (1992), De Gruyter
- Kim, Jaegwon, "Does the Problem of Mental Causation Generalize?", Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 97, pp.281~297 (1997)
- Kim, Jaegwon, "Mind in a Physical World: An Essay on the Mind-body Problem and Mental Causation" (1998), The MIT Press
- Kim, Jaegwon, "Essays in the Metaphysics of Mind", pp.8~40 (2010), Oxford University Press
- Kim, Jaegwon, "Physicalism, or Something Near Enough" (2005), Princeton University Press
- Kim, Jaegwon, "The Re-Emergence of Emergence", pp.189~202 (2006), Oxford University Press
- 김정준, "Christian Spiritual Education: A Holistic Approach", Madang: Journal of Contextual Theology, (29), pp.109~138 (2018), 한국민중신학회[DOI]
- Peoples, Glenn Andrew, "William Hasker at the Bridge of Death: Emergent Dualism and the Prospects of Survival", Philosophia Christi, 10(2), pp.393~409 (2008)
- 전대경, "아더 피어선의 복음주의 개인 종말관-신자의 중간기 상태를 중심으로-", 피어선신학논단, 7(2), pp.71~94 (2018), 피어선기념성경연구원
- Robinson, Kyle Brent, "Body and Soul of Enlightenment: John Wesley, Methodism, and the Age of Reason", Ph.D, pp.2018
- Wesley, John, "the Works of the Rev. John Wesley Vol. 5", pp.198~206 (1826), J. & J. Harper
- Wesley, John, "The Works of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M. Vol. 12", pp.225~230 (1829), John Mason
- Wesley, John, "The Works of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M. Vol. 12", pp.508~520 (1829), John Mason
- Wesley, John, "Wesley's Notes on the Bible" (1987), Francis Asbury Press
- "Epiphenomenalism" (2019)[URL]