| 要約: | This thesis compares two Roman philosophical treatments of On Anger, one written in Greek by the Epicurean Philodemus, the other in Latin by the Stoic Seneca. It seeks to resolve three problems between the two authors’ conception of anger: (1) the “definitional” problem, which outlines the deciding factors that makes anger what it is and distinguishes it from all the other non-anger psychological processes; (2) the “cognitive” problem, which clarifies the relationship between anger and the judgments that cause, underlie, and constrain the occurrence of the emotion; (3) the “motivational” problem, which focuses on the involvement of desire in anger and how it leads people to feel and act in certain ways. By investigating how Philodemus and Seneca each handles the three problems in their works, I aim at giving a thorough examination of the two authors’ understanding of the nature of anger, especially in the cognitive and motivational respects, meanwhile demonstrating the intersections and differences between the two theoretical systems.
|
|---|