著者

加藤 泰史 高木 駿 馬場 智一 小島 毅 納富 信留 建石 真公子 芝崎 厚士 後藤 玲子 杉本 俊介 田坂 さつき 柳橋 晃

出版者

椙山女学園大学

雑誌

学術変革領域研究(A)

巻号頁・発行日

2023-04-01

---

本総括班は、「領域運営調整会議」「ジェンダー学会議」「評価会議」を主導的に開催することで、本領域研究を適切に遂行できる環境と条件を整えると同時に、Web上にHPを作成して研究成果を各計画研究班で共有できるように工夫したりその都度社会に向けて発信したりできるようにする。その際に、各計画研究代表者の役割を明確にし、特に特任助教や特任研究員等の採用といった若手支援を適切に遂行できるように促す。また、年度毎の論文集の企画や『講座 尊厳』、さらに社会へのアウトリーチ等の企画にも責任を持つ。

著者

納富 信留

出版者

日本哲学会

雑誌

哲学 (ISSN:03873358)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2017, no.68, pp.45-62, 2017-04-01 (Released:2017-06-14)

参考文献数

1

---

In the first part of this paper, in order to reconsider the significance of the history of philosophy, I examine its relationship with philosophy in three respects. First, the history of philosophy aims to examine the beginning (archē) of philosophy. By revealing its beginnings (not only in ancient Greece), we can start to engage in a new philosophy. Second, the history provides us with philosophical texts that encourage our thinking. We find there rich resources of reasoning and ideas on philosophical issues. Third, this history shows us our own position in two ways. It presents a set of philosophical concepts, problems and frameworks that we inherit from past philosophers. Also, an examination of this heritage reveals our own position within philosophy.In the second part, I critically survey the various candidates for “first philosopher” in ancient Greece. Each thinker, from Thales to Plato, has supporters and good justification for being considered the first. Then, in the third part, I propose a new perspective, “compound eye history”, in which we investigate plural lines of thinking. Each distinct line started from a new problem raised by a philosopher and developed through critical or positive responses by his contemporaries or later thinkers. I envisage 10 “plots” or lines of ancient philosophy by which we can conceptualise that whole intellectual activity of human life and wisdom.

著者

納富 信留

出版者

日本西洋古典学会

雑誌

西洋古典学研究 (ISSN:04479114)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.46, pp.44-55, 1998-03-23 (Released:2017-05-23)

---

Critias is known as the leader of the cruel "Thirty Tyrants", who governed defeated Athens after the Poloponnesian War(404/3 B.C.), and killed over 1500 people under their reign of terror. Critias raises two important issues in the history of philosophy. First, as a relative of Plato, he seems to have influenced young Plato ; Plato later says in the Seventh Letter that he was initially attracted by Critias' invitation to the oligarchic government, but soon got disappointed on seeing its evil deeds(324B-325A). Second, Critias is regarded as a major cause of the decision to bring Socrates to trial in 399 ; the Athenians believed that Socrates was guilty of "corrupting youth" because he had educated anti-democratic politicians, such as Critias and Alcibiades(cf. Aeschines, 1. 173). These events kept Plato away from real politics and forced him to contemplate politics in philosophy. I believe that Plato confronted the issues concerning Critias in his early dialogue, the Charmides, in which young Critias plays a major role in discussing sophrosyne(temperance or prudence). However, the commentators have scarcely considered political issues in this dialogue, probably because they take the "evil image of Critias" for granted. First, therefore, I reexamine the historical figure of Critias and show how his image was created. It is Xenophon who is most responsible for making up our image of Critias. He describes Critias as a cruel tyrant and ascribes all evils of the Thirty to his personal motivations. Xenophon's account in the History of Greece II. 3. 11-4. 43 reflects the strong reaction against oligarchy in democratic Athens, and originates both in his hostility against the Thirty and his intention to defend Socrates' education(Memorabilia 1. 2. 12-38, 47). This has concealed the Thirty's real political intentions under the "evil image of Critias". On the other hand, we have some positive evidence to indicate that the Thirty originally intended to restore justice and morality in Athens (Lysias 12. 5 ; P1. Ep. VII 324D) ; they executed the sycophants("villains" in democratic Athens). We cannot deny the possibility that Critias and his group seriously aimed for ideal justice, and philosophical examination of the ideology of Critias is therefore necessary. The problem lies in what they understand as justice and sophrosyne. This is the main target of Plato's examination of Critias in the Charmides. Most commentators have ignored the political aspect of the dialogue. Sophrosyne is(unlike Aristotle's definition in the Ethics)a major political virtue along with justice, and the leading ideal for the Spartans and the oligarchs. Sophrosyne is said to bring about good government(Charm. 162A, 171D-172A, D). A crucial point in interpreting the Charmides is how we can understand the shift and relationship between several definitions of sophrosyne which Critias provides. He often gives up his earlier definitions easily and presents new ones ; there seems no logical relation between these. I see his definitions not as logically consequent, but as implying and revealing Critias' underlying ideology. I focus on two shifts : the first comes when Critias abandons his first definition "to do one's own", and gives a new definition "to know oneself" (164C-D) ; the second shift explicates "to know oneself" as "knowledge of the other knowledges and of itself" (166B-C). In each case, the direct cause of shift is Socrates' using an analogy between sophrosyne and techne (skill). Critias opposes Socrates' analogy and tries to separate two kinds of knowledge : self-knowledge and particular skills. Since the relation between the two is explained in terms of "rule" and "supervise" (173C, 174D-E) , I conclude that the clear distinction between the two(View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)

著者

納富 信留

出版者

岩波書店

雑誌

思想 (ISSN:03862755)

巻号頁・発行日

no.948, pp.37-57, 2003-04

著者

下田 正弘 蓑輪 顕量 永崎 研宣 大向 一輝 宮崎 泉 納富 信留 Muller Albert 苫米地 等流 藏本 龍介 船山 徹 高橋 晃一 師 茂樹 齋藤 希史 高岸 輝

出版者

東京大学

雑誌

基盤研究(A)

巻号頁・発行日

2019-04-01

---

本研究は「人文学がデジタル時代にいかに遂行されうるか」という次世代の人文学にとって重要なテーマについて、人文学諸分野が参照可能なデジタル知識基盤を仏教学から提供し、人文学全体が共同で未来を開く方法論を検討する〈統合デジタル研究環境〉を形成する。そのため、人文学におけるテキスト、画像、事物、行為等の研究対象の相違と、思想、言語、歴史、行動科学等の研究方法の相違の両者を視野に入れ、両者から生まれる知識の多様性を、デジタル技術を通し効果的に保存し利用する多層的概念モデルを構築し、新大蔵経データベース(新SAT-DB)に実装して提供する。

著者

納富 信留

出版者

日本哲学会

雑誌

哲学 (ISSN:03873358)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2007, no.58, pp.25-43,17, 2007-04-01 (Released:2009-07-23)

---

When Nishi Amane introduced Western civilisation into Japan in the mid 19th century, he observed that its essence lies in "philosophy", especially in its Greek origin. I examine therefore the original meaning of "philosophia" in ancient Greece in order to reconsider the possibility of philosophy in modern Japan.First, "philosaphos" as form of a human life is contrasted with the modern concept of "philosophy" as an academic discipline. Asking what a philosopher is inevitably raises a serious question about one's own life, whereas modern philosophy ignores this ethical dimension of "philosophy". Second, Greek thinkers experimented a variety of styles-prose, verse, aphorism, dialogue, speech, and treatise-through which a possibility of doing philosophy was pursued. The conflict between these styles developed philosophical thinking and eventually established universality. Third, Greek philosophy laid the basis for sciences by systematizing the entire area of knowledge. It also founded academic institutions-Academy and Lyceum-to pursue shared research in philosophy and sciences in a free intellectual space. This started the tradition of Western philosophy.Considering these aspects, I suggest that philosophy be reconsidered in our modern society as realisation of a human life. In particular, the concepts of "wisdom" (sophia), "universality", and "soul" (psyche) should be examined in light of Greek philosophy, to which we need to return as a mirror that sheds a new light on our own philosophy.

著者

納富 信留

出版者

国士舘大学哲学会

雑誌

国士舘哲学 (ISSN:13432389)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.17, 2013-03

著者

納富 信留

出版者

公益財団法人 日本学術協力財団

雑誌

学術の動向 (ISSN:13423363)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.16, no.1, pp.1_14-1_17, 2011-01-01 (Released:2011-05-19)

参考文献数

21

著者

納富 信留

出版者

日本西洋古典学会

雑誌

西洋古典学研究 (ISSN:04479114)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.66, pp.23-34, 2018 (Released:2021-03-24)

著者

納富 信留

出版者

公益財団法人 日本学術協力財団

雑誌

学術の動向 (ISSN:13423363)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.16, no.1, pp.7, 2011

著者

納富 信留 栗原 裕次 佐野 好則 荻原 理 大芝 芳弘 田中 伸司 高橋 雅人 土橋 茂樹 田坂 さつき 近藤 智彦

出版者

慶應義塾大学

雑誌

基盤研究(B)

巻号頁・発行日

2008

---

古代ギリシアにおける「正義」概念を明らかにし、現代社会の諸問題に応える目的で、プラトン『国家』(ポリテイア)を共同で検討した。その研究成果は、将来まとめて欧文研究書として海外で出版することを目標に、国際学会や研究会で報告され、欧文論文として海外の雑誌・論文集に発表されている。2010年夏に慶應義塾大学で開催された国際プラトン学会大会(プラトン『国家』がテーマ)では、メンバーが運営と研究の中核として、内外の専門家と共同で研究を推進した。

著者

納富 信留

出版者

西日本哲学会

雑誌

西日本哲学年報 (ISSN:09197982)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.16, pp.147-163, 2008 (Released:2024-05-10)

著者

野津 寛 納富 信留 吉川 斉 葛西 康徳

出版者

信州大学

雑誌

基盤研究(C)

巻号頁・発行日

2017-04-01

---

葛西(研究分担者)が令和31年度3月13日から22日まで米国の大学及び学会(テキサス州南メソディスト大学ロースクール及びボストンのAssociation for Asian Studies学会)に出張する予定だったが、コロナウイルスにより先方から通知が来てキャンセルすることになった。そこで、令和2年度中に改めて出張ないし海外研究者を招聘するため、当該費用は令和2年度に繰り越した。この予算は、海外からの研究者招聘に使用する予定であった。しかし、令和2年度もコロナウイルスにより、研究分担者の海外出張と海外研究者の招聘に使えなくなり、再び次年度に繰り越すこととなったた。そのため、この繰越金に関する研究実績はあげられなかった。

著者

納富 信留

出版者

九州大学文学部

雑誌

哲学年報 (ISSN:04928199)

巻号頁・発行日

no.59, pp.49-78, 2000-03

著者

野津 寛 納富 信留 吉川 斉 葛西 康徳

出版者

信州大学

雑誌

基盤研究(C)

巻号頁・発行日

2020-04-01

---

近現代日本における古代ギリシア演劇研究および受容の諸相を追究し、古代ギリシア演劇研究および受容・上演が将来進むべき方向性を示唆するため、私たちの基盤研究(基盤C 17K02590)を発展的に継承する。(1)近現代日本における古代ギリシア演劇の受容の実態調査。(2)わが国の古代ギリシア悲劇の受容と上演の活動全体が、能など日本固有の伝統演劇の諸要素の積極的活用の有無という根本的な選択の相違によって、受容の2大類型に分類できることを明らかにする。(3)西洋人による古代ギリシア悲劇と能の比較研究について、宗教学的・人類学的な比較対照研究の伝統という観点から日本における研究・受容の在り方を問う。

著者

明星 聖子 高畑 悠介 井出 新 松原 良輔 松田 隆美 中谷 崇 納富 信留 矢羽々 崇 伊藤 博明 Pekar Thomas 黒田 彰 近藤 成一 宗像 和重 杉浦 晋 武井 和人 北島 玲子

出版者

埼玉大学

雑誌

基盤研究(A)

巻号頁・発行日

2016-04-01

---

昨年度の検討を受けて、今年度は昨年度のテーマに若干変更を加えた以下のAからEの5つのテーマについて、さらに今年度からは総合的なFのテーマも加えて研究を進めた。A.ドイツ文献学の成立の事情とその日本における受容および明治/大正期の文学研究の確立をめぐる検討、B.日本文学における現在の文献学的状況を探るケーススタディ、C.再評価の機運が高まっているイタリアの文献学者S.Timpanaroの代表著作の 読解と翻訳、D.英文学研究および教育における編集文献学的方法論の実践、E.独文学研究および教育における編集文献学的方法論の実践、F.人文学テクスト全般における「信頼性」および「正統性」をめぐる総合的な編集文献学的考察。テーマごとの班活動以外に、全体としての研究会も3回、2019年6月16日に慶應義塾大学で、7月31日に放送大学で、また2020年1月26日に慶應義塾大学で開催した。第1回での研究発表は、「編集文献学の可能性」(明星聖子)、第2回は、「古典文献学の可能性」(納富信留)、「注釈の編集文献学」(松田隆美)、第3回は、「南朝公卿補任の真贋判断をめぐって」(武井和人)、「偽書という虚構ー近代日本の小説3つをめぐって」(杉浦晋)。なお、こうした活動が実を結び、2019年9月に刊行された雑誌『書物学』(勉誠出版)で、特集「編集文献学への誘い」が組まれ、そこでプロジェクトメンバーの論考6本がまとめて掲載されたことは、特筆に値するだろう。

著者

納富 信留

出版者

日本西洋古典学会

雑誌

西洋古典学研究 (ISSN:04479114)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.58, pp.87-94, 2010-03-24 (Released:2017-05-23)

著者

納富 信留

出版者

国士舘大学哲学会

雑誌

国士舘哲学 (ISSN:13432389)

巻号頁・発行日

no.17, 2013-03

著者

納富 信留

出版者

日本西洋古典学会

雑誌

西洋古典学研究 (ISSN:04479114)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.46, pp.44-55, 1998

---

<p>Critias is known as the leader of the cruel "Thirty Tyrants", who governed defeated Athens after the Poloponnesian War(404/3 B.C.), and killed over 1500 people under their reign of terror. Critias raises two important issues in the history of philosophy. First, as a relative of Plato, he seems to have influenced young Plato ; Plato later says in the Seventh Letter that he was initially attracted by Critias' invitation to the oligarchic government, but soon got disappointed on seeing its evil deeds(324B-325A). Second, Critias is regarded as a major cause of the decision to bring Socrates to trial in 399 ; the Athenians believed that Socrates was guilty of "corrupting youth" because he had educated anti-democratic politicians, such as Critias and Alcibiades(cf. Aeschines, 1. 173). These events kept Plato away from real politics and forced him to contemplate politics in philosophy. I believe that Plato confronted the issues concerning Critias in his early dialogue, the Charmides, in which young Critias plays a major role in discussing sophrosyne(temperance or prudence). However, the commentators have scarcely considered political issues in this dialogue, probably because they take the "evil image of Critias" for granted. First, therefore, I reexamine the historical figure of Critias and show how his image was created. It is Xenophon who is most responsible for making up our image of Critias. He describes Critias as a cruel tyrant and ascribes all evils of the Thirty to his personal motivations. Xenophon's account in the History of Greece II. 3. 11-4. 43 reflects the strong reaction against oligarchy in democratic Athens, and originates both in his hostility against the Thirty and his intention to defend Socrates' education(Memorabilia 1. 2. 12-38, 47). This has concealed the Thirty's real political intentions under the "evil image of Critias". On the other hand, we have some positive evidence to indicate that the Thirty originally intended to restore justice and morality in Athens (Lysias 12. 5 ; P1. Ep. VII 324D) ; they executed the sycophants("villains" in democratic Athens). We cannot deny the possibility that Critias and his group seriously aimed for ideal justice, and philosophical examination of the ideology of Critias is therefore necessary. The problem lies in what they understand as justice and sophrosyne. This is the main target of Plato's examination of Critias in the Charmides. Most commentators have ignored the political aspect of the dialogue. Sophrosyne is(unlike Aristotle's definition in the Ethics)a major political virtue along with justice, and the leading ideal for the Spartans and the oligarchs. Sophrosyne is said to bring about good government(Charm. 162A, 171D-172A, D). A crucial point in interpreting the Charmides is how we can understand the shift and relationship between several definitions of sophrosyne which Critias provides. He often gives up his earlier definitions easily and presents new ones ; there seems no logical relation between these. I see his definitions not as logically consequent, but as implying and revealing Critias' underlying ideology. I focus on two shifts : the first comes when Critias abandons his first definition "to do one's own", and gives a new definition "to know oneself" (164C-D) ; the second shift explicates "to know oneself" as "knowledge of the other knowledges and of itself" (166B-C). In each case, the direct cause of shift is Socrates' using an analogy between sophrosyne and techne (skill). Critias opposes Socrates' analogy and tries to separate two kinds of knowledge : self-knowledge and particular skills. Since the relation between the two is explained in terms of "rule" and "supervise" (173C, 174D-E) , I conclude that the clear distinction between the two</p><p>(View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)</p>

著者

納富 信留

出版者

九州大学

雑誌

哲學年報 (ISSN:04928199)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.57, pp.149-176, 1998-03-10