從阿奎那的類比法到藍聖恩的「模型」與「揭示」──宗教語言可能性的古與今

From Aquinas' Analogy to Ian Ramsey's Models and Disclosures-the Possibility of Religious Language Then and Now

尋覓一套適切的語言，以便用於有關上帝的言說（God-talk），歷久以來都是神學及哲學的一個重要課題。比喻作為一種語言的工具，自古已被應用到不同的知識範疇，但對宗教論述而言，類比的方法卻是經由中世紀的托馬斯‧阿奎那推廣後，才開始被廣泛採用。但阿奎那式的類比法也並非普遍被接納。其中的主要爭論，是在於文字究竟是否只可以作單一意義的闡釋，還是可以像比喻那樣具有多重涵義。當代學術界的研究，對宗教語言的討論更是火上加油：邏輯實證論者堅持認為有關上帝的言說都是毫無意義的，因為真理的宣稱永不能在這個範疇得以立定。有些批評者更認為，宗教是屬於「不能言說」的世界，人們只能以沉默來回應。這些批評驅使宗教思想家們急於作出回應。前牛津大學基督宗教哲學教授藍聖恩（IanRamsey）對此挑戰作出了當面的回應。他的回答可分為兩方面。首先，他固然是要在這些哲學的批判之前為宗教語言作出辯護。與此同時，他也渴望說明護教學其實能夠從邏輯經驗主義的理論找到支持。藍氏所建構的「模型」（model）與「揭示」（disclosure）進路，恰能證明宗教語言在經驗世界的基礎。他的進路也顯示出，宗教言說所涵概的足以超越經驗主義對真理與意義的狹隘定義。本文的目的，是將阿奎那的類比法與藍氏的模型理論作一個比較，並特別指出兩個方法同樣是從可見的到不可見的進路來言說上帝。與此同時，本文也會指出，兩者因著不同的本體論引申而來的基本區別。

The search for a proper language for God-talk is a perennial task in theology as well as in philosophy. From times of antiquity, the use of analogy was employed in different realms of knowledge. Yet it was not until the medieval era, primarily through the effort of Thomas Aquinas, that analogy was used extensively in religious discourse. However, Thomistic analogy was not accepted by all. The contention between univocal and analogical use of words was never settled. The contemporary scene adds further fuel to the debate. Logical positivism claims that God-talk is totally meaningless, as truth claims can never be established in such a domain. And some critics say that religion belongs to the world of the 'un-sayable' and silence is the only response. The situation demands an urgent response from the side of the religious thinkers, and Ian Ramsey, previous Nolloth professor of Philosopy of Christian Religion at Oxford University, has taken up the task to face this challenge. Ramsey's job is twofold. First, he is of course concerned with defending religious discourse against such philosophical critiques. At the same time, he is eager to show how theological apologetics could actually benefit from the tenets of Logical Empiricism. His method of 'models' and 'disclosures' is used to demonstrate the empirical relevance of religious language. Such approach also reveals that religious discourses do contain something more than the narrowness of meaning and truth set down by the logical empiricists. The purpose of this paper is to place Aquinas' analogy side by side with Ramsey's models approach and see how they compare and contrast each other. Specifically, we will see how these approaches have roughly the same dynamics of going from what is seen to what is unseen in talking about God. We will also see how the two projects differ owing to a fundamental difference in their ontology.