「無からの創造」と「潜在からの顕現」との両否定

西田とヘーゲル

抄録

Both Nishida and Hegel see the occurrence of something from the viewpoint of‘energeia and dynamis’.In this paper, we try to clarify their theory and consider their relation and difference. Hegel generally sees the occurrence of something as change from energeia to dynamis. He thinks our activity derives something which exists in itself from condition. In A Study of Good, Nishida sees product of act as actualization of potential inspiration and formulates form of activity of consciousness as differentiation and development of potential totality. We can see Hegel’s influence on Nishida’s thought above. However, after the book, we can see change in Nishida’s thought. That is to say, in the later Nishida, he negates either actualization of potentiality or creation from nothing and consists paradox that something comes from the former world spontaneously while activity of finding it out changes it. Hegel’s theory has tendency of a kind of determinism. On the other hand, Nishida’s theory permits various possibilities of new occurrence and allows creativity and individuality of our activity which takes part in determination of new occurrence. As for our action, Hegel sees it as actualization of our potential talent and character and as change of form from dynamis to energeia whereas Nishida thinks that product of act cultivates our talent and character.