There is a certain parallel between ‘negative capability’ in poetics and negation in theology. However, the former should be understood after Coleridge, not Keats, as blending empathetic self-estrangement with expressive subjective involvement. Yet this only makes sense in terms of a participation in the transcendent. Similarly, negation in mystical theology is one moment in oscillation with the cataphatic. Negative theology, so understood, only makes sense at all within a broadly Neoplatonic metaphysical framework, as can be shown both historically and conceptually. Neither phenomenological nor grammatical approaches to negation are by comparison sufficient, though they have their supplementary illuminating place. Today, however, we need to supplement the Neoplatonic metaphysical framework with a stronger sense that the mystical approach to God involves in itself our poetic activity which inversely has to be understood as participative.

中文翻译：

---

诗学和神学中的否定

诗学中的“消极能力”与神学中的否定有一定的相似之处。然而，前者应该在柯勒律治之后被理解，而不是济慈，因为前者将移情的自我疏离与表达性的主观参与融为一体。然而，这只有在参与超越的情况下才有意义。同样，神秘神学中的否定是与灾难性振荡的一个时刻。如此理解的否定神学只有在广泛的新柏拉图形而上学框架内才有意义，这一点在历史上和概念上都可以证明。相比之下，无论是现象学的还是语法的否定方法都不够充分，尽管它们有其补充的启发作用。然而，今天，我们需要用更强烈的意识来补充新柏拉图形而上学框架，即接近上帝的神秘方法本身就涉及我们的诗歌活动，而反过来，诗歌活动必须被理解为参与性的。