頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 論朱熹對孟子「性善」說的詮釋及其問題--「性善」與「人性本善」的辯議 (上)=Discussing Zhuxi's Interpretation of the Concept of “Human Nature” in Mencius and Its Possible Problems |
---|---|
作 者 | 劉振維; | 書刊名 | 哲學與文化 |
卷 期 | 29:6=337 2002.06[民91.06] |
頁 次 | 頁504-531+581 |
分類號 | 125.5 |
關鍵詞 | 性善; 人性本善; 性; 情; 才; 心; Human nature is good; Xing Shan; Human nature is originally good; Xing Ben Shan; Human nature; Xing; Fact or sentiment; Qing; Ability; Cai; Heart; Xin; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 從《孟子》書中可以得知,孟子對人性論的主張是「性善」。但是,時人幾乎均解之為「人性本善」。此當是受宋明理學影響之故;因為集理學大成的朱熹,在《孟子集註》中明白指出「人性本善」。然而,朱熹之見,實當視為對孟子人性論哲學的一種詮釋,不應視為對孟子人性論解釋的確論。 朱熹哲學自成體系,學界已有相當意識,所以,以之解釋孟子哲學,不免會產生歧異。本文分析了朱熹對《孟子》注解的關鍵詞,如性、情、才、心,對比《孟子》文意,以顯朱熹的解釋在《孟子》文中會產生歧異,甚至無法解通之境,同時指出孟子「性善」的可能真義。以之證明孟子「性善」與朱熹「人性本善」兩者思維是完全不同。 本文的結論:孟子對人性的主張是「性善」,而不是朱熹解釋的「人性本善」。順此可以得知,時人立基於宋明理學上解釋《孟子》的人性論,其誤解當更是深入,因此所得出的結論充滿了無法預料的危險性。 為使問題焦距清晰,本文範域集中體現在《孟子》本文及朱熹的《孟子集註》二書之一,辨議「性善」與「人性本善」在哲學上具有不同的意義。 |
英文摘要 | From the book Mencius, we can easily see that Mencius held the view that human nature is good, but almost everybody reads this as meaning “human nature is originally good.” This view shows the influence of Song-Ming thoughts on later interpreters. Zhuxi stated explicitly in his Commentary of Mencius that human nature is originally good. But this statement should be looked upon as Zhuxi's interpretation rather than the final word on Mencius. The independence of Zhuxi's philosocphical system is commonly recognized. Thus his Commentary of Mencius should be looked at with care. This essay confronts Zhuxi's commentary with a careful analysis of some key passages in Mencius. The writer has chosen some key concepts such as nature (xing), fact or sentiment (qing), ability (cai), and heart (xin) to expose the important differences between the two thinkers. The essay concludes that according to Mencius, human nature is good, not originally so. Thus the interpreters of Mencius today use Zhuxi at their own peril. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。