頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 「智慧」怎麼了?--人之為人、抑或人之成為人?=Whatever Happened to “Wisdom”?: “Human Beings” or “Human Becomings?” |
---|---|
作 者 | 安樂哲; 俞懿嫻; | 書刊名 | 哲學與文化 |
卷 期 | 34:6=397 2007.06[民96.06] |
頁 次 | 頁71-87 |
專 輯 | 創化與歷程專題 |
分類號 | 121.2 |
關鍵詞 | 智慧; 儒家; 修養; 懷德海; 五行; 四端; 人性; Wisdom; Confucianism; Personal cultivation; Whitehead, A. N.; Five virtues; Four beginnings; Human nature; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 雄辯的畢達哥拉斯(Pythagoras)所描述的愛智慧(philosophia)是一種整體的、實踐式的生活方式,它當然需要抽象的、理論科學的沉思,更重要的是還含有許多宗教實踐的律則,如靈魂不朽、定期的苦行戒律、社會和政治改革計畫、持之以恆的倫理反省、身體的控制、膳食規定和禁忌等。但畢氏這種把哲學視為美好生活之全體的觀點隨時光而消逝了。原本的哲學之旅讓位於另一種迥然異趣的朝聖之途,那就是對抽象、清晰知識以及這種知識所承諾的確定性的追求。「知識」與「真理」成了系統哲學的辭彙,「智慧」成了一個在西方學院廊下被嚴重荒廢的字眼。隨著時間的流駛,對理論與精神(spiritually)抽象的景仰,意味著實踐智慧、修辭和美學全都陷入了二元論。哲學-「愛智慧」-在所有意向和目的上都變成了philo-episteme-「愛確定性的知識」。中國文化的展開與古希臘不同。它植根於儒家「下學而上達」的訓誡,中國哲學的思路從最初就堅持從日用行為中追求智慧,將通過人際關係進行的「修身」作為所經遇事情的意義的源泉。每個人從其家族、社群、政治關係中取得獨特的視角,他們投身於精心思慮的成長和思考中,將他們和家族社群的關係調整到一個更清晰、更有意義的地位。個人修身增加了宇宙(cosmos)的意義,而意義增加的宇宙又反過來為個人修身提供了一個豐饒的土壤。 |
英文摘要 | For the eloquent Pythagoras, the holistic way of life he described as philosophia-“the love of wisdom”-while entailing the contemplation of abstract, theoretical science, involved much more importantly religious practices based upon the immortality of the soul, ascetic observances, a program of social and political reform, ethical reflection, a physical regimen, and even dietary prescriptions and prohibitions. But this conception of philosophy as a holistic vision of the good life faded in time, and gave way to the search for apodictic knowledge and its promise of certainty. “Knowledge” and “truth” became the vocabulary of systematic philosophy, and “wisdom” was banished from conversation in the corridors of the Western academy. The worship of the theoretically and spiritually abstract meant that in the fullness of time practical wisdom, rhetoric, and the aesthetic were relegated to the down side of a prevailing dualism. The Chinese cultural narrative unfolded differently. Grounded in the Confucian exhortation-”Study what is near at hand and aspire to what is lofty下學而上達”-the Chinese philosophical narrative has from earliest times sustained a commitment to the pursuit of wisdom by understanding personal cultivation as the ultimate source of an emergent cosmic meaning. It is the revolution currently taking place within the Western philosophical community as an attempt to reinstate wisdom that provides an opening and an invitation to take Chinese philosophy and culture more seriously. An internal critique continues to be waged within professional Western philosophy under the many banners of process philosophy, hermeneutics, post-modernism, neo-pragmatism, neo-Marxism, deconstructionism, feminist philosophy, and so on, that takes as a shared target what Robert Solomon has called “the transcendental pretense”-idealism, objectivism, logocentrism, essentialism, the master narrative, “the myth of the given”-the familiar reductionistic “isms” that have emerged as putatively novel choices as philosophers switch horses on the merry-go-round of systematic philosophy. In place of a Cartesian philosophical language that privileges the function of clear and distinct ideas in our quest for an objective certainty, vocabularies of process, change, and indeed productive vagueness have increasingly come into vogue. These recent developments in Anglo-European philosophy itself have begun to foreground interpretative vocabularies more relevant to the articulation of Chinese culture. In this essay, I will argue that the pragmatic theory of truth as expounded by William James and particularly John Dewey is an attempt to reauthorize “wisdom” as a philosophical goal in the Western philosophical narrative. This development opens a space for a conversation between Deweyan pragmatism and Confucianism on how best to achieve it. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。