查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
| 題 名 | 十九世紀經世風潮的異議者們--以北京理學圈與吳廷棟為中心=Dissidents of the Nineteenth Century Chinese Statecraft Movement: The Bejing Circle of Neo-Confucianism and Wu Tingdong |
|---|---|
| 作 者 | 丘文豪; | 書刊名 | 新史學 |
| 卷 期 | 35:1 2024.03[民113.03] |
| 頁 次 | 頁1-56 |
| 分類號 | 127.6 |
| 關鍵詞 | 理學; 經世; 北京理學圈; 吳廷棟; 曾國藩; Cheng-Zhu Neo-Confucianism; Statecraft; Wu Tingdong; Zeng Guofan; |
| 語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
| 中文摘要 | 本文討論十九世紀北京理學圈成員吳廷棟對當時經世思潮的反省與批判。理學與經世密不可分,學者一般認為十九世紀的理學強調實踐,淡化門戶與心性之辨。然而,本文注意到北京理學圈嚴格的區分程朱陸王,深入剖析心性,並與經世風潮保持距離。這正是他們以程朱理學語言,所表達出的特殊經世關懷。本文指出,十九世紀朝野雖然提倡理學,但他們崇尚踐履與效用,甚至提倡陽明學等思想,超出程朱道統的範圍。1840年代,唐鑑等人編纂《學案小識》便是針砭這種在他們眼中功利的理學態度。他們相信,堅持程朱道統,並以性與天道為經世之體,才是挽救世道之根本。接著,吳廷棟在1840至1870年代,繼續北京理學圈對經世思潮的反省。他堅持以程朱「性即理」為經世之本,嚴格辨析義利,並以此為基礎反省並批判當時士人的經世思維,他嚴格區分經世的層次,並提出「天理之私」的概念。吳廷棟向皇帝解釋理學與節義之別,並為程朱理學之無用辯解;他與曾國藩一生論學,曾氏在他的影響下,理學境界不斷精進。北京理學圈與吳廷棟的經世思考與當時新興的經世之學有一定的距離,且難以以現代語言常識中的「政治」來理解,但卻不能忽視他們的思維與行動仍是經世風潮的一環。 |
| 英文摘要 | This article delves into orthodox Neo-Confucian reflections on and criticisms of statecraft in the nineteenth century. Focusing on the thought of Wu Tingdong (1793-1873), it argues that Wu engaged with the prevalent trends of “praxis” and “utility” and articulated his political concerns in the language of orthodox Neo-Confucianism. In the nineteenth century, Neo- Confucianism was embraced by Chinese cultural elites, who emphasized “praxis” within the Neo-Confucian tradition and temporarily suspended the philosophical disagreements among Neo-Confucians between orthodox Neo-Confucianism and the Lu-Wang School. However, some orthodox Neo-Confucians in Beijing strictly distinguished their philosophical stances from their Lu-Wang counterparts. In the 1840s, Tang Jian (1778- 1861) and his allies denounced the utilitarian tendencies within Confucianism, advocating instead that a correct moral and ontological philosophy should serve as the basis of statecraft. From the 1840s to the 1870s, Wu Tingdong continued to contend that orthodox Neo-Confucian ontology was essential to save the world. He criticized the worldly thinking prevalent among his contemporary scholars. He distinguished between levels of “practice” and explained the difference in political efficacy between orthodox Neo-Confucians and other ideologies. Wu even tried to convince the emperor of his approach. Meanwhile, Wu exerted influence over Zeng Guofan’s (1811-1872) praxis and advancement in Neo- Confucian learning. Wu’s tutelage, Zeng continued to refine his ideas and approaches. In short, the political ideas of Wu Tingdong and orthodox Neo- Confucian comrades in Beijing differed from the prevailing statecraft ideology at that time. While it may be challenging to interpret their ideas within a modern framework of “statecraft” and “politics,” it should not be ignored that this was a distinct approach to shaping political discourse and actions.. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。