頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 馮友蘭《中哲史》(三十年代) 論新儒家的得失之評論=Feng You-lan's “History of Chinese Philosophy” on the Merits of Neo-Confucianism |
---|---|
作 者 | 金春峰; | 書刊名 | 哲學與文化 |
卷 期 | 28:7=326 2001.07[民90.07] |
頁 次 | 頁638-650+678 |
分類號 | 125 |
關鍵詞 | 朱熹; 馮友蘭; 新儒學; 理氣; 心性; Zhu Xi; Feng You-lan; Neo-Confucianism; Li and qi; Mind and nature; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 馮友蘭先生三十年代《中哲史》論宋明新儒家,系統地引進新實在論以解釋程頤、朱熹所講的理世界以及理氣關係、心性關係及「格物致知」說、「太極」思想,並旁及朱陸朱王異同。馮友蘭先生以新實在論解釋朱熹之哲學思想,認為朱熹所講之理為形而上,超乎時空;心為知覺靈明、氣之靈,在時空中,為形而下,朱熹析心理為二,乃成為定論而牢不可拔。 實際上,朱熹的思想十分複雜,其所謂心並非僅僅是認知之心,只有知覺靈明一種功用與屬性,而同時是「本心」「仁義之心」。「性即理」也就是「本心」即理,與陸象山的說法,只是形式與為學功夫的差別。宇宙觀與理氣體系上,朱陸哲學雖然不同,但並不妨害兩者對道德本原之看法的一致。朱熹本人有對「天地生物之心」的信仰,其思想來源受佛教的影響甚深,與實在論或新實在論的文化思想背景甚不相同;但這些馮先生都忽視了。因此,馮先生對朱熹及朱陸異同、朱王異同的分析,就不能不有很大的片面性,是我們所不能忽視的。馮先生的看法是 三十年代提出的,但八十年代的《新編中國哲學史》,馮先生仍堅持這些看法,因此本文將這些問題提出來加以討論,仍然是有意義的。 |
英文摘要 | Published in the thirties, Feng You-lan’s History of Chinese Philosophy systematically introduced neo-realism to explain Cheng Yi’s and Zhu Xi’s thoughts—the universe of li, the relationship between li and qi, the relationship between mind and nature, the acquirement of knowledge through the study of phenomena, and taichi—while refereeing to the distinctions between Zhu and Lu (Lu Xiang-shan) along with the differences between Zhu and Wang (Wang Yang-ming). Illustrating Zhu Xi’s philosophy with neo-realism, Feng argued that Zhu Xi’s conception of li was metaphysical and transcendental, while mind was the most sensitive perception, faculty, and entity. Zhu Xi’s distinction between li and mind became a strong dogma. Actually, Zhu Xi’s thoughts were quite complicated. What he meant by “mind” was not only the mind of cognition or a function or attribute of perception, gbut also the essential mind and the mind of morality and justice. Nature as li is equivalent to the mind as li; according to Lu Xiang-shan, what differentiates them was the distinction between formality and practice. Zhu Xi and Lu Xiang-shan, though different in their cosmologies and in the hierarchies of li and qi, had matching ideas about the origin of morality. Zhu Xi believed in the will of nature; his thoughts were under the powerful influence of Buddhism and distinct from realism or neo-realism, which Feng simply ignored. Therefore we can’t overlook the fact that Feng’s analyses of the distinction between Zhu and Lu along with the differences between Zhu and Wang must have been partial. Feng proposed his ideas in 1930s, but in the new edition published in 1980s, he still asserted the same claims. Thus with the discussion about these questions, this article still has its significance. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。