查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 論唯物觀點解老之貧困=On the Poverty of the Materialistic Explanation about Lao Tzu |
---|---|
作者 | 鄭榮洲; Cheng, Jong-chou; |
期刊 | 臺灣人文生態研究 |
出版日期 | 19971100 |
卷期 | 1:1 1997.11[民86.11] |
頁次 | 頁1-17 |
分類號 | 121.31 |
語文 | chi |
關鍵詞 | 解釋; 化約主義; 類烏托邦; 方法學的整體主義; 漏斗式認識論; 相對主義; Explanation; Reductionism; Quasi-utopia; Methodological holism; Pessimistic epistemology; Relativism; |
中文摘要 | 本文評論若干先輩學者,運用名為科學、實乃唯物化約的觀點以解釋老子,其結 果窘態畢露且掛一漏萬。蓋彼等率皆循因果必然、機械聯結的決定論觀點,且以「存在決定 意識」、「階級侷囿個人」、「經濟利益恆優先於精神」等漏斗式的被動主義認識論為預設 ,進而跡近解剖一般任意揣測老子政治言論的階級動機; 於焉,或 (如胡適 ) 自我投射地 視老子為革命家,或 (如嚴幾道 ) 把老子盧梭化,(而胡、嚴之解又被視為「把老子資產階 級化」 ),或 (如楊興順、詹劍峰 )" 六經注我 " 地把老子無產階級化, 或 (如古棣、許 抗生 ) 從相對立場且基於階級鬥爭史觀之需而視老子代表奴隸主階級。 綜觀以上各家之解 老,淡忽 << 老子 >> 類烏托邦所表詮的超越且周溥之特徵,也未洞其線延而能動的時間觀 , 馴致援引靜滯的、橫截的 (斷裂的 )、 簡化的觀點, 或以不過如此爾爾 (Nothing but) 的心態,妄圖囊括老子思想之全身,或掌握其架構;殊不知,此舉之障蔽與謬誤,既肇端乎 方法學的整體主義,復混淆人文學與自然科學之分際;彼等學者既已自我窄化視域在先,則 繼而誣枉老子,又何足怪哉!實則,識者正可透過本文所評析彼等對老子所做或左或右、或 上或下的階級界定,進而確知;老子乃超然物外者也,正因其不偏向於某一特定階級而立論 ,是以在任一階級眼中,老子總顯得似已而非已,也正由於老子不受囿於階級格局,故而其 言論能反映階級際的共同利益 (commmonality)、開顯存有 (道 ) 的容、公、天、道、久諸 德勝境;總之,彼等解老者,偶有所得,若曲士所見「道之一隅」耳。 |
英文摘要 | The poverty of the materialistic explanation about Lao Tzu is too obvious to be ignored. Such method of explanation was named scientific viewpoint and used by some previos scholars such as Shih Hu, Fu Yen, hsing- shung Yang and Li Ku. They used to explain Lao Tzu from the viewpoints of Determinism, Mechanicism, Reductionism, Relativism or pressimistic epistemology. They arbitrarily defined Lao Tzu as revolutionary, an eastern J. Rousseau, a bourgeois, a representative of slave-owners class, or even a ploletarian, etc.. This paper will review those explanation, show their defects and argue that Lao Tuz's quasi-utopia, which is based upon dynamic and durable viewpoint of time, is not only indefinable but transcendent, universal and far beyond any kind of static, partial and nothing-but mentality. In fact, Lao Tzu's quasi-utopia manifests the value such as commonality, tolerance and eterniyt for various social classes. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。