暑假作業
文章名稱:
倫理中的自然探析─以阮籍為討論對象
On the Nature in Morality-Taking Ruan Ji as an Object
作者名稱:
鄭婷尹(Ting-Yin Cheng)
資料來原:
人文集刊 ； 8 期 (2009 / 06 / 01) ， P1 - 28
內容摘要:
阮籍越名教的實質為何？反對名教即反對儒家？其自然本質只能歸屬道家？摧毀禮法就是對儒家的揚棄？該以什麼樣的觀察點說明？這些都是可再深究的問題。名教不等於儒家，儒家思維亦可帶有自然質素，「越名教」所越者乃虛偽化的儒教，非整個儒家；「任自然」不同於道家自然的概念，是對人性中自然流露的倫理道德精神持肯定態度。在此認知上，選擇由「倫理中的自然」做探討：面對虛偽的名教，阮籍未揚棄儒家，而是試圖回到更自然本質的部分，於此頗受孔子啟發；藉由人我的探討得知：阮追求的是在倫理中符合自然真誠原則的群體，若徒有人倫卻顯得虛偽，阮寧可揚棄。最末透過主我客我的論述，探討何以阮籍有意識於這方面努力，卻未能平和展現之因
What is the essence of the transcending Ethical Code (越名教) of Ruan Ji (阮籍)? Is disapproving Ethical Code equivalent to disapproving Confucianism? Does the theory of nature only belong to Daoist (道家)? Are the two things to disobey law and morality and to abandon Confucianism equivalent? How to decide from what point of view to explain these questions? These are problems needed to be studied further.Ethical Code is not equal to Confucianism, and Confucian thinking can also be associated with nature. To transcend Ethical Code refers to discarding hypocritical manner and law, but not the whole Confucianism. Following Nature (任自然), different from the concept of nature in Daoist, is the result of appreciating the intuitive morality from human nature. Based on this perception, we study the nature in morality. When facing deceptive Ethical Code, Ruan Ji did not abandon Confucianism and tried to return to the natural essence, following the inspiration of Confucius. In view of the research on interpersonal relationship, we conclude that Ruan Ji respected those who show the nature in morality, but scorned those who obey morality hypocritically. Finally, following the study of inner and outer selves, we discuss the reason why he cannot peacefully express his thoughts despite his awareness of the nature in morality.
倫理中的自然探析─以阮籍為討論對象
On the Nature in Morality-Taking Ruan Ji as an Object
作者名稱:
鄭婷尹(Ting-Yin Cheng)
資料來原:
人文集刊 ； 8 期 (2009 / 06 / 01) ， P1 - 28
內容摘要:
阮籍越名教的實質為何？反對名教即反對儒家？其自然本質只能歸屬道家？摧毀禮法就是對儒家的揚棄？該以什麼樣的觀察點說明？這些都是可再深究的問題。名教不等於儒家，儒家思維亦可帶有自然質素，「越名教」所越者乃虛偽化的儒教，非整個儒家；「任自然」不同於道家自然的概念，是對人性中自然流露的倫理道德精神持肯定態度。在此認知上，選擇由「倫理中的自然」做探討：面對虛偽的名教，阮籍未揚棄儒家，而是試圖回到更自然本質的部分，於此頗受孔子啟發；藉由人我的探討得知：阮追求的是在倫理中符合自然真誠原則的群體，若徒有人倫卻顯得虛偽，阮寧可揚棄。最末透過主我客我的論述，探討何以阮籍有意識於這方面努力，卻未能平和展現之因
What is the essence of the transcending Ethical Code (越名教) of Ruan Ji (阮籍)? Is disapproving Ethical Code equivalent to disapproving Confucianism? Does the theory of nature only belong to Daoist (道家)? Are the two things to disobey law and morality and to abandon Confucianism equivalent? How to decide from what point of view to explain these questions? These are problems needed to be studied further.Ethical Code is not equal to Confucianism, and Confucian thinking can also be associated with nature. To transcend Ethical Code refers to discarding hypocritical manner and law, but not the whole Confucianism. Following Nature (任自然), different from the concept of nature in Daoist, is the result of appreciating the intuitive morality from human nature. Based on this perception, we study the nature in morality. When facing deceptive Ethical Code, Ruan Ji did not abandon Confucianism and tried to return to the natural essence, following the inspiration of Confucius. In view of the research on interpersonal relationship, we conclude that Ruan Ji respected those who show the nature in morality, but scorned those who obey morality hypocritically. Finally, following the study of inner and outer selves, we discuss the reason why he cannot peacefully express his thoughts despite his awareness of the nature in morality.
回應(0)