意识流和自然主义——从叶锋教授的文章谈起

发布时间：2018-03-12 14:08

  本文选题：自然主义的不一致性　切入点：非一元化的合理性　出处：《西南大学学报(社会科学版)》2017年02期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：叶锋教授的论文《为什么相信自然主义及物理主义》的可商榷处在于它的某种自身不一致性。它对自然科学的最合理性的论证有以自身为标准之嫌,既有破绽,且不周延,未看到衡量"最合理"的标准不是唯一的,合理与有效可以在时间视野拉长后呈现多元向度。詹姆士阐发的"意识流"和胡塞尔的"内时间意识流",既是反形而上学和实体心灵观的,也是反物理主义和自然主义的,又具有人类可及的直观证据和知识价值,它属于心与物还没有分裂的原本的身体意识,自然主义的物理化脑图也无法追踪它的认知价值之所在。用"共同的基因和生长环境"来论证人类的非相对主义道德不成功,而主张人的价值和尊严存在于"大脑神经元结构",是一种物质化的"我执",与叶锋教授声称的自然主义与佛教伦理观的相似性不协调。而且,这种存在观不可能导致佛家大乘的慈悲伦理。叶锋教授引用的相关西方文献的作者并不持有自然主义和物理主义的伦理意识观,反倒是认同现象学的基本立场。
[Abstract]:The debatable aspect of Professor Ye Feng's paper "Why to believe in naturalism and physicalism" lies in its own inconsistency. Not seeing that the "most reasonable" measure is not the only one, Reasonableness and efficiency can take on multiple dimensions after the extension of time horizon. James' explanation of "stream of consciousness" and Husserl's "stream of inner time consciousness" are not only counter-metaphysics and physical mind, but also anti-physicalism and naturalism. It also has the intuitive evidence and intellectual value available to human beings. It belongs to the original body consciousness, which has not yet split between the mind and the object. Nor can naturalism's physical brain map track its cognitive value. "Common genes and growing environments" are used to demonstrate that human non-relativistic morality is not successful. The assertion that human values and dignity exist in the "neuron structure of the brain" is a materialized "ego", which is incompatible with the similarity between naturalism and Buddhist ethics claimed by Professor Ye Feng. This view of being cannot lead to the merciful ethics of Buddhism Mahayana. The authors of the relevant western literature cited by Professor Ye Feng do not hold the ethical consciousness of naturalism and physicalism, but rather agree with the basic stand of phenomenology.
【作者单位】： 山东大学哲学与社会发展学院;
【基金】：国家社会科学基金重点项目“孝道的哲学基础和思想含义研究”(15AZX013),项目负责人:张祥龙
【分类号】：B842.7;N02
，

本文编号：1601890