道德自我如何挺立——以东亚儒学“克己”纷争为鉴

发布时间：2018-03-18 05:28

本文选题：克　切入点：能　出处：《孔子研究》2017年02期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：东亚儒学有关"克己"的诠释纷争,表面看来是尊"朱"与反"朱"势力的角逐,实质蕴涵着不同的自我观。"克"—"己"之间存在一种表里结构:训"克"为"能"者,视自我为(全)善,因而只需逆觉体证、发挥本心,突出强调主体的能动作用,此解以杨简为代表;训"克"为"胜"者,察觉自我有恶,故当依循天理、尊崇道心,侧重揭橥规范的塑造意义,此解以朱熹为宗主。两类训释的核心分歧在于:挺立道德自我所采取的路径有所不同;至于清代毛奇龄、颜元等人,拥立马融以驳斥朱熹,虽在思想史上有其特定的意义,但未能深入义理层面,辨识"朱注"对"马注"的转进之功。
[Abstract]:On the surface, the dispute over the interpretation of Confucianism in East Asia about "self-denial" seems to be a contest between the "Zhu" and anti-Zhu forces, which in essence implies different views of self. There is a superficial structure between "overbearing" and "oneself", that is, to teach the "overlord" to "be able". Regard self as (all) good, so you only need to counteract physical evidence, give play to your heart, and highlight the active role of the subject. This solution is represented by Yang Jian. Those who are taught to "conquer" as "victors" are aware of their own evil, so they should follow the principles of heaven and respect the Tao. The core difference between the two types of interpretation lies in the different paths taken by standing up for moral self; as for Mao Qiling, Yan Yuan, et al. In the Qing Dynasty, Ma Rong was supported by Ma Rong to refute Zhu Xi. Although it has its special significance in the history of thought, it fails to go deep into the level of justice and theory, and to distinguish the progress of Zhu Note and Ma Note.
【作者单位】：海南大学社会科学研究中心;
【基金】：2016年国家社会科学基金青年项目(项目编号:16CZX031)的阶段性成果
【分类号】：B222

【相似文献】