|
41.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2018 >
Issue: 56
王介成
Chieh-Cheng Wang
On the Concept of Body in the Mozi
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
本文旨在從「修身」概念出發對《墨子》的身體觀進行探研。首先本文指出,《墨子》的身體乃由「形─心─氣」構成,此合於先秦諸子對人身體之理解。形即形軀;心則首重其認識義,同時也和「善」、「愛」、「志」、「性」有所關聯;氣在《墨子》中雖未具理論規模,但氣會隨志而現亦是我們了解〈所染〉的關鍵。基於這樣的身體形構我們可看出,《墨子》所修之身並非僅是生理形軀之身,而是一身心合一之身,透過修養(做工夫)學者的身心形態得以發生轉化。本文以為,所謂工夫不單限於內在的心性修養,只要能使人的思想、行為有所改變,無論是由內而外或由外而內的方法皆可稱為工夫。據此本文從《墨子》中析理出「去」、「反之身」、「立志」、「力事」、「學」、「辯」六種工夫。最後本文發現,《墨子》修身的目的與理想是成就墨家式的人才為天下興利除害,這樣的身體則內含「知無欲惡之身」、「力勇之身」與「交利之身」三種身體向度,此三種身體共構成《墨子》身體觀的最高理想。
This essay aims to discuss the concept of body in the Mozi through the investigation on self-cultivation. First of all, this essay tries to indicate that the body in the Mozi is constructed by‘xing (形, “body”) ─xin (心, “heart”) ─ qi ( 氣, “energy”)’which is in accord with the Pre-Qin thinkers’ understanding to the body. While xing refers to the flesh-bloody part of human being, the concept of xin focuses on the aspect of cognition and is closely related to the concept of shan (善, “goodness”), ai (愛, “love”), zhi (志, “will”) and xing. Despite the concept of qi has not been fully developed in the Mozi, it remains significant in understanding On Dyeing (〈所染〉). Based on this framework on the body, we could assert that the cultivated body which implied in the Mozi is not merely a physical body constituted by flesh and blood, but an integration of mind and body. Through the cultivation (gong-fu 工夫), the physical-mental state of the practitioners will then begin to transform. This essay reveals that the domain of gong-fu should not be restricted in the immanent cultivation of xin-xing ( 心性, “mental disposition”). Regardless of using the approaches of inside-out or outside-in, any practice could change one’s thought and behavior could be regarded as “gong-fu”. Thus, this essay generalizes six kinds of gong-fu from the Mozi, namely qu (去, “removing”), fan-zhi-shen (反之身, “self-reflecting and self-justificating”), li-zhi (立志, “determining”), li-shi (力事, “performing one’s duty”), xue (學, “learning”) and bian (辯, “debating”). This essay concludes that the purpose of self-cultivation on the Mozi is to establish an ideal model of Mohism, so as to promote benefits and eliminate harms for the society. This interpretation of body complies with three dimensions, which are zhi-wu-yu-e-zhi-shen (知無欲惡之身, “the body with intelligence neither desiring nor disliking anything”), li-yong-zhi-shen (力勇之身, “the body with power and bravery”) and jiao-li-zhi-shen (交利之身, “the body with mutual aid”).
|
|
|
42.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2018 >
Issue: 56
曾怡嘉
Yi-Jia Zeng
A Review of Alexander Broadie’s A History of Scottish Philosophy
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
蘇格蘭哲學與思想史近年為英語學界之新興研究領域。身為該領域之先驅、蘇格蘭啟蒙研究首屈一指的學者,亞歷山大•布洛迪有鑑於此趨勢,以本書叩問「何謂蘇格蘭哲學」之根本問題,並提供讀者一部十分全面的哲學史著。布洛迪成功地在書中兼顧歷史與哲學的深度,闡明蘇格蘭哲學的本質與重要性。他主張蘇格蘭哲學必須放入歷史脈絡之中研究,因為它並不僅是一項哲學的志業,更是數世紀以來凝聚蘇格蘭民族的文化傳統。若缺少過去思想家們齊力建構此一智識文化,近代以降的科學、文學、政治與文化發展恐怕舉步維艱。本文旨在評論《蘇格蘭哲學史》;同時概覽布洛迪任教於格拉斯哥大學時從哲學到歷史的學術轉向。他對蘇格蘭哲學文化的投入值得當代歷史學家與哲學家關注,其作品開啟了思想史與哲學史對話的契機;文末將透過本書探討目前英語學界思想史與哲學史之互動關係。
Scottish philosophy and intellectual history have become the increasingly fashionable fields of academic studies. Alexander Broadie, one of the pioneers and an accomplished scholar of the Scottish Enlightenment, returns to the basic question, namely, “what is Scottish philosophy?”, and presents a comprehensive work on the history of Scottish philosophy. Broadie successfully elucidates the nature and significance of Scottish philosophy both historically and philosophically. He argues that Scottish philosophy must be studied in its historical context, for it is not only a philosophical enterprise but also a persistent tradition which has united the Scottish nation for centuries. The advancements in science, literature, politics, and culture in Scotland would be extremely unlikely, if not impossible, without such an intellectual culture established by thinkers in that tradition. This article is intended as a review of Broadie’s A History of Scottish Philosophy in the background of his shifting academic interests from philosophy to history while he holds the professorship in University of Glasgow. His commitment to Scottish philosophical culture deserves the attention of contemporary historians and philosophers, for his work opens up a space for
|
|
|
43.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2017
鄭志忠
Jyh-Jong Jeng
Kant’s Refutation of Idealism
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
在《純粹理性批判》B 版的論證(B274-9)中,康德提出一個有說服力的策略,嚴肅地正面回擊懷疑論者對於外在世界真實性的質疑。他直接攻擊懷疑論者的核心假設。首先,康德以懷疑論者都應該能夠接受的自我知識的構想為起點,然後逐步地揭露它的矛盾性。這使得懷疑論者陷入兩難困境。或者他們必須承認,在他們的假設之下,自我知識是不可能的;或者他們必須放棄那個假設,換句話說,他們不僅必須承認自我知識的直接明證性,同時也必須接受作為它的可能性條件的外部事物存在的直接明證性。本文主張:(1)「駁斥」是有說服力的;(2)「駁斥」與「先驗觀念論」的核心主張是相容的。論文分為三大部分。首先,釐清「駁斥」在先驗哲學中的系統性地位,並藉此闡明「現實性設準」的經驗認知意義;其次,批判地分析「駁斥」的論證結構與理由證成;第三,藉由釐清關鍵術語的歧義,來闡明「駁斥」與先驗觀念論的相容性;最後,總結「駁斥」的策略。
In the demonstration of the second edition of the Critique of Pure Reason (B274-9), Kant brings up a persuasive strategy for seriously refuting skeptics’ position concerning the reality of outer world. He attacks directly the core presupposition of skeptics. First of all, Kant takes as a starting point the conception of self-knowledge that should be accepted by all skeptics. Kant then uncovers step by step the sceptics’ contradiction and he hence puts them in a dilemma. Under the sceptics’ assumption, either they must acknowledge the impossibility of self-knowledge or they must give up that assumption. In other words, not only must skeptics acknowledge the direct veridicality of self-knowledge, but also accept the direct veridicality of the existence of outer things as the condition of the possibility of self-knowledge.This paper argues that (1) the ‘refutation’ is persuasive, and (2) the ‘refutation’ and the core theses of ‘transcendental idealism’ are compatible.This essay contains three parts. The first part is to clarify the systematic status of the ‘refutation’ in transcendental philosophy and, by this clarification, to expound the empirically cognitive significance of the ‘postulate of actuality’; the second part is to critically analyze the structure of demonstration and justification of the ‘refutation’; the third part is to expound the compatibility of ‘refutation’ with ‘transcendental idealism’ by clarifying the ambiguity of key terms. The paper ends with a conclusion summarizing the strategy of the ‘refutation’.
|
|
|
44.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2017
陳士誠
Shih-Chen Chen
A Research on the “Unity of Knowing and Acting” and Its Transcendental Explanation Based on Ethics
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
知行合一是陽明學核心之一;探求其哲學史根源,以及其倫理學證成方式,以顯其學之規模,即本文之兩個目的。所謂根源,非泛指心學傳統中分析出一種模糊的觀念性連結,而是在確定文本中藉倫理學詮釋尋得文獻根據,以證此知行合一在經典承傳中之一脈相承處。此相承處即是《孟子.離婁上》中所揭示者:知之,即行之,此表示知行間的分析關係,在其中,知,乃智之實:知仁義,即固守仁義;因而,所謂知,即行其所知之遵守義。陽明謂是非心之知,其文本根據即可溯源至此,非如勞思光謂兩者只在詞源上有關而已。這是本文第一個目的。第二個目的乃是藉倫理學證成此知行合一之說。勞思光視「行」為發動義,把「行」一詞之意涵,從常識,提昇到心學與語言哲學位階,但若謂去證成知行合一在倫理學上的必然性,也即,知行何故非合一不可,這問題還需尋求更根本的說明。依本文,這乃基於一相關於使心學所蘊含之倫理學概念成為可能之先驗分析工作,也即,知行合一乃在人之主體同一性中成立,而這同一性則乃是使倫理規範與究責概念成為可能之先在性條件,從而即揭示知行合一之必然性基礎。在這同一性中,知與行在倫理上的屬己性被證立,從而倫理規範與究責之可能性才能被證成。因為,只有在知與行皆屬我的,我才能承認倫理規範之有效性及其可究責性,從而構成一藉主體之自我關係的形式性論證。
The doctrine of the “unity of knowing and acting” is one of the core concerns of Wang Yangming’s philosophy. This paper is trying to elucidate Wang’s theory by investigating: 1. The philosophical origin of this doctrine. 2. The justification of its ethical theory. Regarding the investigation of its “origin”, I will show the philosophical inheritance between Wang’s doctrine and classical texts by the support of relevant textual evidence, instead of examining the linkage between different general ideas in the School of mind. The common ground is revealed in Book 4A of Mencius, of which has been stated clearly that to know is to act. The relationship between knowing and acting is analytic. Since knowing is the richest content of wisdom, and genuine knowing is the observance of action, the knowing of benevolence and righteousness is also the observance of such values. Such Mencius’ idea serves not only the lexical origin as suggested by Lao Sze-kwang, but also as the textual ground of Wang’s understanding of the knowing function of the mind of discerning right and wrong. The second purpose of this paper is to justify the doctrine of the “unity of knowing and acting” by ethical interpretation. Lao emphasizes the significance of activity in the concept of “acting”, and transforms the meaning of “acting” from common sense to the level of school of mind and philosophy of language. Nevertheless, if the ethical necessity of the “unity of knowing and acting” has to be justified, i.e. the reason why knowing necessarily entail acting, a further explanation is needed. In this paper, ideas in School of mind will be explained in terms of ethical concepts in order to achieve a transcendental analysis. The “unity of knowing and acting” is possible in subjective identity, which is the a priori condition to make the concept of an ethical norm and imputation possible. The ethical necessity of the “unity of knowing and acting” can thus be revealed. In the subjective identity, the ethical “ownness” of knowing and acting is justified, and an ethical norm and the possibility of imputation can also be possible. Since knowing and acting belong to one’s own self, the ethical norm and its imputation is then valid. This is a formal argument constituted by the self-relation of one’s subjectivity.
|
|
|
45.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2017
陳斐婷
Fei-Ting Chen
How Does Air Receive Color?
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
本文嘗試重建亞里斯多德如何看待中介物空氣容受顏色,給予《靈魂論》第二書第七章418a26-b20 這個段落一個新的詮釋。亞里斯多德分兩個方向進行這項探究。一方面,我論述亞里斯多德嘗試建立一個視覺事件的因果發生序列,顏色是整個視覺事件因果發生序列的動力因起點,使得中介物諸如空氣等透明事物產生變動。而這項變動是一項性質變化。另一方面,透過考察亞里斯多德透過對於光的探究,我指出,處於實現狀態的透明事物,應該理解為展現其與火或此類物體同一的透明本性,是透明事物歷經變動的必要條件。如果上述關於空氣如何容受顏色的解讀是正確的,或許可以為視覺感官如何接受視覺對象的形式(De anima 2.12,414a18-19)提供新的思考方向。
In this paper I reconstruct how Aristotle sees the medium receiving color in De anima 2.7, 418a26-b20 and offer my own interpretation. I argue that Aristotle intends to establish a causal chain for a perception event, which begins with the color of the perceived object as the efficient explanation of the whole causal chain. And color moves the medium, i.e., something transparent such as air, in the manner of alteration. On the other hand, I argue that we should construe the actuality of the transparent thing to be the state of exhibiting the nature of transparency, which air shares with things such as fire. And receiving color in the transparent thing requires the transparent thing to be in actuality. If this line of interpretation is correct, it may reshape the current reading of how the faculty of perception “receives form without matter” (De anima 2.12, 414a18-19).
|
|
|
46.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2017
陳湘韻
Hsiang-Yun Chen
The Real Problem of Bishop Sentences
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
描述性理論(或稱E-型理論)是對「驢子代詞」(donkey anaphora)的一種分析(如:伊凡斯(Evans,1977),韓牧(Heim,1990),尼爾(Neale,1990))。此徑路常為人詬病的一點是無法解釋「主教句型」(bishop sentences)。艾勃(Elbourne,2005)提出一套情境語義學(situation semantics)式的描述性理論,並宣稱該理論不僅能解決傳統描述性理論在說明主教句型時的困難,還能解釋另一種新的主教句型。本文旨在質疑艾勃的分析。我指出艾勃的解法不但使用了未受約束的指代詞(unbound anaphora),且其對新的主教句型的說明也並不適切。
Bishop sentences such as “If a bishop meets a bishop, he blesses him” have long been considered problematic for the descriptivist (or E-type) approach of donkey anaphora (e.g. Evans, 1977; Heim, 1990; and Neale, 1990). Elbourne (2005) offers a situational descriptivist analysis that allegedly solves the problem, and furthermore extends its explanatory coverage to bishop sentence with coordinate subjects. However, I throw serious doubts on Elbourne’s analysis. Specifically, I argue that the purported solution is committed to the use of unbound anaphora, and it cannot sustain the claimed empirical adequacy.
|
|
|
|
47.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2017
楊德立
Tak-Lap Yeung
A Review of After Hegel: German Philosophy, 1840-1900
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
相比十九世紀後半葉的德國哲學,哲學學者與史家一般更注重前半葉的成就。Frederick Beiser 這本著作,正是針對這種情況而寫。他認為十九世紀後半葉被過度簡化和忽略,其實相對於前半葉,後半葉甚至「更重要和哲學上更有趣」,而通過新的敘事和理論重構,該能賦予其應得的重視。為此,作者鑄造了五條不同的歷史線索,包括新「康德主義的興起」、「物質主義的爭論」、「歷史主義的發展」、「現代邏輯的根源」、「悲觀主義的冒起」,讓讀者以不同角度,重新認識這段歷史。他以發掘失落的傳統為己任,對於志同道合的讀者而言,這書當然對味,然而,若要讓讀者公平、恰當地了解當時的思潮,從另一角度而言,書名引來的期望或未盡相符。作者的學術素養無容置疑,本書豐富的資料和清晰的整理,能讓無論是否熟悉該段哲學史的讀者皆耳目一新。若讀者能自行把當中的細節,放到更大的歷史脈絡看,相信會對此書有更正面的評價、獲益更多。
In contrast with the late 19th century German Philosophy, most historians of philosophy emphasize the achievements of the first half of the century. In After Hegel: German Philosophy, 1840-1900, Frederick Beiser stands against this academic current and coins five different narratives, including “the rise of neo-Kantianism”, “the materialism controversy”, “the growth of historicism”, “the root of modern logic”, “the rise of pessimism” to allow readers to reengage with the second half of the 19th century. He takes the responsibility of enlivening the so-called “lost traditions”, and of course, for those readers who have similar taste and interest, this book is their cup of tea. However, if we, by the name of the book, anticipate this work to illustrate a general picture of the “mainstream” philosophical traditions from those times, we may be disappointed. From the academic point of view, this book is certainly well written, with rich references and a comprehensive understanding of the related topics. Through Beiser’s reconstruction of the philosophical controversies, the stiff narratives of the history of philosophy can be softened and refreshed. If the readers themselves are able to incorporate the details provided by the book into the wider historical context and the specific problems in the history of philosophy, the reward can be even bigger.
|
|
|
|
48.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2017 >
Issue: 53
黃文宏
Wen-Hong Huang
On Hung Yao-Shun’s Conception of “Absolute Dialectics of Alethiology”
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
Hung Yao-Shun (1903-1986), one of the major Taiwanese philosophers in the Japanese ruled period, whose research deserves more attention today. My intention in this paper is twofold: First, to clarify some basic concepts of his “absolute dialectics of alethiological dialectics”, and secondly to indicate some possible developments of his logic. The paper is divided into five sections. After a brief introduction to the leading question of my paper (section one), I focus on his main philosophical work “Being and Truth - A Study of Schalwa Nuzubidse’s Alethiology” published in April 1938 (totally 145 pages). Nuzubidse attempts to explicate the traditional metaphysics as an aletheological realism, aiming at the disclosure of the truth-in-itself. Some of the basic concepts of Nuzubidse’s alethiology and Hung’s interpretation are discussed here (sections two, three, four). Through these discussions, we can see that Hung goes deeply into the core of Nuzubidse’s alethiology and radicalizes his alethiological realism step by step to an “Absolute Dialectics of Alethiology”. Finally, Hung’s critique on Nuzubidse is discussed in the last section (section five). Hung’s project remains an unfinished ideal, which makes some of his creative thoughts still obscure. By explicating his concepts and reinforcing his arguments, some of the possible contributions and new perspectives that Hung provided to philosophy will be expounded in this section.
|
|
|
49.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2017 >
Issue: 53
Hsiu-Lin Ku
古秀鈴
論極小命題
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
Can the idea of a minimal proposition be successfully held? I will first formulate what the minimal proposition is in the minimalist’s mind, taking Emma Borg as the representative. What a minimalist seeks for a minimal proposition is the abstract and skeletal core meaning of a sentence, and this faith is founded on the notion of minimal word meaning—an atomic, code-like, conceptual thing. I show that the problem of this notion of minimal proposition lies in the three features, intuitive read-off, invariantness, and truth-evaluability, that Borg ascribes to it. I shall argue, first, that positing a conceptual-like thing as the invariant minimal content of word cannot support the invariantness of the minimal proposition of a sentence, and second, that the skeletal content, as the minimal proposition of a sentence, is a grammatically analyzed product and thus is hardly truth evaluable. According to the analyses, the idea of a minimal proposition with these three features identified by minimalists cannot be maintained.
本文探討極小命題成立與否的基礎。首先,本文將以Emma Borg 為極小主義之代表,釐清極小主義者所謂的極小命題是種語句本身抽象而結構化的核心意義,並被賦予三種特色:直覺的、不變的、有真假可言的。本文論證具有此三種性質的極小命題是難以成立的。首先針對此主張的基礎─字詞本身的極小內容是一種不可再分、密碼般、概念化的對象─本文論證字詞展現在語句中的意義並非如此不變,因此難以支持極小命題的不變性。其次,本文論證,抽象而結構化的極小命題是邏輯分析後的產物,因此難以有真假值可言。
|
|
|
50.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2017 >
Issue: 53
Wim De Reu
魏家豪
論巵言─《莊子》之共存與寫作
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
This article attempts to reframe the state of research on the notion of goblet words (zhiyan) in the Zhuangzi. Recent studies predominantly view the notion of zhiyan as referring to peculiar stylistic forms exhibited in the Zhuangzi—forms such as dilemmatic questions and paradoxes. In this article, I question the quick identification of these forms as zhiyan. I argue that zhiyan are essentially definite yet provisional simple-form utterances located on the level of everyday interaction and coexistence. On this level, the peculiar stylistic forms do not play their part. However, such stylistic forms do become indispensable in discussing and recommending zhiyan. It is on this meta-level—for the Zhuangzi, the level of writing—that we find these forms employed. Based on structural similarities, we may stretch the label ‘zhiyan’ to include such forms but should keep in mind that any such extension is secondary to the use of language in coexisting with others.
本文嘗試重塑有關《莊子》巵言之研究。近年來,學界大多將巵言視為《莊子》中特殊文體形式,如兩難問題及悖論。本文對於是否能輕易地將這些形式視為巵言存疑,進而試圖論證巵言基本上是簡單形式的言辭,其特色為明確但暫時性的,作用於日常互動與共存上。於此層面,特殊文體形式可謂無用武之地;然而,於探討並進而提倡巵言之時,特殊文體形式便成為不可或缺的一環。正是於此後設之層次─就《莊子》而言,則是寫作之層次─我們發現特殊文體形式之運用。基於結構上之相似度,我們或能將此等文體稱為「巵言」,但同時不應忘記,其乃從屬於與他者共存時所運用之語言。
|
|
|
51.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2017 >
Issue: 53
廖育正
Yu-Zheng Liao
Can Zhu Xi’s Theory of Mind Respond to Moral Responsibility?
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
在談論道德責任(moral responsibility)歸屬時,一種常被接受的看法是:某人對某事具有道德責任,若且唯若某人在自由意志下,促使了某事的發生。換句話說,若是人無從避免去做一件道德上應受譴責的事情,則不被歸屬道德責任。而朱熹(1130-1200)以心統性情的義理架構,作為其倫理思想的心性論基礎,這樣的系統究竟能否歸屬道德責任?當代學人對此有許多歧見。他們的意見為何產生衝突?朱子心性論可以回應道德責任歸屬嗎?這是本文意欲探究的重點。本文的結論是:當代學人各條研究進路之糾結,大致可以視為相容論與不相容論之爭的中國式展開;對此大哉問,形上學一日不得解,便一日沒有答案。然而在上述糾結之外,若還有回應問題的空間,或許在於以本體工夫論,兼及體驗論的視野,將心詮釋為性情的突現(emergence),去照應涵養省察、格物致知、克己主敬等思想─進而能將Peter van Inwagen 的話改寫為一種中國式的言說:心性情之間,別有一種神秘的工夫。
A commonly held view concerning moral responsibility is that someone has a moral responsibility for some action if and only if someone makes actions freely. In other words, if someone cannot avoid doing actions to be morally condemned, it is not attributable to moral responsibility. Can Zhu Xi’s theory of mind and ethical thoughts─xin-tong-xing-qing 心統性情─respond to the attribution of moral responsibility? Scholars have different opinions and to what extent their disagreement ranges is the focus of this paper.The conclusion of this paper is that the intertwining of these research approaches can be regarded as philosophical problems of the Chinese style concerning compatibilism and incompatibilism. This problem cannot be solved unless its metaphysical problem is dealt with in the first place. However, in addition to the above solution, perhaps we can see xin 心 as emergence of xing-qing 性情, and imagine a special vision of ontological gong-fu 工夫 and experience, taking care of thoughts like han-yang-xing-cha 涵養省察, ge-wu-zhi-zhi 格物致知, ke-ji-zhu-jing 克己主敬. We then adapt the famous statement of Peter van Inwagen as follows: “there is mysterious gong-fu between xin and xing-qing.”
|
|
|
52.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2016 >
Issue: 52
林宏星
Hong-Xin Lin
Zhuxi on True Knowledge and It’s Motivational Efficacy
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
本文試圖通過對朱子「真知」概念的內容和結構的分析,說明「真知」概念所包含的動機效力,並藉由T. Nagel 的理論,以回應休謨式問題的詰難。對於「知而不能行」之知,朱子認為這種知只是淺知,而真知則必能行。依朱子,一個人在特定情境下對何為最好的知道得越深,他就越可能依其判斷去行動,當一個人之知達到了最高的程度,他便完全會依知而行。這種知(真知)不僅是對所當然之則之知,也是對所以然之理之知,而這種所以然之理原在自家身心上,經由反省體驗而得,因而具有在道德行動中決定如此而不如彼的動機效力
This paper tries to explain the idea of motivational efficacy included in Zhuxi’s concept of “true knowledge” by analyzing the content and structure of this concept, and to face the challenge of the Humean problem through T. Nagel’s theory. For Zhuxi, the knowledge of “knowing without being able to act” (zhi er bu neng xing) is merely knowledge of a shallow kind as the true knowledge will definitely lead to action. In a given situation, the better a man knows what good is, the more likely he acts according to his judgment. When a man’s knowledge reaches the highest degree, he will completely follow it. This kind of knowledge (“true knowledge”) is not only the one that man acts according to what he knows, but also the one that man should do. The latter originates from one’s own mind, and it can be known only through self-reflection by gaining the motivational efficacy determining why a man does this way rather than the other in moral actions.
|
|
|
53.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2016 >
Issue: 52
陳榮華
Wing-Wah Chan
Rorty’s Recontextualization and Gadamer’s Fusion of Horizons
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
本文首先指出,無論羅逖(Rorty)的脈絡重整 (recontextualization) 和高達美(Gadamer)的視域融合 (Horizontverschmelzung, fusion of horizons) 都是思考的過程。雖然它們是兩種不同的理論,但都是獲得知識的方式。然後本文要證成,脈絡重整無法得到實有的知識,也無法完成羅逖的啟發哲學 (edifying philosophy) 的理想,這是說,脈絡重整無法突破已有的哲學典範,創立新的哲學典範,以提出創新的哲學知識。但高達美的視域融合卻可以避免脈絡重整的困難,讓人能理解實有,也可突破而得到創新的知識。因此相對而言,高達美的視域融合是較合理的思考理論。
This essay first shows that the concept of recontextualization in Rorty and the fusion of horizons in Gadamer are ways of thinking through which knowledge is obtained. Then, I argue that recontexuationalization, as a way of thinking in Rorty, fails both in the achievement of knowledge about reality and in the establishment of Rorty’s philosophical ideal: edifying philosophy. The argument implies that the concept of recontextualization is not able to create a new paradigm by breaking the imprisonment of our present paradigm. Nevertheless, as Gadamer’s fusion of horizon avoids the theoretical difficulties existing in Rorty’s concept of recontextualization, it leads us to obtain the knowledge about reality by being able to create new knowledge. Therefore, in comparison with Rorty’s recontextualization, Gadamer’s fusion of horizons is a more satisfactory theory of thinking.
|
|
|
54.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2016 >
Issue: 52
林薰香
Shing-Shang Lin
The Eternity of the Augenblick
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
海德格於《尼采》(1961)以存有理解為基礎接續《存有與時間》對存有和時間的追問,論點則由《存有與時間》存有者的存有、向來屬我性(Jemeinigkeit)的個體性轉向存有者整體(das Seiende im Ganzen)、存有本身,因而出現與前期哲學有所延續卻又不同的關係。透過對尼采永恆輪迴學說與強力意志的詮釋,海德格於《尼采》提出「瞬間的永恆(Ewigkeit des Augenblicks)」。如此意義下的永恆與時間及自身性有關,而且和《存有與時間》的瞬間(Augenblick)概念及自主式的自由具有某種相似性,因此本文以《尼采》為主,並藉助《存有與時間》的相關論述,探討海德格有關瞬間和永恆的概念,以及瞬間、永恆與人的可能關係。
In Nietzsche (1961), Heidegger investigates the questions of being and time based on a common base, Being and Time (Sein und Zeit, 1927), referring to the understanding of being. But his theses shifts from the being of beings and the individual of (in each case) mine (Jemeinigkeit) in Being and Time to the beings on the whole and being as such in Nietzsche.In Nietzsche, Heidegger has a new definition of eternity (the “Now” falling back into the Self), and seeks the eternity of the Augenblick (blink) by ways of interpreting Nietzsche’s concepts of Will to Power and Eternal Return. I argue that the new meaning of eternity which relates to time and the self (Selbst, Selbstheit) is similar to the concept of Augenblick (blink) and autonomic freedom (Freiheit der Selbstständigkeit) in Being and Time. So, mainly based on Nietzsche and with the aid of Being and Time, this paper aims to investigate Heidegger’s concepts of Augenblick and eternity as well as their relation with human beings.
|
|
|
55.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2016 >
Issue: 52
魏嘉華
Chia-Hua Wei
Intentionality Analysis of Ethics
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
郎尼根主張倫理意向性分析顯示出倫理行為是動態的。它包括:實在的知識、價值反省、價值判斷、決定與行動。實在的知識是透過認知理論的應用而達成的。再者,人基於對價值的無私渴求,會繼續追問一個更深的問題:「我應該做什麼?」如此人便進入倫理反省的範圍。在倫理反省中,人透過情感而意識到價值。此外,情感對價值的回應發生在情感視野中,情感視野會對價值範圍建構出一個方向,它會特別影響價值詢問、價值反省、深思熟慮、價值判斷、決定與行動。至於價值反省與價值判斷,通常是習慣性的。當人遇到新情境、新的情感和價值判斷的新問題時,人會啟動價值反省和價值判斷的新過程。倫理反省是可以自我修訂。人根據價值判斷,而作出決定與實踐決定。
Lonergan argues that intentionality analysis shows that ethical behavior is dynamic. It includes knowledge of reality, reflection on value, judgment of value, decision and action. Knowledge of reality is achieved through the application of cognitional theory. In addition, based upon the pure desire for value, human beings continue to ask a further question: “What should I do?”. With this question, human beings enter the realm of ethical reflection. In ethical reflection, human beings become conscious of value through feelings. Moreover, feelings in response to value occur in the horizon of feelings. The horizon of feelings constitutes an orientation toward the realm of value. It especially affects inquiry into value, reflection on value, deliberation, judgment of value, decision and action. Reflection on value and judgment of value are usually habitual. When human beings encounter a new situation with new feelings and new questions of judgement of value, human beings start a new process of reflection on value and judgement of value. Ethical reflection can be self-correcting as human beings make decisions and put them into action based upon their judgments of value.
|
|
|
56.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2016 >
Issue: 52
李雨鍾
Yu-Zhong Li
The Confliction between “Emptiness” and “Qi”, along with the Problem of Moral Practice
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
熊十力是現代新儒家中極具影響力,也極富爭議性的人物,本文則嘗試透過圍繞在其身上的爭議性話題,進一步探入其背後所關涉到儒佛之爭及道德實踐問題。本文首先對照分析熊氏《新唯識論》(語體文本)中「心-境」結構和宇宙論架構之間的深層關係,進而揭示出其背後所隱含的「空」與「氣」之爭,前者乃是熊氏有取於大乘佛學(尤其是空宗)之處,後者則是熊氏獨尊的儒家(易學)思想系統所牽動的隱藏性線索;本文試圖表明,熊氏對佛家「空」的觀念的吸納,實際上引發了儒學系統中「氣」之坐標的移動與重置,而「氣」及其背後支撐起的實存性體驗又影響了熊氏思想中「空」的形態。藉由「空」與「氣」之間共生而衝突的張力,我們一方面將得以一窺形塑熊氏思想形態的獨特因素,另一方面則可以進一步追問其背後所反映出的,熊氏在儒家「仁心」與佛家「悲心」之間的倫理抉擇,並重新思考此二家在道德實踐問題上各自的利弊得失,由此我們方能真切體會到熊氏由佛轉儒背後的道德關懷與深刻用心,而其中所呈現出的問題結構至今仍值得深思。
Xiong Shili is one of the most influential and controversial philosophers in the modern neo-Confucianism. The paper, starting from the controversial topics haunted Xiong, tries to explore the practical base of morality behind them. Firstly, we compare the “mind-condition” structure and the cosmological structure and by this comparison a conflict hidden behind them is thus revealed as between “emptiness” and “qi”. The former is what Xiong borrows from Mahayana Buddhism, and the latter is derived from the Confucianism tradition that Xiong especially appreciates. As a matter of fact, Xiong’s absorption of the concept of “emptiness” leads to the resetting of the position of “qi” in Confucianism, and the substantial experience supported by “qi” in turn has influences on the formation of “emptiness” in Xiong’s thought. By holding the tension between “emptiness” and “qi”, we can further reveal Xiong’s ethical choice between the “ren” of Confucianism and the “karunā” of Buddhism, by which we are finally able to make tangible the profound moral concerns behind Xiong’s turning from Buddhism to Confucianism.
|
|
|
|
57.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2016 >
Issue: 51
洪巳軒
Szu-Hsuan Hung
On the Consolidation of Political Power from the “Man-Made Shi” in Hanfeizi
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
如果政治權力是一種命令者有意圖的以各種方式促使他人服從其對於 有價值之資源的支配性分配活動,那麼如何建立政治的權力關係就成為最關 鍵的焦點。《韓非子》認為道德性的權力關係在理論上雖然可能卻不可行,是以主張透過法令的制定以作為權力的形式要件。並以賞、罰為政治權力的 實質要件,在以人情好利惡害為理論基礎下,透過權力者於發布命令時所挾 帶的教育、經濟與武力之優勢資源,認定權力對象會選擇放棄抵抗而採取服 從行為,權力關係由是建立。
Political power can be defined as “what the commanders purposefully do, by all means, to acquire public obedience to their allocation of resources.” Hanfeizi claims that a morality-based power relationship is theoretically possible, but not actually feasible. Instead, laws should be the core in a political power relationship. More specifically, by assuming that human beings are benefit-oriented and harm-aversive, commanders should make orders based on their advantages in education, economic status, and military power to punish and reward people. These orders will eventually replace resistance with obedience and construct a political power relationship.
|
|
|
|
58.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2016 >
Issue: 51
鄧敦民
Duen-Min Deng
A Critical Comparison of Natural Deduction Systems
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
自然演繹法(natural deduction)是大多數基礎邏輯課程中所教的證明 系統,然而不同的教科書所採用的自然演繹法系統不盡相同,造成了教學與 學習上的困擾。特別是在量詞推論規則上,我們有兩套完全不同的系統。其 中一個系統(本文稱之為「Gentzen 系統」)使用了一條看起來較為複雜的 「存在個例化規則」(existential instantiation),而另一個系統(本文稱之為 「Copi-Kahane 系統」),則是用了一條看起來較為簡單的存在個例化規則。 雖然目前大部分中文邏輯教科書都採用了「Copi-Kahane 系統」的規則,然 而也有少數中英文基礎邏輯或中階邏輯教科書是採用「Gentzen 系統」。這造 成了教學上的一些問題,例如它也許會造成基礎邏輯與中階邏輯課程銜接上 的一些難度。在本文中,我將從邏輯教學的觀點來比較「Gentzen 系統」與 「Copi-Kahane 系統」的優劣,並對於我們應該採用哪一個系統來教學提出 我的建議。
Natural deduction is the logical system most commonly used in teaching elementary logic. However, different textbooks may adopt different versions of the natural deduction system, which can be quite annoying to many teachers and students of logic. More precisely, with regard to the inference rules for quantifiers, there are two completely different systems of natural deduction. One system (which I shall call the “Gentzen system”) has a rule of “existential instantiation” that looks pretty complicated, whilst the other system (which I shall call the “Copi-Kahane system”) has a much simpler rule for existential instantiation. Although most of the Chinese textbooks for elementary logic use the rules of the Copi-Kahane system, there are still some textbooks for elementary logic or intermediate logic which use the Gentzen system. This leads to some problems especially in teaching logic, as students may find it somehow difficult to learn intermediate logic (which usually use the Gentzen system) if what they learn in elementary logic is the Copi-Kahane system. In this paper, I shall critically compare the Gentzen system with the Copi-Kahane system to judge which one is better for teachingelementary logic.
|
|
|
|
59.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2016 >
Issue: 51
韓曉華
Hiu-Wah Hon
Mou Zong-san on Philosophical Language
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
本文認為牟宗三先生重新翻譯維特根什坦的《名理論》之目的,固然 是吸納與消化萊布尼茲與羅素等的邏輯分析一套之思考於其《認識心之判批》 內,即對邏輯系統作出重新之疏解。然而,牟宗三先生以「分解地說」與「非 分解地說」來重新釐定維氏的「可說」與「不可說」,則表達了他對「哲學 語言」的理解。此「哲學語言」的理解至少具有兩重意義:一是牟宗三先生 所論「哲學」之可能根據;二是牟宗三先生以其獨特的「哲學語言」觀對 經典詮釋方案的可能依據。依此,梳理牟宗三先生的「哲學語言」觀,即具 有能理解牟宗三先生哲學思想的兩大重要工作(哲學思想和哲學詮釋)的 意義。
This paper argues that the purpose of Mou Zong-san’s retranslation of Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus is to incorporate Leibniz and Russell’s thoughts of logical analysis into his A Critique of the Cognitive Mind. In order to succeed, Mou held the distinction between “discriminating speech” and “undiscriminating speech” to express his view of “philosophical language” which has at least two meanings: First, the “philosophy” that Mou argues is based on this view. Second, Mou’s unique view of “philosophical language” is likely to be a basis of his interpretation of the classics. Therefore, clarifying Mou’s view of “philosophical language” will significantly enable us to understand the two crucial tasks (philosophical thinking and philosophical interpretations) of Mou’s philosophy.
|
|
|
|
60.
|
NTU Philosophical Review:
Year >
2015 >
Issue: 50
傅皓政
Hao-Cheng Fu
On Deprivation Account of Death
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
| cited by
伊比鳩魯在〈給美諾西厄斯的信〉中提到死亡本身其實並沒有什麼,所 以根本無需懼怕,我認為在他的論證中潛藏三個非常重要的預設:(1)快樂 主義;(2)物理主義以及(3)存在要求。表面上看起來,伊比鳩魯的論證 似乎是成立的,由於人死亡之後就沒有任何感覺,也就不會有任何快樂或痛 苦的感受,所以,對死亡者本身而言,他顯然無法評斷死亡這個事件對自己 而言到底是好或不好。然而,沒有實際感覺到某個事件所帶來的痛苦經驗,對某人而言就沒有好或不好的評價嗎?事實不然。我在本篇論文中將試圖透 過剝奪說證明即使某人無法實際感受到某個事件對他而言是快樂或痛苦,該 事件對其本身而言是好或不好仍然是可以評價的,並且透過價值比較理論證成對某人而言,即使他沒有實際感受到該事件帶來的痛苦,我們仍然會同意 該事件對他而言確實造成傷害的論題。因此,伊比鳩魯認為死亡並沒有什麼 的論證並不成立。
In Letter to Menoeceus, Epicurus contended that death is nothing to us since it is the deprivation of all sensations. I find that his argument implies at least three assumptions, which are hedonism, physicalism and existence requirement. At first glance, Epicurus’ argument seemed to be acceptable due to one is deprived all his sensations and unable to estimate whether death is good or bad for him when death comes. So, it is concluded that death is nothing to us. However, the question follows: is something really not bad for a person if one has no capacity to acquire the unpleasant experiences? I must say that the answer is ‘No’. In this essay, I will argue that something is bad for the people even they don’t have any unpleasant experience and most of us will agree that he is indeed harmed by the lack of pleasant experiences. Thus, Epicurus’ argument is implausible because the strong version of existence requirement is not justified.
|
|
|