(thematized) 7 (0) () 脉

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "(thematized) 7 (0) () 8 00 8-00 00 8-0 0-08 7 00 - 脉 000 7 7 7 8-7 87-007 8 80-288-"

皮步
7 years ago
Views:

1 良知與知覺析論羅整菴與歐陽南野的論辯一論辯的緣起經過與雙方的前見 (NSC7-0-H MY) 0 (0) (8) (0) -287-

2 (thematized) 7 (0) () 脉

3 () 8 10 () 袠

4 (prejudices) 覩 -290-

5 18 19 着

6 二羅整菴駁斥良知即天理而主張良知即知覺而非天理的論據 ( 一 ) 良知即知覺 (homogeneous) (heterogeneous) 輙輙

7 (Vorstellungskraft, faculty of representation) 26 perception

8 ( 二 ) 良知非天理却 (dualism) -294-

9 輙

10 (substance) (reality) (reality) reality (moral creative reality) 87 (substance) (accident) (reality) (nothing) (reality)

11 却 36 ( 三 ) 天地萬物無良知

12 37 (reality)

13 着 39 ( 四 ) 致知易簡, 忽略格物工夫 40 迹礲

14 却

15 三歐陽南野申明良知即天理而非知覺的論據 ( 一 ) 良知非知覺

16 48 49 (0-) (Immanuel Kant, 7-80) (intellectual intuition)

17 51 52 却

19 ( 二 ) 良知即天理

21 ( 三 ) 天地萬物皆有良知

22 64 却却

23 ( 四 ) 格物致知是本領工夫 66 礲礲

24 68 四良知與知覺之辯的哲學意義

25 73 74 (-) b-7a 서울 문석 윤 조선 후기의 주요 논쟁과 갱검 한국국학진흥원 국학연구실 Ⅲ 안동 한국국학진흥원 의 철학과 조선학자들의 논변

28 良知與知覺析論羅整菴與歐陽南野的論辯 -7 - 關鍵詞 : 羅整菴歐陽南野良知知覺天理 -314-

29 Liangzhi and Zhijue: An Analysis of the Debate between Luo Zhengan and Ouyang Nanye LIN Yueh-hui This paper examines the important debate conducted by Luo Zhengan ( ), a master of the Zhu Xi school, and Ouyang Nanye ( ), a scholar of the (Wang) Yang-Ming school, during the Ming dynasty. Luo and Ouyang debated on the ideas of liangzhi (original knowing) and zhijue (the faculty of representation), which also implicated theoretical differences between the Zhu Xi and Yang-Ming schools of Neo-Confucianism. Luo, closely following the theoretical structure of Zhu Xi s idea of xinxing (mind-nature), made a rigid distinction between mind and nature. He interpreted Yang-ming s liangzhi in terms of zhijue, identified Yang-ming s liangzhi being tianli (the heavenly principle) with treating zhijue as nature, and argued vehemently that liangzhi and tianli are far from one and the same thing. In contrast, Ouyang was well-versed in Yang-ming s dialectical thinking that both substance and function come from the same source. By clarifying the relationship of liangzhi and zhijue being inseparable and immiscible, he was opposed to treating zhijue as liangzhi. Liangzhi and tianli are one and the same thing, Ouyang contended. As a result, we have found in the debate two contradictions. One concerns the relationship between liangzhi and tianli; that is, Luo s liangzhi and tianli being far from one and the same thing contradicts Ouyang s liangzhi and tianli being one and the same thing. The other contradiction resides in what underlies the above two propositions. Justifying their respective positions regarding liangzhi and tianli, Luo appealed to identifying liangzhi with zhijue, and Ouyang denied liangzhi being zhijue. This paper intends to fulfill three objectives: First, to disclose the theoretical presuppositions of the Zhu Xi and Yang-Ming schools; secondly, to indicate the fundamental differences in understanding the subject (whether mind being zhijue or liangzhi) and the ontological substance (tianli) between Zhu Xi and Yang-Ming schools; thirdly, to suggest that, in the context of either the history of Chinese philosophy or East Asian Confucianism, this debate on liangzhi and zhijue is a philosophical topic rich in contents and worthy of more attention. Keywords: Luo Zhengan Ouyang Nanye liangzhi (original knowing) zhijue (faculty of representation) tianli (heavenly principle) -315-

30 徵引書目

31 문석윤 조선 후기의 주요 논쟁과 갱검 한국국학진흥원 국학연구실 안동 한국국학진흥원 00 서울 8 의 철학과 조선학자들의 논변 -317-

4 5 (R. Rorty) (Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature) (normal) (system) (abnormal) (incommensurability) (edification, Bildung) 6 (Gadamer) (therapeutic

2014 9 95 119 陸象山學問的詮釋學性格一象山的學問風格 1139-1193 1 2 3 (NSC98-2410-H-001-043- MY2) 1 1992 7 245 2 40 1541 92 3 2008 34 410-95- 4 5 (R. Rorty) (Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature) (normal)