- 期刊
義務論與德行倫理學對比分析下的朱子心統性情說
On Zhu Xi's Xin Tong Xing Qing from The Contradistinctive Analysis of Deontology and Virtue Ethics
摘要
從比較哲學的視野觀察當代臺灣的儒家倫理學研究，大致發展出兩條可觀的路徑：其一為義務論倫理學的深化與轉向，援引羅爾斯、哈伯馬斯與柯思嘉，進行規範性的理由轉向；其二為跟隨德行倫理學的當代復興，援引余紀元、麥金泰爾、安靖如與斯洛德，從事德行的轉向。本文分析朱子的心統性情說既論述「心之本體」、「心具萬理」，嚴守「義利之辨」與「理欲之辨」，提出「仁」、「義」、「禮」、「智」道德法則；卻又嚮往聖賢氣象。朱子主張「心」主宰「性」、「情」兩面，「心」內含「志」、「意」、「才」、外涉「感」、「應」、「形」。本文嘗試透過義務論與德行倫理學兩者所具有道德特質的對比分析，進而分析朱子的心統性情說在現代道德哲學的討論中，具有哪些義務論或德行倫理學的道德特質？亦即朱子的道德思考是否建立在道德法則的普遍規範、道德理想的目標設定、道德動機的內在要求、道德情感的實質參與或道德情境的具體考量？
並列摘要
Observing contemporary Taiwan Confucian ethics research from the perspective of comparative philosophy, it has roughly developed two considerable paths: one is the deepening and turning of deontology, citing John Rawls, Jürgen Habermas, and Christine Korsgaard for normative; The second path is to follow the contemporary revival of virtue ethics, citing Yu Jiyuan, MacIntyre, Stephen Angle, and Michael Slote to engage in the transformation of virtue. This article analyzes Zhu Xi's theory of ＂heartmind unites nature and emotion (Xin Tong Xing Qing心統性情)＂, which not only discusses the ＂inherent reality of the heartmind (Xin Zhi Benti心之本體)＂ and ＂heartmind possess various principles (Xin Ju Wan Li心具萬理)＂ strictly adheres to ＂distinguish between righteousness and personal benefits (yi li zhi bien義利之辨)＂ and ＂distinguish between rationality and desires (li yu zhi bien理欲之辨)＂, and proposes the moral laws, ＂such as benevolence (ren仁)＂, ＂righteousness (yi義)＂, ＂ritural (li禮)＂ and ＂Wisdom (zhi智)＂; but also yearning for being the sage and the virtuous. Zhu Xi advocates that the heartmind dominates the two sides of＂nature (xing性)＂ and ＂emotion (qing情)＂, and the heartmind contains the functions of ＂commitment (zhi志)＂, ＂intentions (yi意)＂ and ＂endowment (cai才)＂; be implicated in ＂feel (gan感)＂, ＂respond (ying應)＂ and ＂shape (xing形)＂. This article attempts to contrast the moral characteristics of deontology and virtue ethics, and then analyzes the moral characteristics of Zhu Xi's ＂Xin Tong Xingqing＂. In other words, is Zhu Xi's moral thinking based on the universal norms of moral laws, the goal setting of moral ideals, the inherent requirements of moral motivation, the substantial participation of moral emotions, or specific considerations of moral situations?