摘要
本文所探討之論點有二：其一，電影《英雄》之「天下」；其二，中國儒、道思想之「天下」。 戰國時代教崩壤，群雄爭霸，法家思想占優勢，秦王以武力征服天下，被推為英雄，當之無愧。本論文則以起於同時期，並影響中國政治、學術數千年之儒、道思想論電影《英雄》。則電影《英雄》之道德內涵既薄弱，思想亦虜淺。中國自古以來，歷代君王均推崇智慧、善意等仁德。秦王在《英雄》中，被塑造成英雄，由情節顯示，犧牲人民，大興戰爭，乃為了實現天下一統之必要，其惡行與儒、道思想崇尚仁愛和平，大相逕庭。 亞里斯多德有三個辯論層次：道德情操（智慧、美德、善意）、感性（訴諸情感）及邏輯（推理），電影《英雄》企圖以同樣的辯論層次來鋪敘刺殺秦王之不可行、企圖說服觀眾唯有犧牲小國小民，方能成就天下一統之英雄大業。本文之所以論辯《英雄》中的秦王不符合英雄資格，原因在於《英雄》的辯論層次雖然似乎充滿道德情操、感性及邏輯推理，卻看重武力強取、對小國人民缺乏仁德。 小國人民，自始至終難以接受天下一統之必要性。尤其不能亦不願相信，下令萬箭齊發射向小國小民的秦王，是心懷好意，更遑論承忍他為小國小民之英雄。
並列摘要
This paper tries to elaborate the rhetoric differences concerning all under heaven (天下)between the two sides, the story teller of the movie, Hero, and the Chinese who adores wisdom, virtue, and goodwill. The ”Hero” uses wars in his realization of the unification of all under heaven; the mist (儒家) and daoist (道家), on the other hand, value love and peace. As the movie reveals, the king of Qin is a hero because of the Enthymeme-unification of all under heaven (天下). In order to persuade the audience, the Hero movie tries to embody all three of Aristotle's differentia of persuasion-s-ethos (practical wisdom, virtue, and goodwill), pathos (emotional appeal), and logos (reasoning). However, it is argued that the king is not qualified as a hero because of his missing virtue, lack of wisdom, and good will. In conclusion, the rhetoric of Hero is superficial in that the ”hero” has nothing to say except for unification of all under the heaven, and is without moral substance because there's no good will toward its targeted audience.