牟宗三先生蕺山學之探討－以〈對於評斥朱子理氣為二者之衡定〉一文為核心

Exploration on Mou Tsung-San's Ji Shan Theory-Focusing on the Article "Review on the Criticism of Chu Hsi Li Chi as Binary"

蔡家和(Chia-He Tsai)

《哲學與文化》 37卷5期 (2010/05) Pp. 65-84

https://doi.org/10.7065/MRPC.201005.0065

摘要

本文乃基於牟先生批評蕺山對於朱子學的理解有誤，而吾人則對牟先生此文做進一步的討論。其中主要涉及到朱子學理氣二元之區分是否有問題？蕺山批評此超越的區分，其道德理想性是否因而喪失而流為下墮的學問？吾人並對理與氣的重要性、優先性做一解釋，討論理是否只是氣的謂詞？理與氣何者為實、何者為名？究是朱子學或蕺山學較能合於先秦儒者之原意？及牟先生對於蕺山思想是否有其相應之理解？

關鍵字

理 ； 氣 ； 喜怒哀樂 ； 超越的分解 ； 二元

並列摘要

This article explores Mr. Mou's criticism on Ji Shan's inaccurate understanding on Chu Hsi theory. It studyies Mr. Mou' article and develops the second introduction, with main concern on whether the division of Li Chi binary of Chu His theory is inaccurate. Does Ji Shan's criticism on the transcendent division become declining study because of losing the idealism? We further elaborate the importance and priority of Li and Chi and discuss if Li is simply the predicate of Chi. With regard to Li and Chi, which is the reality and which is the name? Does Chu Hsi theory or Ji Shan Theory meet the original intention of the Confucianists of Chin Dynasty? Does Mr. Mou have the corresponding understanding on Ji Shan's thoughts?

並列關鍵字

Li ； Chi ； Joy ； Anger ； Sorrow and Happiness ； Transcendent Division ； Binary

參考文獻

朱子(1972)。易本義。台北:世界書局。

唐君毅(1984)。中國哲學原論·原教篇。台北:學生書局。

羅整菴(1990)。困知記。北京:中華書局。

唐君毅(1990)。哲學論集。台北:學生書局。

馮友蘭(1991)。中國哲學史新編。台北:藍燈文化事業公司。