透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.215.16.238
  • Journals

Evaluating James Legge's (1812-1897) Assessment of Master Mèng's Theory of the Goodness of Human Nature: Comparative Philosophical and Cultural Explorations

評價理雅各對孟子性善論之評估

Abstracts


暸解理雅各對孟子人性論之翻譯、詮釋與評估的性質與正當性,要比過去一般所認定或宣稱的更為複雜。其中牽涉到的詮釋學、比較哲學和比較宗教的元素,是評價理雅各譯文的人很少處裡的部分。文的說明理雅各如何以多面向的層次來詮釋他個人〈孟子〉譯本中之「性善」。這些面向包括他對「善」不同的翻譯,以及他大篇幅介紹性文章與譯文。其中諸多細節可以說明理雅各為何選擇把「性善」一詞譯為「人性的善良傾向」。本文同時概略說明,就約瑟夫.巴特勒(Joseph Butler) 及孟子對人性的闡述進行比較哲學分析後,他得出了哪些結論。此外本文也從理雅各自己新教異議者的神學研究中,揭示他為何支持以這種方式來詮釋孟子的人性論。此外,理雅各就孟子的性格與學說的某些相關層面所提出的比較哲學及宗教問題,顯示在這些領域上,他青睞孔子甚於孟子。

Keywords

理雅各 孟子 約瑟夫.巴特勒 韓愈 人性 性善

Parallel abstracts


Understanding the character and justifications of James Legge's (理雅各, 1815-1897) translations, interpretations and assessments of Master Mèng's 孟子account of human nature is a more complex matter than has been normally assumed or claimed. It involves hermeneutic, comparative philosophical and comparative religious elements which are rarely addressed by those who evaluate Legge's translation. This article explains the multi -dimensional layers of Legge's interpretation of the ”goodness of human nature” with The Mencius (first edition 1861, second edition 1893) within his Chinese Classics. These include his various translations of shàn 善as well as his extensive introductory essays and translations. Details found in these places help to explain why Legge chose to render the phrase xìng shàn 性善的 ”the tendency of [human] nature to good.” It also provides a summary of his conclusions from a comparative philosophical analysis of Joseph Butler's and Master Mèng's accounts of human nature. Another insight reveals why Legge supported this interpretation of Master Mèng's teaching on human nature from his own Protestant Dissenter theological studies. Added to this are comparative philosophical and religious questions raised by Legge regarding certain related aspects of the character and teachings of Master Mèng, indicating shy he preferred the character and teachings of Master Kŏng 孔子over Master Mèng in these realms.

References


王東波(2012)。理雅各對中國文化的尊重與包容:從「譯名之爭」到中國經典翻譯。民俗研究。2012(1),44-49。
王輝(2008)。理雅各的《中庸》譯本與傳教士東方主義。孔子研究。2008(5),103-114。
王輝(2007)。理雅各的儒教一神論。世界宗教研究。2007(2),134-143。
劉家和(2005)。史學,經學與思想:在世界史背景下對於中國古代歷史文化的思考。北京:北京師範大學出版社。
餘樹蘋(2012)。「不誠」之「誠」:由理雅各對孔子的質疑所引起的「誠」問題討論。廣東社會科學。2012(2),73-77。

Cited by


陳韋縉(2010)。西文參考資料對理雅各英譯《詩經》之影響研究〔碩士論文,國立清華大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6843/NTHU.2010.00152
游鎮壕(2014)。王韜《毛詩集釋》引陳奐《詩毛氏傳疏》研究〔碩士論文,國立臺北大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0023-2811201414225755

Read-around


  • 曾昭旭(1978)。孟子論不善之起源鵝湖月刊(40),35-38。https://doi.org/10.29652/LM.197810.0008
  • 許宗興(2005)。“孟子性善論”解析華梵人文學報(4),31-71。https://doi.org/10.29930/HJH.200501.0002
  • 鄧瑞卿(2015)。論《孟子》人性論及其現代意義衍學集(7),134-150。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=P20120906001-201501-201507020012-201507020012-134-150
  • 李楚桑(2022)。論孟子、墨子義內義外之辨鵝湖月刊(566),42-51。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=18133738-202208-202211160011-202211160011-42-51
  • 蔡育芳(2008)。錢穆對《孟子》「性善說」之詮釋屏東教育大學學報-人文社會類(30),63-84。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=P20161013001-200803-201610200023-201610200023-63-84