「『親民』『新民』之議」與儒學方法論的審思

The Methodological Concerns of Confucianism on the Controversy of ＂Hsin＂ and ＂Chin＂

苑舉正(Jeu-Jenq Yuann)

《哲學與文化》 42卷9期 (2015/09) Pp. 5-20

摘要

中國哲學在21世紀受到全球矚目的事實，讓中外許多學者開始思考如何振興中國哲學。本文的主要目的即在於從科學方法論的視野，支持中國哲學的發展，但策略上應以兼顧中國思想的特殊性以及普遍性為主。這是一個深具前瞻性的目的，因為環視21世紀的全球化發展中，若是中國哲學僅企圖維持一門「在地學問」（a local learning）的話，那麼它的價值只是特殊文化之例證，無法促進知識之進步。為求達成中國哲學普遍性的目標，本文運用科學方法論之討論作為論證之核心。科學方法論從研究的方法著眼，讓一門學術活動符合科學的規範。在這個訴求上，上個世紀七○年代介於孔恩（T. Kuhn）與波普（K. Popper）之間，有關於科學歷史之典範論（theory of paradigm）以及科學哲學之否證論之爭議，適足以為我們提供一個思考的方向。同時，我們在本文中，將透過中國哲學中有關鍵意義的「親新」之議作為一個分析的例證，說明此議適足以為詮釋古代經典帶來現代意涵。最後，在賦予中國哲學現代意涵的企圖中，本文引用列維納斯（Emmanuel Levinas）詮釋〈塔穆德〉經典的例證，再次說明發展中國哲學的願景。列維納斯那種以去除神話為本，以倫理討論為根，並鼓勵所有人以問答方式參與討論的研究態度，為猶太人經典之詮釋，奠下發展成為普世哲學的基本精神。中國哲學之發展應以此為例，轉換成為追求現代性的學問。

關鍵字

《大學》 ； 親新之議 ； 孔恩 ； 波普 ； 列維納斯

並列摘要

The fact that the Chinese philosophy is becoming more and more prominent makes a lot of scholars start to resuscitate it. The purpose of this paper intends to look at this fact from a methodological point of view. We support the resuscitation, but we also think strategically we should examine things in perspectives by taking into account both the particularity and universality of the Chinese philosophy. Without doing this, the Chinese philosophy remains a subject of local learning which cannot exert its utility of promoting the progress of world learning. For this reason, the paper's focus will be on methodological arguments in order to achieve the far-reaching goal of making the study of Chinese philosophy a scientific subject. We therefore take the example of the debates between T. Kuhn and K. Popper in 1970s to demonstrate a new approach concerning our objective. Kuhn's theory of paradigms and Popper's theory of falsification offer us two approaches of thinking how to make the study of Chinese philosophy transform itself and become scientific. To this regard, the historical debates between ＂Chin＂ (親) and ＂Hsin＂ (新) exemplify a concrete instance for us to understand how to bring modern interpretation to the understanding of a piece of ancient texts. Finally, this paper takes E. Levinas' interpretation of Talmud as a model to manifest what we are likely to do in interpreting ancient texts. Levinas' methods of demythologization, of ethical basis and of encouraging debates are efficient ways of shifting the reception of the Jewish Talmud to its modern version of far-reaching philosophy. We at end of this paper conclude that the study of Chinese philosophy should follow this methodological track in order to make it a new subject of the modern age.

並列關鍵字

Dai Hsu (The Great Learning) ； ＂Hsin＂ and ＂Chin＂ ； T. Kuhn,K. Popper ； E. Levinas

參考文獻

王陽明(2012)。傳習錄。臺北:國立臺灣師範大學出版中心。

朱熹(1983)。四書集注。臺北:漢京文化事業有限公司。

牟宗三(1983)。中國哲學十九講。臺北:臺灣學生書局。

杜保瑞(2013)。中國哲學方法論。臺北:商務印書館。

苑舉正(2012)。庫恩《科學革命的結構》之半世紀回顧論。科學文化評論。9(4)，5-23。