嵇康的思維方式與魏晉玄學

Chi Kang's Way of Thinking and "Wei-chin-hsüan-hsüeh"

岑溢成(Sham Yat Shing)

《鵝湖學誌》 9期 (1992/12) Pp. 27-54

https://doi.org/10.29653/LS.199212.0002

摘要

哲學史家在標示魏晉玄學的特色，以至爲魏晉玄學作分派與分期時，大都以多數魏晉思想家所討論的核心課題，即存有論的「有」與「無」問題爲基礎。其他的特色，如思想立場從儒家轉向道家，思想及論辯採取高度抽象的「辨名析理」的方式等，無不由這種基礎特色推繹出來。嵇康公認是魏晉玄學的重要人物之一。但他的作品則全與「有」、「無」問題沒有明顯的關聯。這對於嵇康在魏晉玄學中的地位之釐定，對於嵇康思想的系統性詮釋，都引生了困難和爭論。在本文之中，我們將提出「受用」和「講論」的區分，指出哲學史家們一般的做法只強調了思想的理論性的「講論」一面，忽略了實踐性的「受用」一面。爲了消釋有關他在魏晉玄學中地位的爭論和對於他的思想系統在詮釋上的困難，我們將採取一種不同的詮釋策略，以嵇康思維方式的特色爲基本的著眼點，通過對幾篇嵇康比較不受重視的論文的分析，展示嵇康在「辨名析理」上的獨特表現，並且把這種獨特的表現解釋爲嵇康並非在「講論」而是在「受用」《莊子》思想的結果。

關鍵字

嵇康 ； 魏晉玄學 ； 思維方式 ； 辨名析理 ； 受用 ； 講論 ； 詮釋策略

並列摘要

The characterization of wei-chin-hsüan-hsüeh by most historians of Chinese philosophy is based on the theme discussed nearly by all philosophers in the Wei and Chin dynesties, i.e., the ontological problem of ”being” and ”nothing”. All other characterizations of this trend of thought, such as the inclination of the philosophical position from Confucianism to Taoism, the highly abstract philosophical method of conceptual analysis, are unexceptionally derived from this cord characteristic. Naturally, this characteristic is applied by the historians to the demarcation of different schools and different periods of wei-chin-hsüan-hsüeh. Chi Kang is uncontroversially one of the most important figures of wei-chin-hsüan-hsüeh. Strangely, none of his writings has explicit relevance to the very theme of ”being” and ”nothing”. This gives nise to the diversity of explanations of his appropriate position in wei-chin-hsüan-hsüeh and the difficulty of a consistent and significant interpretation of his thought. In this paper, the distinction of ”entertainment” and ”discourse” will be introduced to show that this com mom characterization has overemphasized the theoretic ”discourse” side, but negelected the practical ”entertainment” side of Chinese philosophy. We will assume the strategy of interpretation by analysing some of Chi Kang's minor essays,-which are believed to be insignificant and mututally irrelevant in content but are consistent in its conceptual analysis, and its deconstructive style of argumentation. We explain this as Chi Kang's ”entertainment”, not ”discourse” of Chuang Tzu's thought. From such an explanation, we will obtain a key for a consistent and significant interpretation of Chi Kang's thought and a more appropriate determination of his position in wei-chin-hsüan-hsüeh.

並列關鍵字

Chi Kang ； whi-chin-hsüan-hsüeh ； way of thinking ； conceptual analysis ； entertainment ； discourse ； strategy of interpretation

參考文獻

王葆玹(1987)。正始玄學。

田文棠(1988)。魏晉三大思潮論稿。

任繼愈(1988)。中國哲學發展史（3）。

牟宗三(1970)。才性與玄理。

何啟民(1976)。竹林七賢研究。