鼎革之際的船山義理學

Chuan-Shan Confucian philosophy in the “Era of Change”

曾文瑩(Wen-yin Tsen)

指導教授 ： 曾昭旭

國立中央大學/文學院/中國文學系/博士(2008年)

摘要

本論文所謂的「鼎革之際」，在時間上指十七世紀船山所處的年代而言，此一時期學界多以「明末清初」或「明清之際」稱之。本文所以特名之為「鼎革之際」，乃為突顯全面性之推故致新、革故鼎新的時代特性，以及船山天人義理學在此變動與轉型的時代中，所特具的開新與啟蒙意義。學者對此一時期的學術定位看法分歧，明清之際的儒者在鼎革之際是否有突破傳統思惟的原創性思考，回應時代問題，並賦予儒學新的內容與意義，此一探討饒富意義。
　　船山堪為明清之際的大儒，他以「別開生面」的方式接續儒學發展的自我定位十分明確。通過對當代船山學研究的梳理，本文提出以下有關「天人之學」的詮釋差異，藉由此中之意義落差所豁顯的問題，在正文中逐一討論：一、船山所論之「氣」是豐厚盛美、一體流行的道德世界，還是豐富多樣的物質存在？這關乎船山掌握的儒學內容為何？二、以船山「天人關係論」為焦點，說明船山對「天道」之「必然」與「主體」之「自由」二領域何以能並立不礙，如何說明？其論既與「理學」或「心學」有所不同，亦與「氣學本色派」有異而不能納入此類氣學系譜，那麼其人之學在儒學發展中應如何定位？三、以船山的「理欲觀」為切入點，闡明船山對「情、才、欲」的新看法十分符合近代人士對個人解放的訴求，而於近現代思想的發展有獨特的價值與意義。
　　有關船山論氣之觀念地位、天人性命之關係、理欲之關係等三大問題的實義，乃船山「天人之學」的骨幹，也是本文的主體所在，在船山「天人之學」的研究基礎上，吾人闡論其學所蘊蓄的思想活力，與其自出機杼的「天人之學」在鼎革之際所創造出的樞紐意義與啟蒙價值。

關鍵字

船山 ； 船山學 ； 明清之際 ； 即氣言體 ； 天人之學 ； 理欲合一

並列摘要

The “Era of Change” mentioned in this thesis means the time of period around seventeenth century, which is the era that Chuan-Shan lived. The academic circle in that time, we called it “End of Ming Dynasty, begin of Ching Dynasty” or “During the Ming and Ching Dynasty”. The reason to name this thesis “Era of Change” is to emphasis the character of era, which was totally changed from the old to new and to discard the old ways of life in favor of the new. In this changing and transforming era, the Chuan Shan’s “Heaven-Man Theory” has innovate and the initiate meaning especially. Scholars has different views to the academic position in this particular period. Have the Confucianism scholars during the Ming and Ching Dynasty had the break through thinking from the traditional ideas, responded the problems of that era, and give Confucianism with new contents and meanings? These are the questions worth discussion.
　　Chuan Shan is one of the most important Confucianism scholars in the time during the Ming and Ching Dynasty; he is clearly self-positioned at implement the “Entirely new” way to continue the developed of Confucianism. Through smooth flowing the Chuan Shan philosophy by the recent research, this thesis will discuss about the problems raised by the different interpretation of the “Heaven-Man Theory:
1. The “Chi” that Chuan Shan mentioned about was means rich and beautiful, moral world exist as a whole, or full of various material existences? What is this going to do with the Confucianism content that Chuan Shan controlling?
2. Focus on Chuan Shan’s “Heaven-Man relationship theory”, how to illustrate why Chuan Shan could emphasis on territories of both “Inevitability” of “Tian Dao” (Noumenon ) and “Freedom” of “Main body”? This theory is different from the “Principle theory” and “Heart theory”, it is also different from the “Classical Chi Theory”, so can not categorize into Chi philosophy pedigree. Therefore, how to position his theory in the Confucianism development?
3. Use Chuan Shan’s “View of principle and desire” as cutting point, explain that Chuan Shan’s point of view to “emotion, talent, and desire” is cohere with the modern people resort to personal emancipation. Therefore, what is the unique value and meaning of this theory to the modern thinking development?
The actual meanings of the three main problems - Chuan Shan’s concept position of “Chi” discussion, the relationship between Heaven-Man and the relationship of principle and desire - are the back bone of Chuan Shan’s “Heaven-Man Theory”, that is also the main portion of this thesis. Base on Chuan Shan’s “Heaven-Man Theory”, I will personally discuss the dynamic thinking of his theories, and the key position and initiation value he created with his conception of “Heaven-Man Theory” during the “Era of Change”.

並列關鍵字

Chuan Shan ； Philosophy of Chuan Shan ； during the Ming and Ching Dynasties ； Manifoldness of Phenomena Did ； Heaven-Man theory ； the unity of principle and desire

參考文獻

王汎森《中國近代思想與學術的系譜》，台北：聯經出版社，2003年

牟宗三《中國哲學十九講》，台北：學生書局，1990年

牟宗三《生命的學問》，台北：學生書局，1980年

牟宗三《政道與治道》，台北：正中書局，1980年

勞思光《新編中國哲學史》，台北：三民書局，1990年11月增訂6版