儒家心理學：黃光國難題正面臨的迷陣與突破

如果華人本土社會科學的發展成熟過程裡不能繞開對「黃光國難題」（Hwang Kwang-Kuo Problem）的回答，則黃光國難題本身的內容與性質就應該更仔細釐清，其中亟需釐清者莫過於認識黃光國學說中的「迷陣」（maze）。黃光國並未回答自身學說的雙重矛盾性：其一，使用「天人對立」的科學哲學來精確認識具有「天人合一」性質的中國思想，尤其依據科學哲學架構的「微觀世界」是否真證實並解釋依據中國思想發展出來的「生命世界」，且其申論的「多重哲學典範」（multiple philosophical paradigms）究竟有無具體中心思想？其二，從個體面向社會的利益角度詮釋出「自我的曼陀羅模型」（mandala model of self）與「人情與面子的理論模型」（theoreticalmodel of Face and Favor），如何證實該內涵不僅能解釋其符合儒家思想的主軸觀念，甚且還能呈現佛家最高義理中的空性（śunyata）？筆者覺得只有承認黃光國在企圖整合各種觀念的過程裡，尚未解決「中西會通」與「儒佛會通」的兩大困境，其思想具有拼裝性，實不利於「多重哲學典範」的典範架構，應轉而從調整建構實在論（constructive realism）與批判實在論（critical realism）的角度承認心體（nous）對於人的實際存在，順此架構相應的精神實在論（spirical realism）與歷史實在論（historical realism）來面對生命世界，並依據「德性」、「知識」、「欲望」與「實踐」這四個層面設計出「自性的曼陀羅模型」，才能符合儒家思想旨趣，將空性轉回自性，進而完成「中西會通」與「儒佛會通」的義理，意即成熟發展出真正具有中華思想性質的華人本土社會科學，並讓儒家心理學獲得理論發展的脈絡。

關鍵字

中華文化；心學；心體論；黃光國難題；精神實在論；歷史實在論

並列摘要

If the Chinese indigenous social sciences are not mature enough to get around the Hwang Kwang-Kuo Problem, then the content and nature of this problem should be clarified. In particular, Hwang's ＂maze＂ must be understood. Hwang has failed to answer the two contradictions in his own theory. First, he used the ＂opposition between humans and nature＂ paradigm in philosophy of science to understand Chinese thinking on ＂the unity of heaven and man＂. Can a ＂micro world＂ based on the philosophy of science confirm and explain a ＂life world＂ developed in accordance with Chinese thought? Second, Hwang interpreted his＂mandala model of self＂ and his ＂theoretical model of face and favor＂ from the perspective of individual-oriented social interests. How can he verify that his models not only explain the main principles of Confucianism, but also reveal Sunyata, the highest concept of Buddhism? Hwang has attempted to integrate various ideas, but he has not resolved the two major dilemmas of ＂The Communication of Chinese and Western thought＂ and ＂The Communication of Confucianism and Buddhism＂. Instead, we should recognize the actual existence of nous from the perspectives of ＂constructive realism＂ and ＂critical realism＂, and then construct a corresponding spiritual realism and historical realism to face the life world with a ＂mandala model of self＂ based on four levels: ＂morality＂, ＂knowledge＂, ＂desire＂ and ＂practice＂. Only by conforming to the objectives of Confucianism can the meanings of ＂Chinese and Western thought＂ and ＂Confucianism and Buddhism＂ be understood. Mature Chinese indigenous social sciences can truly encompass the nature of Chinese thought. Let Confucian psychology continue its theoretical development.