舍勒与宋明儒者论一体感——一项现象学的与比较宗教学的探究

舍勒试图在对一体感之本质的现象学描述和对不同文化圈中一体感现象的比较宗教学研究之间架设一座可以沟通的桥梁,但他几乎没有注意到古代中国的思想传统对于宇宙同一感的讨论,特别是没有涉及宋明儒学有关"万物一体"的思想。宋明儒者的"万物一体"说含有形上学、体知修身学以及社会政治意涵等维度,它对于"一体感"的比较宗教学探究深富意义。根本上,舍勒的"一体感"和儒家的"万物一体"说最终都要面对当时代的社会政治现实,都有"淑世"的精神和抱负,而且都面临着唤醒或通达"同一感"和"万物一体"感的要务,相较于舍勒那里略显神秘的方式而言,儒家传统不仅可以丰富"宇宙同一感"的理想类型(形式面),而且可以在工夫论-伦理学的层面为"重新培养出宇宙同一感"提供新的、可实践的技艺。     

论儒佛道三教的生态思想及其异辙同归

中华传统文化中的儒佛道,蕴涵着丰富的生态文明的思想智慧。儒家仁爱为本的生态思想,以成人成己、中正和谐、天人合一为追求的目标,"天地人一体同仁"充分体现出儒家"仁民而爱物"的社会伦理与生态伦理相融的人文精神。道家道教自然和谐共生的生态智慧,提倡"因天地之自然",以实现"人与天合","神与道合"。"天地人一体同道"表达了与天地自然和谐相处的理念和追求,形成了与儒家从人伦推及人与自然不同的思维路径与生态文化特色。中国佛教圆融慈悲的生态精神,以缘起论阐发了心与物、理与事、天地与人之间的圆融互具、相即相融的整体关系,提倡对万物众生的慈爱和悲悯,丰富发展了佛教的生态思想和哲学智慧。基于共同的价值追求,儒佛道分别从人的本性、道法自然、缘起净心出发,异辙同归地指向了天地人的同体与和谐共存。三家相异互补的生态思想,既是当代生态文明建设的重要文化资源,也为当代生态文明建设提供了借鉴和启迪。     

儒家生态伦理的两条基本原则及其关系

"万物一体"和"爱有差等"是儒家伦理中的两条基本原则。"万物一体"是儒家理想中最高的道德境界,是仁人的德性表征;"爱有差等"则是仁人的"万物一体之仁"在具体道德情境中的必然表现,是儒家"万物一体"思想区别于道家、佛家的标志。从二者关系来看,前者优先于后者,只有达到"万物一体"境界的人才能合适地做到"爱有差等"。儒家伦理的德性论特征和这两条原则之间的关系为我们提供了一条超越人类中心主义和非人类中心主义之争,整合当代生态伦理学诸种理论的重要途径。     

论程颢仁学的生态意蕴

接续儒家以往的仁学思想,程颢推出了涵具鲜明生态意味的新仁学。他认为,人类与自然万物相互依存,构成一体无间、生化日新的有机系统。万事万物都禀受了仁德,都具有内在价值。自觉促成自然万物与人的生化日新、生生不息,实际上是现代意义上的可持续发展。实施可持续发展,既是人关爱自然万物的手段,又有利于保存生命和实现生态理想。要实现天人一体、和谐共生的生态理想,人类就必须去除小我的利益计较,还要遵循必要的行为规范。     

“万物一体之仁”:王阳明的仁学思想及其生态学意义

思孟派儒家主张将人的道德关怀扩大到天地万物,这一致思路向被宋儒发展为"万物一体之仁"的思想。王阳明整合了《大学》的"三纲领"、孟子的"仁民而爱物"、"尽心"和《易传》的"天地之心"等理论资源,对"万物一体之仁"的思想进行了充分的发挥和发展。在王阳明的学说中,"以天地万物为一体"是儒家仁爱思想的最终目标,是"仁者"的最高境界,也是儒家道德关怀的最高体现。"万物一体之仁"的思想中包含着深刻的生态伦理思想,是中国儒学对人类思想的独特贡献,可以为我们超越西方传统的人类中心主义、有效解决生态危机、实现人类社会的可持续发展提供重要的思想资源。     

是“天人合一”还是“天、地、人”三才——兼论儒家环境哲学的基本构架

长期以来,中国学术界流行把儒家的基本思想乃至整个中国文化归结为"天人合一",并常常把"天人合一"的源头归结于《易经》。其实考诸中国思想史,把儒家的基本思想总结为"天人合一",特别是把"天人合一"的来源归结于《易经》的说法并不准确,是一种误导。《易经》的"天、地、人"三才思想较之于"天人合一"更为符合儒家思想的本旨。在儒家三才和谐的理念中,天、地、人三者各自都有自身的功能与价值。身为三才和谐结构中的积极参与者,人类拥有促进与维持宇宙和谐的重要责任。就环境哲学而言,儒家的"三才"说既不是"环境保护主义",也不是"自然保护主义",而且相对于大地伦理学与深层生态学等西方的整体性环境哲学而言,儒家整体性的环境哲学赋予人类在宇宙间以一个更崇高的地位和责任。     

《大学问》--"以天地万物为一体"

现时研究王阳明的资料,一般强调阳明"致良知"的个体性方面,较少有整体性的表达;并且对<大学问>重视不够.<大学问>是王阳明晚年的终极性目标,"以天地万物为一体"就是"致良知"所要实现的思想的整全表达.良知的核心是仁,仁表现在关爱、关怀时有差别,这是儒家所承认的;同时由孺子、鸟兽、草木、瓦石等事事物物,体验万物的良知.由此可知,中国哲学本来就关怀生态,我们过去重视不够,值得反思.本文拟对王阳明<大学问>"以天地万物为一体"如何实践"致良知",发挥仁学本义进行初步研究.     

论儒家思想中的"人"与"自然"之关系:兼论其21世纪之启示

本文探讨儒家思想传统中“人”与“自然”之关系。本文先从比较文化史视野,析论中国思维方式之特质在于“联系性思维方式”。本文指出,儒家思想传统以“联系性思维方式”为基础,强调“人”与“自然”之间是一种相即相融并互相渗透的关系。“自然”是“人”的创生者,“人”也是“自然”的参与者。儒家思想家主张“人”与“自然”之间具有连续性与一体性之关系。这两种关系之所以可能,其基础正在于人与宇宙万物都以生生不已的仁德为其本性。“仁”既内在于每个人的心性之中,又超越于每个个体之上,成为宇宙万物之共同质素。而儒家思想中“人”与“自然”之连续性与一体观的建立与发展,正是以人“心”之自觉为其基础。     

儒家和谐伦理的历史形态与现代启迪

传统儒家伦理的和谐性主要体现在仁爱原则以"推及"的方式贯穿始终,在由"家"到"国"的过程中,以血缘亲情为基础,使"家"的伦理规范自然过渡到"国"(民族)的伦理规范,达到了家、国之间的和谐统一.宋明时期更将仁爱扩展为"民胞物与"、"万物一体",使人的伦理意识由家庭、社会、自然一直推广到天地万物.这种伦理规律的和谐性、家庭观念的神圣性与仁爱原则的超越性对于建构现代和谐伦理具有重要的启迪意义.     

罗近溪的"格物"说--从"格物"之悟谈起

本文从罗近溪早年的"格物"之悟出发,详细考察了罗近溪"格物"说的具体内涵,认为罗近溪的"格物"说奠基在他的"大学"说和"知止"说之上,一方面阐扬了"万物一体"的思想,另一方面规定了明明德亲民止于至善的道德--政治实践活动的先后程序.罗近溪的"格物"说构成他解读<大学>和儒家经典的基本视角,在儒家经典诠释学和儒学发展史上具有重要的地位和意义.     

"Psychotherapy" versus "treatment"

Presents a comment on "Psychological treatments" by D. H. Barlow. Barlow proposed that we distinguish between the terms "treatment" and "psychotherapy." The author believes that not only is the distinction unnecessary, but that its implications could have negative consequences for the field of clinical psychology. It is the proposed distinguishing feature that treatments are "specifically tailored to the pathological process that is causing the impairment and distress" that is most problematic. Clinical psychology does not need a distinction that further exacerbates the split between researchers and practitioners.     

"Enmeshment" and "Fusion"

The paper examines two related concepts utilized by two different schools of family therapy. Any family seen to be "enmeshed" is also seen as "fused," and vice versa. The difference in the level of focus, on the "system containing the individuals" (structural) or the "individual in the system" (fusion), determines the difference in therapeutic approach of these two schools.     

"本体论"与"伦理学"--形而上学的两个向度

形而上学有两个密切相关的内在向度,就是本体论向度与伦理学向度.在哲学史上,哲学家们之所以在"追求形而上学"的同时,又总是"反形而上学",并非是人们的形上本性出了问题,而是因为人们总是将形而上学视为单纯的"一维性",总是用一个向度来取代或遮蔽另一个向度.而所谓的"后形而上学思想",也并不是消解了形而上学,而是指形而上学从"本体论向度"转向了"伦理学向度".     

“对的”与“好的”

什么是“对的”,和对它的证立,是道德哲学中具有争议性的核心问题,也是效用主义和道义论间的主要差异之所在。统合效用主义对于“好的就是对的”这个陈述有一套完整周延的说法。而道义论对这个问题的证立不够周延或没有足够的说服力。     

PREFERRING "HOUSEWIVES" TO "FEMINISTS"

Four studies are described outlining the favorability of attitudes toward women. In Study 1, participants indicated their attitudes toward women and men and their construal of the term "women". The results revealed that women were evaluated more favorably than men, but that male right-wing authoritarians (RWAs) who construed women as referring primarily to feminists were least favorable in their attitudes. In Study 2, participants indicated their attitudes toward both "housewives" and "feminists". The results revealed that feminists were evaluated less favorably than housewives, and that the most negative attitudes toward feminists were expressed by authoritarian men. Study 3 revealed that high-RWA males held more negative symbolic beliefs concerning feminists (i.e., beliefs that feminists failed to promote participants'values) and that these beliefs accounted for variation in attitudes among high RWAs and much of the RWA-attitude relation. Finally, Study 4 revealed that high RWAs perceived greater value dissimilarity between them-selves and feminists. The implications of the findings for future research are discussed.     

"石狮"、"风水"与"吉祥"

谁都知道,在古老的中国,不管是衙门、宫殿、庙宇的门前,还是豪宅、大户人家的门口,人们都能看到摆着一对石狮。据说,这对石狮子在许多中国人的心目中,它不但是一种气派的象征,而且还是一种被人认为是好的“吉祥物”。如今,旧时的衙门没有了,但遗留下来的宫殿、庙宇的门前,其中有些石狮仍有保存。然而,想像不到的是,这号称“吉祥物”的石狮今天却开始“走”进某些党政机关的大门口,它们(石狮)在那里时时都在保护着这些政府要员“平平安安”、“吉祥如意”。这不仅使我联想起一些极端的报道,有些政府官员为升迁,请算命先生定位,用风水术为政府…     

"Us" and "Them":

Abstract: In the Aristotelian tradition, politics is a matter of public deliberation over questions of justice and injustice. The Bush administration's response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, has been uniformly hostile to this notion, and it has instead promoted a jingoistic politics of self‐assertion by an America largely identified with the executive branch of its government. This is doubly disturbing, as the executive branch has sought to free itself from international law, multinational commitments, and domestic judicial regulation, even as it has sought to validate itself by demonizing its enemies. This essay draws out the disturbing echoes here of Carl Schmitt's work of the 1920s, in particular of Schmitt's conception of the sovereign as the ungrounded ground of the law and the political as the site of mortal conflict between friend and enemy. The essay argues that Schmitt's position in the twenties, for all of its evident problems, is superior to that of Bush, Wolfowitz, and Ashcroft in at least two senses: Schmitt condemns the idea of waging war for profit and recognizes that such wars will often be disguised as moral crusades waged against the “inhuman”; and he acknowledges that claiming to fight a war for humanity denies one's enemies their humanity, leaving them open to torture and even extermination.     

从"管制"到"平衡"--政府与公众理想关系模式的构建及其制度化

论文从行政民主的角度探讨政府与公众之间的理想关系模式及其制度化构建过程 ,将我国在改革之前的政府与公众模式概括为管制模式。论文指出 ,在制度变迁的过程中 ,这一模式日益受到挑战。而在新的制度环境下 ,我国政府与公众的关系模式应该是平衡模式。这一模式的制度化措施包括培育自主的市民社会 ,赋予公众以独立的活动空间 ;促进行政公开 ,建立一个开放负责的政府 ;推进行政法建设 ,抑制行政恣意     

The "Natural" and the "Formal"

The paper presents an argument against a metaphysical conception of logic according to which logic spells out a specific kind of mathematical structure that is somehow inherently related to our factual reasoning. In contrast, it is argued that it is always an empirical question as to whether a given mathematical structure really does captures a principle of reasoning. (More generally, it is argued that it is not meaningful to replace an empirical investigation of a thing by an investigation of its a priori analyzable structure without paying due attention to the question of whether it really is the structure of the thing in question.) It is proposed to elucidate the situation by distinguishing two essentially different realms with which our reason must deal: the realm of the natural, constituted by the things of our empirical world, and the realm of the formal, constituted by the structures that we use as prisms to view, to make sense of, and to reconstruct the world. It is suggested that this vantage point may throw light on many foundational problems of logic.