论周敦颐《通书》之“神”——以朱子、牟宗三为中心的讨论

前贤未充分注意和深入研究《通书》之“神”及朱注、牟宗三的评论。周敦颐的《通书》明确以“神”为与“物”相对的形上存在,同时又有遍在性、微妙性、活动性。以“理”来诠释《通书》之“神”,是朱子注的重要特点。牟宗三认为,朱熹的“理”是存有不活动的“但理”,以这样的“理”论“神”,失落了《通书》之“神”本有的灵妙性。牟宗三对朱子之理的认识有其片面性,但他对《通书》之“神”内涵的揭示有其思想的深刻性,不失为一种富有新意的创造性阐释。牟宗三把诚体、神体、理体、心体贯通为一,认为这是一个整体的生生不息的天命流行之体,这些阐释对我们重新理解北宋理学有重要的思想意义。     

《太极图》与《太极图说》之关系再考察

对于《太极图》与《太极图说》而言,许多人认为"传图者必传说"。但是,把上述主张绝对化,会忽视一些非常重要的史料。据祁宽、朱子等人的一系列资料来看,《通书》的最初版本"九江本"并非如大家所认为的那样,没有收录《太极图》与《太极图说》,而只是没有收录《太极图》。基于此,我们还需要重新审视潘兴嗣《先生墓志铭》文中的句读问题、《太极图》的最初面貌问题、《太极图》与《太极图说》与道家的渊源问题,以弄清《太极图》与《太极图说》的关系。最后,本文还通过对《诸儒鸣道集》所收《通书》与朱子所整理的各《通书》版本进行比较,进一步分析了《通书》最初版本的可能面貌。     

从“舂陵本”《通书》论《通书》的早期流传

目前为止,学界对《通书》早期版本的考察,基本集中在所谓"程门传本"和"九江本"上。但据有关文献显示,编刻于周敦颐舂陵老家的"舂陵本",才是《通书》的最早版本。"舂陵本"和"九江本"《通书》同属于周氏"故家旧本"系列,其中都没有收录《太极图》,这就进一步证实了有学者认为《通书》本无《太极图》,是"程门传本"将它附于《通书》之后的推测。这也为我们分析《通书》早期版本的流传,分析二程与周敦颐的关系,提供了非常宝贵的线索。     

上海简"怀尔明德"探析

上海博物馆《论诗》简展出时,笔者发现简７上部稍残断,前当有缺简。此简可隶定、标点为：“……怀尔明德”曷？诚谓之也;“有命自天,命此文王”,诚命之也,信矣。卜子曰：此命也夫！文王虽欲也,得乎？此命也“有命自天,命此文王”见于《大雅·大明》,则很明显前“怀尔明德”亦当为引文,《诗论》此简是引《诗》文而论《诗》。从“诚命之也”对应“有命自天”之形式来看,“怀尔明德”前当有一“谓”字,与“诚谓之也”之“谓”对应。《大雅·皇矣》有：“帝谓文王：予怀明德”一句,与此较接近,只是“予怀明德”与“怀尔明德”不同…     

化自然以归人文——论周敦颐融道入儒的宇宙论思想

<正>周敦颐的著作主要有《太极图说》和《通书》。《太极图说》依据《易传》以《老》解《易》,以气化宇宙论阐述自然世界的演化过程;《通书》则结合《易传》和《中庸》,展现了儒家人文宇宙观的本义。周敦颐思想还有一个重要的方面就是"孔颜乐处",即通过"孔颜乐处"体认圣人之人格与气象,化自然以归人文。在周敦颐的这三层思想中,《太极图说》的宇宙论有明显的道家倾向;《通书》融道入儒,建立了儒家的价值形而上学体系;"孔颜乐处"则指明了宋代儒学的精神方向。     

《宋元学案》的编撰与濂溪学的新诠——从刘宗周到黄宗羲、黄百家父子

刘宗周《五子连珠》《圣学宗要》的案语,后被黄宗羲、黄百家父子收录于《宋元学案》并作了补充论证。《濂溪学案》不收朱子的两种"解"并对朱子多有批评,提出《通书》以"诚"翻新《中庸》道理、强调《通书》之颜子学为周、程授受张本,刘、黄等人对濂溪学的重新诠释与定位,走出了朱子学的影响并带有和会朱陆的色彩。     

中华书局本《二程集》之《周易程氏传》标点正误

中华书局于1981年出版的《二程集》之《周易程氏传》,无论从文本的选择上,还是句读方面,对于程学的研究都可谓有开创之功。此书在2004年再版,但未作任何修订。其实,于2003年由齐鲁书社出版的《〈程氏易传〉导读》一书中梁韦弦先生已经指出《二程集》之《程传》在标点及文字方面的一些遗漏。所以本文旨在系统地对中华书局版的《程传》作一些拾遗补漏的工作,以期为后来的学者提供更为准确的点校本《程传》。     

易学与中国伦理思想

<正> 在中国伦理思想史上,《周易》一直占有崇高的地位,被奉为性命之源,圣学之本,受到历代学者的重视。周敦颐赞叹说:“大哉《易》也,性命之源乎!”(《通书》)王夫之通过认真的比较研究指出:“根极精微,发天人之蕴,《六经》、《语》、《孟》示人知性知     

立身与著述

(本册文字未注明年代,据其中一部分有日期(三十年二月)或提及年纪(三十三岁)处推算,当记于1941年.其内容为作者自定之立身与著述规划等.书于绿格宣纸本,手工装订.原文除个别章节有标点外,均仅以空格断句,现由整理者根据内容加以标点.格式基本按原文.--刘注)     

标点趣谈

正偶读顾颉刚先生的《笔记》,其中一则言及"标点之必要",实在极有趣味,让人发笑。顾先生引一山东农民之《春帖子词》,无标点"一气"而下,是:"今年好劣运少不得打官司做酒做成醋又酸了喂猪喂成象老鼠都死了"。那么要去读,总是要点断,却是点在不同的地方,完全是善意恶意"两读法"了。善意读之:"今年好,劣运少:不得打官司;做酒做成;醋又酸了;喂猪喂成     

"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。     

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     

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.