武当派秘传逍遥掌

"逍遥"即自由自在、不受拘束的意思,多指自在的行为或心情.<庄子·逍遥游>把逍遥视做一种清静无为、个人精神达到自由的境界.庄子认为,真正的逍遥在于任其自然.庄子说:小鸠、大鹏以至列子御风而行都是有条件的,不是绝对的逍遥.因此他提出"至人无己,神人无功,圣人无名"的命题.他说只有凭借天地的正道.驾御六气的变化以邀游于无穷者,才是无所待的至人.至人能达到"天地与我并生,万物与我为一"的理想人格,是真正逍遥的境界.     

寒山诗里南华影——浅谈寒山子诗的佛道融合意蕴

寒山子的诗在思想情感上具有佛道融合的意蕴。对于人生在世的生死、穷通、贫富、荣辱、寿夭、贤愚等际遇问题,庄子主张"知不可奈何而安之若命",寒山子熟知《庄子》,对《庄子》的融会贯通,使其诗充满了随遇而安的基调。逍遥游既是庄子追求的境界,也是寒山子景慕的理想。但是寒山子既已由道入佛,那么他对逍遥的理解自然也就具有浓郁的随性逍遥的特点。无论是隐居在俗,还是出家为僧,寒山子都生活在贫穷之中,有时不免于陷入依靠借贷度日的困境之中。从佛教立场上说,人生世间,贪心最重。因此我们也可以将寒山子的借贷行为,视为是菩萨随缘度脱众生悭贪之心的忍辱之行。寒山子将《庄子》融会贯通于自己的诗歌创作之中,展现出随遇而安、随性逍遥、随缘利物的思想和情感取向,取得了重大成就,影响深远。     

从超越逍遥到足性逍遥之转化——兼论郭象《庄子注》之诠释方法

笔者曾发表《经典诠释中的两种内在定向及其外化》一文①,提出经典诠释中的两种内在定向的理论,以及顺向诠释、逆向诠释和异向诠释的概念。本文是在该文基础上的进一步发展,以郭象对庄子之逍遥游的诠释和改造为例,讨论诠释学方法论中的基本课题,尝试以跨越性诠释、融贯性诠释、以及文本的异质性等概念来分析和解释从庄子之超越的逍遥到郭象之足性之逍遥的转化的内在机制。一、庄子之超越的逍遥庄子的逍遥游是在安命的基础上追求的一种精神的自由。安命论是庄子哲学的起点或基础,逍遥论是庄子哲学的终点或目标,齐物论和真知论则是庄子哲学的…     

鲲鹏寓言的定位——兼谈一条读《庄》义法北大核心CSSCISSCI

庄学家们或将《庄子·逍遥游》中大鹏理解为庄子笔下象征最高精神境界的逍遥者形象,或将其理解为系列有待者中的一个阶梯,这些分歧的解决端赖于《逍遥游》各环节结构关系的理解和鲲鹏寓言在《逍遥游》中地位的界定。本文即由此争议出发,分析了种种分歧背后的根源,讨论了这种种理解的误区所在。文章进而提出了一种不同以往的文献理解方式,将鲲鹏寓言重新定位为《逍遥游》的引言,其意义在于兴发出"小大之辨"。在具体文本分析的基础上,提出了一条阅读《庄子》内七篇的义法:在注重获得庄子整体理解的同时,要特别注意保持各个不同语义层次文献的相对独立性。每一语义系统的意义应该首先在其系统内部推敲、寻求;任何来自此系统之外的意义要想安放到此系统的理解中,都必须和系统的语义无矛盾;一旦发生矛盾,首先应该作出调整的是来自系统外的理解。     

鲲鹏寓言的定位——兼谈一条读《庄》义法

庄学家们或将《庄子·逍遥游》中大鹏理解为庄子笔下象征最高精神境界的逍遥者形象,或将其理解为系列有待者中的一个阶梯,这些分歧的解决端赖于《逍遥游》各环节结构关系的理解和鲲鹏寓言在《逍遥游》中地位的界定。本文即由此争议出发,分析了种种分歧背后的根源,讨论了这种种理解的误区所在。文章进而提出了一种不同以往的文献理解方式,将鲲鹏寓言重新定位为《逍遥游》的引言,其意义在于兴发出"小大之辨"。在具体文本分析的基础上,提出了一条阅读《庄子》内七篇的义法:在注重获得庄子整体理解的同时,要特别注意保持各个不同语义层次文献的相对独立性。每一语义系统的意义应该首先在其系统内部推敲、寻求;任何来自此系统之外的意义要想安放到此系统的理解中,都必须和系统的语义无矛盾;一旦发生矛盾,首先应该作出调整的是来自系统外的理解。     

试析《庄子》对先秦诸子的学术批评

《庄子·天下篇》是中国学术批评史上的开山之作,其主要内容是对先秦诸子及其人物的评论和评价。但就其反映的理想人格的类型来判断,《天下篇》并非庄子本人所作,而是其弟子或后学的作品。庄子本人对先秦诸子的学术批评,见于《庄子》内七篇。庄子本人批评的道家人物,除了《天下篇》中论及的老聃(老子)、宋钘(宋荣子)和庄子本人之外,还有列子(列御寇)、接舆、南郭子綦(南伯子綦)、阳子居(杨朱)等。庄子所批评的"儒、墨",实际只有儒家的孔子及其弟子。由于"儒"及孔子的"师儒"身份,包括庄学在内的诸子学派的渊源皆可追溯至孔子,故庄子本人不可能对儒家及孔子有激烈批评。《庄子》书中对"儒墨""杨墨"或"儒、墨、杨、秉"及惠施的批评,实际上只涉及名家和名辩作风,反映了先秦逻辑学由形式逻辑向辩证逻辑发展的重要线索。庄子弟子或后学对先秦诸子的批评与庄子本人的先秦诸子批评之间,存在着内在联系。     

宋代庄学诠释中四种“逍遥游”析论

历代学者对"逍遥游"的诠释构成了庄学的重要内容,而宋代庄学中的"逍遥游"诠释最为视角多样观点纷呈,其中有四种观点较为系统且具代表性:一是以"无累"诠释"逍遥游",认为事物受制于造化而拘于阴阳则为有累,唯有超越形器之累方为逍遥;二是引阴阳象数《易》理诠释"逍遥游",或以为超越阴阳之上方为逍遥,或以为顺阴阳之变方为逍遥,或以为合乎阴阳之理而与之同运方为逍遥;三是以"乐"为"逍遥游"义旨,将逍遥诠释为儒家德性自足与道德之乐,以摄道归儒,融合儒道;四是以"化"为"逍遥游"本指,认为化有大小故飞有高下,化有大小故逍遥有优劣,随事而化亦可逍遥。上述思想观点亦表现为逻辑上的渐进深化过程,相较于魏晋不仅多所创见,且整体上已突破向、郭旧说而别具新意,推进了宋代庄学的发展,也为中国庄学增添了新的思想资源。     

论《庄子&#183;逍遥》的主旨

《庄子&#183;逍遥游》篇,旧是难处.关于“逍遥游”的含义问题,大鹏和小鸟谁自由、谁不自由的问题,圣人有待与无待的问题,无名、无功、无己的含义及其相互关系的问题等,学界众说纷纭,对于这些问题的不同解答,导致了对于《逍遥游》主旨的不同把握.本文通过对学界争论最多的三个方面进行辨析：逍遥＂、＂游＂释义;文章结构;无为思想的理解,认为《逍遥游》的主旨是表现理想的人生境界及达致这种境界的方式.     

心灵苦旅中的生命放歌——解读《庄子·逍遥游》

庄子哲学的主题是放歌生命.位居<庄子>首篇的<逍遥游>是庄子哲学之总纲.对于庄子来说,"逍遥游"既不是"鲲"在水中的游,也不是"鹏"在空中的游,而是"心"在世间的游,是精神的苦旅:神游! 只有神游是游于"无穷"的逍遥游."游"即化"形"归"虚",是"心"对"形"的抗争.     

《庄子》内七篇与惠施考论

庄惠之交是了解庄子的一个视角,历来为学者所注意。《庄子》内七篇均与惠施有一定渊源:从《齐物论》《逍遥游》看,惠施于"齐物"有所得,庄子有所取鉴,但惠施所论不醇,"齐物"而不能"逍遥",遂与庄子之学分道扬镳;《人间世》论士人进退存身"形就心和"之道,思想背景与惠施一类纵横策士有关;《养生主》论"无用"之"保身",亦发端于《逍遥游》庄惠辩"无用";《德充符》论"不与物迁、命物之化"之"德",与惠施"弱于德""逐万物而不反"形成鲜明对比;《大宗师》论生死哲学甚精,是庄惠围绕"鼓盆而歌"论生死的延展与深化;《应帝王》走向对政治的完全厌弃,汲汲于政治的惠施是一个主要参照点。但庄子创作七篇非因惠施,惠施亦只是庄子笔下众多"质"中之一员。     

"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.