Max Scheler,cousin of disjunctivism

Disjunctivism has triggered an intense discussion about the nature of perceptual experience. A question in its own right concerns possible historical antecedents of the position. So far, Frege and Husserl are the most prominent names that have been mentioned in this regard. In my paper I shall argue that Max Scheler deserves a particularly relevant place in the genealogy of disjunctivism for three main reasons. First, Scheler’s view of perceptual experience is distinctively disjunctivist, as he explicitly argues that perceptions and hallucinations differ in nature. Second, his version of the position is philosophically interesting in its own right. This is so primarily, though not exclusively, in virtue of the positive story he tells us about perceptual content. Third, Scheler’s case proves particularly instructive to the question of whether intentionalism and disjunctivism constitute a fundamental, unbridgeable divide.     

The a Priori Value and Feeling in Max Scheler and Wang Yangming

Following Mou Zongsan’s interpretation of Wang Yangming, this paper investigates the phenomenology of values and moral emotions in Max Scheler and the Confucian learning of heart, especially Wang Yangming. Part I illustrates the meaning of moral emotions in Confucianism and introduces Wang Yangming’s idea of pure knowing (liangzhi 良知). Part II introduces Max Scheler’s idea of a priori value and feeling in order to explain how pure knowing could be both immanent and transcendental, both subjective and objective. Part III explores the phenomena of value and feeling in Confucianism and Wang Yangming, giving a Schelerian interpretation of Wang Yangming’s teaching of four verses. Similar to Max Scheler, Confucian learning of heart affirms the intentional structure between hierarchy of values on the one hand and loving, preferring, and feeling of values on the other hand. This paper intends to clarify the basic structure of Wang Yangming’s thought; therefore, analyses on detailed moral emotions will be left to discussion in the future.     

舍勒与康德,殊途同归:道德的善

尽管康德和舍勒的伦理学形态存在着很大的差异,但是二者在根本上都属于自律伦理学.康德在人的意愿中探讨道德自律,而舍勒则在人的爱的秩序中探讨道德自律.但是与康德的理性自律不同,舍勒强调的是人格自律.对于舍勒来说,人格是道德的善的载体,人格的本质在于一种绝对时间化,而绝对时间化又是在其通过行为并在行为中持续的生成中进行的,因此道德的善必须具有绝对时间的特征.无论康德和舍勒伦理学之间的差异有多大,他们最终关注的都是道德的善的问题.