朱熹论"命"

朱熹在继承前人的基础上,独创性地把"命"分为"气之命"和"理之命",并且认为"理之命"操之在我,而"气之命"是人的主观能动性所不能为的,又在此基础上提出了"罕言命"。     

道教内丹学中的"性命先后"问题辨析

"性命先后"是道教内丹学中一个很重要的理论问题,本文从内丹学文献出发,梳理"先命后性"和"先性后命"在内丹学南北宋中的确切意义,并从理论上指明其中可蕴含的哲理意义,说明两者内在相通与辩证统一.     

《易传》中"命"对"生"和"性"的统摄

就同一理论维度论,<易传>认为"生"、"性"同源于"命",即在"生"和"性"之间,"命"成为连接二者的契合点,"生"经由"命"转化为"性".<易传>讲"生"是基于阴阳"转易"的,由此出发则使"生生不已"成为"命"的基本内涵,而讲"性"则是基于"命"向万物之"顺承"的."命"的"生生不已"促成了"性"的积极有为,进而引领出一种乐观向上的人生态度.     

王船山的德福关系论——以《周易外传·困》为中心

在<周易外传>困卦中,船山全面阐述了自己对德福关系的看法,不仅为人的行为取向提出了明确的方向,而且解释了这种方向的本体论根据.其中对德福来源、性质与差异的探讨是全面而有体系的,最能体现儒家精神.船山首先提出"德福皆为命"的核心命题,进而阐述了"德可充,福不可充"的因为并提出了"以德致福"的思想,以期重新论证并弘扬儒家以德为本的精神理念.本文的逻辑进路也因此得以建立:先分析"命"之基本内涵而后引申出"命"之结构、分化过程和差异性三个分论题,以此为基础形成对德福的全面理解.     

命与天命:儒家天人关系的双重视角

"命"与"天命"是传统文化中一对重要范畴,主要指人所受到的限制。二者都起源于"令",由"王令"而"天令",又因"天令"对王权的决定作用从而成为王权之"命"。西周末,随着传统天命观的式微,"命"开始向个体落实。孔子正是在对"命"深切体验的基础上重提"天命",以作为君子之为君子的依据;子思又将其进一步落实为人之"性"。到了孟子,便通过"命"与"性"、"求在我者"与"求在外者"的比较,终于形成"命"与"天命"的不同规定:"命"体现着天对人之自然生命的限制,表现的是人所无法驾驭的客观力量,但却落实于人并表现为人之"命";"天命"体现的则是人之自我确认的道德理想,其虽然出于人却又必须证之于天,所以是天之真正的命于人者。命与天命,既体现了传统天人关系的双重视角,同时也是儒道两家不同探索侧重的一个基本分野。     

顾宪成之性命论北大核心CSSCISSCI

本文主要讨论顾宪成对于性、命二者关系的看法。"天命"思想在顾宪成的思想中很重要,认为这是学问的"大头脑",是源头所系。他论性命主要依托于对孟子"性也有命焉""命也有性焉"二条的解释。然他论性命与孟子之意甚相反,主张性命交关,孟子则主张区别性命。顾宪成之性命的含义与孟子不同,与程朱也不同,特别是命的含义差别最大。孟子犹以命为命数之命,为在外者;而程朱则逐渐转向以气质论命,把在外之命归于在人身之气质;顾宪成所谓命则为先于性者,为"天命"之命。性、命二范畴在他的思想中有着特殊的界定和重要性。     

人生终极的理性自觉——儒家“命”的观念

儒家"命"的观念认为在人生历程和结局中,存在着某种非人力所能左右的、超越的客观必然性。这是儒家思想中超越的理论层面上的终极关怀的理念。儒学在其历史发展中,对"命"的观念不断作出洋溢着人文精神的诠释:认为"命"之超越性就内在于人的气禀和德性之中;"命"之必然性实际上是在生命源头处的偶然性和在终点显现的一次不可逆性;按照伦理、物理地生活——"尽人事",就是"命"的实现。凡此皆显示,儒家的人生终极关怀充盈着理性自觉。     

从"性"、"命"概念的演化看《易传》的著作年代及思想渊源

本文通过对先秦儒学"性"、"命"概念之演化与发展的历史考察,指出:《易传》的性命之论与《中庸》、楚简、孟学相契,而与荀学不类;《易传》的创作年代是在荀子之前之思孟学派形成和兴盛时期,而不是在荀子之后。     

生死有命与向死而生——论孔子的生死观CSSCI

孔子的生死观主要包含了"生死有命"、"死非其命"、"未知生,焉知死"以及"朝闻道,夕死可矣"这四个维度。死亡之"有命",是指死亡乃每个人所无法回避的自然终结。但是孔子强调的是,即使是死亡,也应为"得命"之死而避免"非命"之亡。生死之命虽然具有必然性,但是惟有"死得其命",才能实现生命的本然意义。孔子探求的是必死之生命应当如何走向死亡的这个过程。通过规定生命的本然内涵和使命意义,"闻道"之生命最终实现了对必然性死亡的超越。     

柳华阳《慧命经》之仙佛合宗思想探析

柳华阳传承了伍守阳"仙佛合宗"的思想,并予以理论化、系统化.在<慧命经>一书中,他在佛言道,在道言佛,佛道双融,以不同于前人的简易之语,晓畅明白地揭示佛道双摄、"性命双修"的"慧命之道",阐释了"天下无二道,圣人无二心"佛道一途的思想,对后世影响深远.     

From the fixity of the past to the fixity of the independent

There is an old but powerful argument for the claim that exhaustive divine foreknowledge is incompatible with the freedom to do otherwise. A crucial ingredient in this argument is the principle of the “Fixity of the Past” (FP). A seemingly new response to this argument has emerged, the so-called “dependence response,” which involves, among other things, abandoning FP for an alternative principle, the principle of the “Fixity of the Independent” (FI). This paper presents three arguments for the claim that FI ought to be preferred to FP.

     

On the interaction of the subject and the experiment in the matching model

Two types of matching designs, static and dynamic, are differentiated. While all matching designs are logically the same in terms of the probability model which determines chance level of performance, an attempt is made to demonstrate that there is an interaction between the tactics, strategies, and actual knowledge ofS and the type of design used which will, in turn, lead to different results even whenS's knowledge is held constant. It is suggested that analogous situations may exist within the framework of the traditional psychometric model.The work reported in this paper was supported by a National Science Foundation Undergraduate Research Participation Grant (NSF-G15797) to the senior author. The authors are indebted to Joel E. Greene for his advice and criticism.     

In the beginning was the doing: the premises of the practical syllogism

If practical reasoning deserves its name, its form must be different from that of ordinary (theoretical) reasoning. A few have thought that the conclusion of practical reasoning is an action, rather than a mental state. I argue here that if the conclusion is an action, then so too is one of the premises. You might reason your way from doing one thing to doing another: from browsing journal abstracts to reading a particular journal article. I motivate this by sympathetically re-examining Hume's claim that a conclusion about what ought to be done follows only from an argument one of whose premises is likewise about what ought to be done.     

城市化与道德嬗变

从 1 9世纪开始的大规模城市化进程是和工业化、商品化、市场化密不可分的。它带来了社会人际关系的变化和道德嬗变。它使业缘道德取代血缘道德成为社会道德的中心 ,并通过交换行为和交换价值促进道德发展和更新 ,还进一步确立了竭诚服务的社会理念。城市化是人类社会的进步 ,是现代社会文明。