近五十年来台湾地区士林哲学之研究与前瞻

根据祁尔松（Etienne Gilson）的说法,中世纪哲学,尤其是十三世纪的思想,是基督宗教哲学。本文按其在台湾发展时所袭用的名词,称之为士林哲学。士林哲学之传入中国,虽然早在利玛窦时期（1550—1610）已经开始,但真正成为学术思想之主流之一,是最近五十年来在台湾地区的发展。20世纪初士林哲学初传入台湾时,当时的思想环境,对基督宗教哲学并不十分友善,这种种情况,与中世纪的思想家,面对信仰与神学之挑战相似。当时的思想家,融合各种不同的思想派系,对柏拉图与亚理斯多德的观念,重新诠释与批判,批判与诠释是创新的基础。所以,中世纪可说是哲学的第二春,而中世纪哲学之精华,即全盛期的士林哲学。十四世纪唯名论之后,士林哲学逐步式微,于十九世纪末再兴。本文认为,士林哲学在台湾发展之过程,与其在中世纪之盛行,及十九世纪末之再兴,背景虽异但有不少相似之处,而这些相似之处,正是士林哲学之基本思想与立场。本文对台湾士林哲学之发展,从四方面探讨：（1）回到形上学之根以面对新的挑战;（2）形上学基本立场与概念之说明;（3）反思与批判;（4）未来发展之方向。本文所参考之资料,一是已发表之学术文献;其二是与学者们之正式交谈——如学术演讲、座谈会等,及非正式之谈话、访问等。     

传统儒家、道家哲学生态观比较

儒家、道家哲学生态观既有共同点,又存在差异。在生态存在论上,两者都是一种生成论世界观,强调人与自然万物的内在联系。不过,道家注重自然运化过程的自然性、一体性,儒家则强调自然运化的生命特征,肯定人与万物的差别;在生态价值论上,道家偏重“自然”的价值．强调自然运化的自然目的性和价值性,肯定人和万物的自然本性的价值。儒家则偏重“人文”价值。它强调人与社会的生存价值．肯定主体德性的价值;在生态实践观上,道家强调“自然无为”的实践原则,“自然无为”体现了对自然自组织、自协调智慧的信任。道家实践观体现在个人生活方式上具有消减性特征,强调慈爱利物、俭啬有度、知和不争。儒家强调发挥人的主体能动性,肯定主体对人与社会、人与自然关系的协调作用。在对农业生产实践的治理上。儒家强调顺应天时、因地制宜和“谨其时禁”。     

Community Science: Creating an Alternative Place to Stand?

This article comments on two emerging views of community psychologys approaches to the use of research for responding to social problems in contemporary community contexts – (a) the formation of a new field of community science, or (b) the updating of community psychology research traditions. If community science is to become established as a field related to community psychology, its proponents will need to agree upon conventions of epistemology, foci of interest, methods, and standards by which its work can be judged so that it can be distinguished from other human sciences. These articles provide early sketches for what community science might be. However, as noted in this commentary, we need to heed signs of concern about community psychologys continued relevance in public discourse regarding the analysis of and responses to social problems. While this special issue offers some promising responses to the concern of what the field can contribute, the field would be well served if we broaden our dialogue about a renewal of community psychologys commitment to social justice and the need for its perspectives in the practice of research that seeks to address community-based issues in the early 21st century.     

Ethical Instrumentalism

The present essay offers a sketch of a philosophy of value, what I shall here refer to as ‘ethical instrumentalism.’ My primary aim is to say just what this view involves and what its commitments are. In the course of doing so, I find it necessary to distinguish this view from another with which it shares a common basis and which, in reference to its most influential proponent, I refer to as ‘Humeanism.’ A second, more general, aim is to make plausible the idea that, given the common basis, ethical instrumentalism provides a more compelling picture of the philosophy of value than Humeanism does.     

张君劢论中国现代化与儒家思想的复兴

张君劢从现代与古代是不能完全割裂的以及在现代化过程中起主导作用的是人的心知或思想方法这两点认识出发 ,认为中国的儒家思想不仅不是现代化的障碍 ,相反可以导致一种新的思想方法 ,这种新的方法能成为现代化的基础。因此 ,我们今天要在中国实现现代化 ,就必须从复兴儒家思想入手。换言之 ,复兴儒家思想是中国现代化的途径 ,而儒家思想的复兴又主要是宋代新儒学的复兴。复兴儒家思想的道路是“自力更生中之多形结构” ,亦即“以儒家为本 ,而沟通东西思想”     

Beyond synchronicity: the worldview of Carl Gustav Jung and Wolfgang Pauli

While exploring the phenomena of synchronicity, Carl Gustav Jung became acquainted with the quantum physicist Wolfgang Pauli and eventually began a collaboration with him. During that collaboration Jung's study of synchronistic phenomena underwent a considerable change; prior to the collaboration, Jung had stressed mainly the phenomenological and empirical features of synchronistic phenomena, while in association with Pauli, he focused his attention upon their ontological, archetypal character. Pauli, on the other hand, became increasingly sensitive to the philosophical aspects concerning the unconscious. Jung and Pauli's common reflections went far beyond psychology and physics, entering into the realm where the two areas meet in the philosophy of nature. In fact, as a consequence of their collaboration, synchronicity was transformed from an empirical concept into a fundamental explanatory-interpretative principle, which together with causality could possibly lead to a more complete worldview. Exploring the problematic character of the synchronicity concept has a heuristic value because it leads to the reconsideration of the philosophical issues that drove Jung and Pauli to clear up the conceptual background of their thoughts. Within the philosophical worldview arising from Jung and Pauli's discussions about synchronicity, there are many symbolic aspects that go against mainstream science and that represent a sort of criticism to some of the commonly held views of present day science.     

Bocheński and Balance: System and History in Analytic Philosophy

Using the work of Józef Bocheski as apositive example, this paper sets out the casefor a balanced use of historical knowledge indoing analytic philosophy. Between the twoextremes of relativizing historicism, whichdenies absolute truth, and arrogant scientism,which denies any constructive role for thehistory of ideas in philosophy, lies a viamedia in which historical reflection onconcepts and their history is placed at theservice of the system of cognitive philosophy.Knowledge of the history of philosophy, whilenot a sine qua non, can empower analyticphilosophy to push forward to new and moresatisfactory solutions to old and new problems.Examples are adduced from Bocheski's oeuvreand from the author's own experience.     

试论宋儒人文性格的时代特征

受时代变迁和社会环境的影响,宋儒的人文性格呈现出鲜明的时代特质。他们所表现出来的“仕以行道”、以天下为己任的理想与豪情,严格的道德自律精神,深沉、浓重的忧患意识,参禅悟道、争相趋禅之风尚,从一定意义上讲,都与当时的社会文化环境密切相联。宋儒人文性格之形成与涵养,涵摄了个人自身和与之相应的社会文化现象的多重因素。     

儒家人物关系论与现代生态伦理

儒家的人物关系论是建立在对自然界必然性的认识基础上的。基于“天人合一”、“万物一体”的哲学基础,儒家提出了“仁民爱物”、“民胞物与”的人物关系原则。这对于建构现代生态伦理学、保护环境有重要的理论和实践价值。     

Getting scientists to think about what they are doing

Research scientists are trained to produce specialised bricks of knowledge, but not to look at the whole building. Increasing public concern about the social role of science is forcing science students to think about what they are actually learning to do. What sort of knowledge will they be producing, and how will it be used? Science education now requires serious consideration of these philosophical and ethical questions. But the many different forms of knowledge produced by modern science cannot be covered by any single philosophical principle. Sociology and cognitive psychology are also needed to understand what the sciences have in common and the significance of what they generate. Again, traditional modes of ethical analysis cannot deal adequately with the values, norms and interests activated by present-day technoscience without reference to its sociological, political and economic dimensions. What science education now requires is ‘metascience’, a discipline that extends beyond conventional philosophy and ethics to include the social and humanistic aspects of the scientific enterprise. For example, students need to learn about the practices, institutions, career choices, and societal responsibilities of research scientists, and to rehearse in advance some of the moral dilemmas that they are likely to meet. They need also to realise that science is changing rapidly, not only in its research techniques and organisational structures but also in its relationships with society at large.