牟宗三康德式《孟子伦理学》解读的新批判

IF 0.5 2区 哲学 0 ASIAN STUDIES ASIAN PHILOSOPHY Pub Date : 2023-01-03 DOI:10.1080/09552367.2023.2164406
Xiangnong Hu
{"title":"牟宗三康德式《孟子伦理学》解读的新批判","authors":"Xiangnong Hu","doi":"10.1080/09552367.2023.2164406","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The New Confucian philosopher Mou Zongsan once compared the ethics of Mengzi to that of Kant, claiming that Mengzi’s ethics shares the same fundamental features with Kant’s and can therefore be better understood through a Kantian lens. This paper aims to argue against Mou by elaborating on two important but hitherto insufficiently addressed differences between Kant’s and Mengzi’s ethics. First, the paper shows that, as opposed to what Mou suggests, passages 6A1 to 6A3 of the Mengzi demonstrate Mengzi’s adoption of an a posteriori approach to ethics that stands in direct contrast to Kant’s a priori approach. Second, the paper argues that even if we read Kant’s ethics in a non-rigorous way that works in favor of Mou’s interpretation, ren (humaneness), yi (optimal appropriateness), li (observance of rites), and zhi (wisdom), as the core concepts of Mengzi’s ethics, can still hardly be regarded as Kantian moral laws.","PeriodicalId":44358,"journal":{"name":"ASIAN PHILOSOPHY","volume":"33 1","pages":"94 - 109"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A new critique of Mou Zongsan’s Kantian interpretation of Mengzi’s ethics\",\"authors\":\"Xiangnong Hu\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09552367.2023.2164406\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The New Confucian philosopher Mou Zongsan once compared the ethics of Mengzi to that of Kant, claiming that Mengzi’s ethics shares the same fundamental features with Kant’s and can therefore be better understood through a Kantian lens. This paper aims to argue against Mou by elaborating on two important but hitherto insufficiently addressed differences between Kant’s and Mengzi’s ethics. First, the paper shows that, as opposed to what Mou suggests, passages 6A1 to 6A3 of the Mengzi demonstrate Mengzi’s adoption of an a posteriori approach to ethics that stands in direct contrast to Kant’s a priori approach. Second, the paper argues that even if we read Kant’s ethics in a non-rigorous way that works in favor of Mou’s interpretation, ren (humaneness), yi (optimal appropriateness), li (observance of rites), and zhi (wisdom), as the core concepts of Mengzi’s ethics, can still hardly be regarded as Kantian moral laws.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44358,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ASIAN PHILOSOPHY\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"94 - 109\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ASIAN PHILOSOPHY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09552367.2023.2164406\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ASIAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ASIAN PHILOSOPHY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09552367.2023.2164406","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ASIAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要新儒家哲学家牟宗三曾将孟子的伦理学与康德的伦理学进行比较,认为孟子的伦理学具有与康德伦理学相同的基本特征,可以通过康德的视角更好地理解。本文旨在通过阐述康德伦理学与孟子伦理学之间两个重要但迄今尚未得到充分解决的差异来反对牟。首先,本文表明,与牟的观点相反,《孟子》第6A1至6A3段展示了孟子对伦理学的后验方法,这与康德的先验方法形成了直接的对比。其次,本文认为,即使我们以一种有利于牟解释的非严格的方式来解读康德伦理学,作为孟子伦理学核心概念的人、意、礼、智,仍然很难被视为康德的道德律。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A new critique of Mou Zongsan’s Kantian interpretation of Mengzi’s ethics
ABSTRACT The New Confucian philosopher Mou Zongsan once compared the ethics of Mengzi to that of Kant, claiming that Mengzi’s ethics shares the same fundamental features with Kant’s and can therefore be better understood through a Kantian lens. This paper aims to argue against Mou by elaborating on two important but hitherto insufficiently addressed differences between Kant’s and Mengzi’s ethics. First, the paper shows that, as opposed to what Mou suggests, passages 6A1 to 6A3 of the Mengzi demonstrate Mengzi’s adoption of an a posteriori approach to ethics that stands in direct contrast to Kant’s a priori approach. Second, the paper argues that even if we read Kant’s ethics in a non-rigorous way that works in favor of Mou’s interpretation, ren (humaneness), yi (optimal appropriateness), li (observance of rites), and zhi (wisdom), as the core concepts of Mengzi’s ethics, can still hardly be regarded as Kantian moral laws.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ASIAN PHILOSOPHY
ASIAN PHILOSOPHY Multiple-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Asian Philosophy is an international journal concerned with such philosophical traditions as Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Buddhist and Islamic. The purpose of the journal is to bring these rich and varied traditions to a worldwide academic audience. It publishes articles in the central philosophical areas of metaphysics, philosophy of mind, epistemology, logic, moral and social philosophy, as well as in applied philosophical areas such as aesthetics and jurisprudence. It also publishes articles comparing Eastern and Western philosophical traditions.
期刊最新文献
Theorizing forgiveness from Nishida Kitarō’s account of love Dharmakīrti’s theory of fault with particular reference to Vādanyāya Beauty, nobility, and desire: Ideals of gentlemanliness and the male body in Confucius and Plato Beyond anthropocentrism: A Watsujian ecological ethic Prolegomena to the study of Youxi Sanmei 遊戲三昧 Buddhist sacred play between agonism and mimicry
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1