从东亚视域论德川日本儒者的伦理学立场

发布时间：2018-04-14 18:03

本文选题：功效伦理学 + 存心伦理学　；参考：《外国问题研究》2016年01期

【摘要】：本文分析德川时代日本儒者之伦理学的本质、主要论点及其潜在问题。本文第一节首先指出日本儒者的伦理学之基本性质是一种"功效伦理学",主张"善"不建立在行为者的"存心"之上(因此,他们也反对"治心"),而是在"善"所达成的效用之上。本文第二节以日本儒者的管仲论与唐太宗论为例证,分析日本儒者主张"德行"必落实在"功业"之上,所以"功业"先于"德行"。本文第三节再以儒家核心价值"仁"与"道"为中心,析论日本儒者的"功效伦理学"立场,使他们将德行义的"仁"与"道"转化为效用义的"仁"与"道"。本文第四节说明日本儒者的"功效伦理学"实浸润在广袤的德川实学思想脉络之中,他们所持的"功业"优先论与"仁"之效用义,皆是德川实学精神的表现。此种"实学"脉络中的"功效伦理学"之问题在于:只关怀"善能产生何种效果",而忽视"善如何可能",可能使"理想"被"现实"所出卖。本文结论认为:日本儒者的"功效伦理学"因为忽视"善"之内在价值,从而使"善"之主体性与自主性难以建立。
[Abstract]:This paper analyzes the essence, main arguments and potential problems of Japanese Confucian ethics in Tokugawa era.The first section of this paper first points out that the basic nature of Japanese Confucian ethics is a kind of "efficacy ethics", and advocates that "good" is not based on the "intention" of the actors.They are also opposed to "governing the mind", but based on the utility of "good".The second section takes Guan Zhong's theory of Japanese Confucianism and Tang Taizong's theory as an example to analyze the Japanese Confucian's claim that "virtue" must be carried out above "merit", so "merit" precedes "virtue".In the third section, taking the core value of Confucianism "benevolence" and "Tao" as the center, this article analyzes the Japanese Confucian's standpoint of "efficacy ethics", so that they can turn the benevolence and Tao of virtue into "benevolence" and "Tao".The fourth section of this paper explains that the "efficacy ethics" of the Japanese Confucians is really infiltrated in the vast context of Tokugawa's practical studies. Their theory of "merit" priority and the utility meaning of "benevolence" are all the manifestations of Tokugawa's practical spirit.The problem of "efficacy ethics" in the context of "practical learning" lies in: only caring about "what effect can good produce" and neglecting "how good is possible" may make "ideal" sold out by "reality".The conclusion of this paper is that the "efficacy ethics" of the Japanese Confucians neglects the intrinsic value of the "good", which makes it difficult to establish the subjectivity and autonomy of the "good".
【作者单位】：台湾大学人文社会高等研究院;
【分类号】：B82-0

【相似文献】