【摘要】：古今中外的學(xué)者們?cè)诮忉屆献有陨普摃r(shí),自覺或不自覺地建立了多種解釋模式,大體有心善說(shuō)、善端說(shuō)、向善說(shuō)、可善說(shuō)、有善說(shuō)、人禽說(shuō)、天命說(shuō)、總體說(shuō)等8種。心善說(shuō)認(rèn)為孟子所謂的"性善"指心善;善端說(shuō)認(rèn)為性善指人性有善端;向善說(shuō)認(rèn)為性善指人性有向善趨勢(shì);可善說(shuō)認(rèn)為性善指人性可以為善;有善說(shuō)指人性中有善(不排除也有惡);人禽說(shuō)認(rèn)為性善指人性相對(duì)于獸性為善;天命說(shuō)認(rèn)為性善指天命之性為善;總體說(shuō)認(rèn)為性善指人性從總體上為善。與此同時(shí),孟子的后世解釋者往往先預(yù)設(shè)了性善論建立于某種判斷之上,然后對(duì)性善論展開討論或批判,他們所預(yù)設(shè)的判斷類型有如下5組10種:(1)先天判斷/后天判斷;(2)本質(zhì)判斷/特征判斷;(3)全稱判斷/特稱判斷;(4)比較判斷/總體判斷;(5)價(jià)值判斷/事實(shí)判斷等。先天判斷認(rèn)為性善指人的先天屬性為善,后天判斷認(rèn)為性善指人的后天屬性為善;本質(zhì)判斷認(rèn)為性善指人的本質(zhì)屬性為善,特征判斷認(rèn)為性善指人的現(xiàn)象特征為善;全稱判斷認(rèn)為性善指人性全部?jī)?nèi)容皆善,特稱判斷認(rèn)為性善指人性部分內(nèi)容為善;總體判斷從人性內(nèi)部總體關(guān)系理解性善,比較判斷從人性與禽獸比較關(guān)系理解性善;事實(shí)判斷認(rèn)為性善指人性事實(shí)上是善的,價(jià)值判斷認(rèn)為性善指人性依某價(jià)值標(biāo)準(zhǔn)是善的。這些判斷類型中,特稱判斷、本質(zhì)判斷、總體判斷、比較判斷皆不排除人性中可能有惡,但仍可得出人性善的結(jié)論。本文在介紹這些解釋模式和判斷類型的同時(shí)也討論了其優(yōu)劣及問(wèn)題,搞清這些對(duì)于全面總結(jié)前人解釋孟子性善論的得失很有必要。
[Abstract]:In explaining Mencius' theory of sexual goodness, scholars at all times and at all times have consciously or unconsciously established a variety of interpretation models, including the theory of good with heart, the theory of good, the theory of good towards the good, the theory of human and poultry, the theory of destiny, and the general theory of eight kinds. The theory of "good of nature" of Mencius refers to the good of the heart; the theory of goodness of nature means that there is a good end in human nature; the theory of goodness of nature means that there is a tendency for human nature to be good, while the theory of good thinks that the good of nature means that human nature can be good. The theory of good refers to the good (not excluding evil) in human nature; the theory of human and poultry holds that the human nature is good relative to the animal nature; the theory of destiny thinks that the nature of nature is good; the general theory thinks that the nature of good refers to the good of humanity as a whole. At the same time, Mencius' later interpreters often presuppose that the theory of sexual goodness is based on some kind of judgment, and then discuss or criticize it. Their preset judgment types are as follows: (1) congenital / acquired judgment; (2) essential judgment / feature judgment; (3) full name / special judgment; (4) comparative / overall judgment; (5) value / fact judgment. The innate judgment thinks that the innate attribute of the human being is good, the acquired judgment thinks that the nature goodness refers to the acquired attribute of the human being, the essence judgment thinks that the nature attribute of the nature good refers to the good, the characteristic judgment thinks that the phenomenon of the nature good refers to the good. The general judgment holds that the sexual goodness refers to all the contents of human nature is good, the special judgment thinks that the sexual goodness refers to the part of the human nature as good, the general judgment understands the sexual goodness from the overall relationship within human nature, the comparative judgment from the human nature and the animal comparison, the understanding of sexual goodness from the human nature and the animal comparison. The fact judgment thinks that the sexual goodness refers to the human nature is in fact good, the value judgment thinks that the sexual goodness refers to the human nature is good according to certain value standard. Among these types of judgment, special judgment, essential judgment, general judgment and comparative judgment do not rule out the possible evil in human nature, but can still draw the conclusion of humanity good. This paper introduces these interpretation models and judgment types, and discusses their merits and demerits, which are necessary for summing up the gains and losses of Mencius' theory of goodness of nature.
【作者單位】： 清華大學(xué)人文學(xué)院;
【基金】：國(guó)家社會(huì)科學(xué)基金項(xiàng)目“先秦秦漢‘性’字詞義的多樣性及其解釋框架”(項(xiàng)目批準(zhǔn)號(hào):16BZX042)的成果
【分類號(hào)】：B222.5

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 梁濤;;孟子“道性善”的內(nèi)在理路及其思想意義[J];哲學(xué)研究;2009年07期

2 梁濤;;“以生言性”的傳統(tǒng)與孟子性善論[J];哲學(xué)研究;2007年07期

3 張奇?zhèn)?孟子“性善論”新探[J];北京師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);1993年01期

【共引文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 方朝暉;;性善論的古今解釋模式與判斷類型[J];復(fù)旦學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2017年03期

2 李會(huì)富;;生性、氣性與情性——孟子性善論之論證前提分析[J];理論界;2017年05期

3 梁濤;;荀子人性論的中期發(fā)展——論《禮論》《正名》《性惡》的性-偽說(shuō)[J];學(xué)術(shù)月刊;2017年04期

4 劉昊;;氣論視野下的性善論重構(gòu)——基于王船山“生”的思想之考察[J];杭州師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2017年01期

5 孫燕青;;《荀子》人性論的實(shí)質(zhì)及邏輯理路[J];現(xiàn)代哲學(xué);2016年06期

6 郭忠;;論中國(guó)傳統(tǒng)性善論和法治的兼容性——兼駁“人性惡是法治基礎(chǔ)”的觀點(diǎn)[J];比較法研究;2016年02期

7 王覓泉;;性善:“倫理心境”還是“自然傾向”[J];道德與文明;2015年06期

8 楊少涵;;孟子性善論的思想進(jìn)路與義理架構(gòu)[J];哲學(xué)研究;2015年02期

9 吳祖剛;;作為論性原則的“生之謂性”[J];西華師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2015年01期

10 韓燕麗;;求善與體善:柏拉圖與孟子[J];南昌大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2014年06期

【二級(jí)參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 李景林;;論“可欲之謂善”[J];人文雜志;2006年01期

2 梁濤;竹簡(jiǎn)《窮達(dá)以時(shí)》與早期儒家天人觀[J];哲學(xué)研究;2003年04期

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前3條

1 記者 牛娟娟;準(zhǔn)確判斷當(dāng)前經(jīng)濟(jì)形勢(shì) 增強(qiáng)宏觀調(diào)控靈活性[N];金融時(shí)報(bào);2011年

2 方明;CPA警惕“相似代表”的判斷謬誤[N];財(cái)會(huì)信報(bào);2005年

3 本報(bào)記者 何侖;是陷阱還是客觀趨勢(shì)？[N];國(guó)際商報(bào);2001年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 李艷敏;基于新會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則的職業(yè)判斷研究[D];河北大學(xué);2008年

2 冀洋;未遂犯之危險(xiǎn)判斷研究[D];南京師范大學(xué);2014年

3 常艷;危險(xiǎn)的判斷[D];清華大學(xué);2005年

4 張珊珊;自信心判斷的產(chǎn)生機(jī)制[D];河北師范大學(xué);2014年

，

本文編號(hào)：2143464