早期儒家与德性伦理学:儒学研究中的相对主义话题——兼与安乐哲、罗思文商榷  

Early Confucianism and Virtue Ethics: The Relativism in Confucianism Studies——A Discussion with Ames and Rosemont

作　　者：韩振华[1] 

机构地区：[1]复旦大学哲学博士后流动站,上海200433

出　　处：《伦理学研究》2012年第3期133-138,141,共6页Studies in Ethics

基　　金：中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助;2010年度教育部人文社会科学研究一般项目"他乡有夫子:欧美的<孟子>译介与诠释研究"(项目批准号10YJC720013);北京外国语大学"211工程"三期建设项目"儒家文学思想的当代转型研究"之阶段性成果

摘　　要：20世纪中叶以来,西方伦理学研究的一个重要特征是德性伦理学的复兴。万白安、艾文贺、余纪元等西方汉学学者参照德性伦理学视角来重新诠释中国早期儒家伦理学,借以彰显儒家伦理与西方伦理对话的新路径。安乐哲和罗思文《早期儒家是德性论的吗?》一文则持一种与德性伦理学完全相异的视角:他们认为早期儒家伦理是一种角色伦理(role ethics),"儒家不寻求普遍,而是集中关注特殊性"。本文尝试对此问题展开讨论。意在阐明三个论点:其一,德性伦理学是儒家伦理的题中应有之义;在这一点上,早期儒家伦理虽不及宋明新儒家突出,但实备此一面向。故此,以德性伦理为视角来考究早期儒家伦理,不仅并非绝然扞格,而且可以开启理解儒家伦理的新视域。其二,安乐哲、罗思文的观点固然能够启人心智,但其论说与其说阐明了早期儒家伦理的根本特征,莫若说自我指涉性地流露了其自身的理论限域:去本质化的过程哲学、以实践为先的新实用主义。将这一理论限阈视为"奥卡姆剃刀",只会使早期儒家伦理成为一种过度后现代化和单面化的狭隘存在。其三,与角色伦理相关联的文化相对主义极度排斥普遍主义的价值诉求,对相对主义和普遍主义之间应有的张力视若不见。以儒家伦理为价值取向的理论和行为主体若将这种绝对了的相对主义内在化为主体自身的信念内容,则无异于自我设限,从而在根本上使得跨文化交流和融合成为一纸空文,在最低限度上也不能避免或消弭不同伦理体系之间的道德冲突。Since the mid-20th century, the revival of virtue ethics in the west hasbeen an important phenomenon. Bryan W. Van Norden, Philip J. Ivanhoe, andsome other western sinologists attempt to reinterpret early Confucian ethics withreferences to virtue ethics by searching for ethical dialogues between China andthe West. Meanwhile, Roger T. Ames together with Henry Rosemont, in their 'IsEarly Confucianism Virtue Ethics?' , take a completely different perspectivethat the early Confucian ethics is a kind of role ethics, and that Confucianismnever emphasizes universality but focuses on particularity instead. This paperattempts to explore this issue from the following three perspectives: First~ virtueethics is an integrant part of Confucian ethics. Though in a more implicit waycompared with Neo-Confucian, the early Confucian still entailed virtue theory.Therefore, the perspective of virtue ethics could be applied to Confucian ethics,which would open a new horizon for the studies of Confucian ethics. Second,Ames and Rosemont's point of view could be somewhat inspiring, but theirdiscourse is much more to reveal their own theoretical vision self-referentially,which are process philosophy, anti-essentialism, new pragmatism withpractice-priority, than to clarify the fundamental characteristics of the ea,r, lyConfucian ethics. Ames and Rosemont view role ethics as an 'Occam's razorbut this 'razor' will only make an excessively post-modernized and one-sidedConfucian ethics. Third, the role ethics, associated with the relativisticinclination, extremely excludes the value demand of universalism, and it ignoresthe natural tension between relativism and universalism. Chinese cultural agents,who adopt this absolute relativism as the principal of their own beliefs, are justplacing limits on themselves. The role ethics fail to prevent or eliminate moralconflicts between different ethical systems, let alone making cross-culturalcommunication and integration possible.

关 键 词：儒家伦理 德性伦理学 角色伦理 新实用主义 

分 类 号：B82-06[哲学宗教—伦理学]