从天理与善恶关系的角度看程颢与程颐天理的异同  

Differences and Similarities between CHENG Hao and CHENG Yi with Consideration on Reason and the Relationship between Good and Evil

作　　者：李晓春[1] 

机构地区：[1]兰州大学哲学社会学院,甘肃兰州730000

出　　处：《兰州大学学报（社会科学版）》2004年第4期16-22,共7页Journal of Lanzhou University（Social Sciences）

基　　金：兰州大学"985工程"第二批学科建设项目"精神空间:对古典哲学的现代诠释"资助.

摘　　要：程颢的天理与气为一体而尚未能分离,故而在程颢看来,气的善恶必须由理的善恶来负责。程颐则放弃了其兄理有善恶的观点,而将以善镇恶之理发展为纯善无恶之天理。此即将天理与气区分开来,理不再对气的恶负责,从而将恶的根源完全推给了气。这样,程颢与程颐的学术重心便很不相同,程颢的天理与气一一对应,故而其理与气关系的问题不多,主要的问题在于天理与性的关系问题,即天理的善恶如何经心性拣别而形成善性的问题。程颐则已解决了此一问题,其“性即理”将性与理直接贯通,其学术的中心在于如何处理理与气的关系。In the eyes of CHENG Hao, a philosopher in the Song Dynasty, reason and character were one thing but they could also be separated. So good and evil that were derived from one's character should be attributed to one's reason. But CHENG Yi, his brother, had abandoned this idea and proposed that reason and character were two different things. Thus their academic focuses differed greatly from each other. To CHENG Hao, reason and character were one and the same thing, so no problems existed between them, except the problem of how to train the good and evil derived from reason into everything that is good. In CHENG Yi's philosophy, this problem had been solved and his focus had thus been on the proper treatment of the relationship between reason and character.

关 键 词：程颢 程颐 天理 善 恶 

分 类 号：B244.6[哲学宗教—中国哲学]