文化观转型与“象思维”之失  

Cultural Transformation and the Loss of Image Thinking

作　　者：王树人[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国社会科学院哲学研究所,北京100732

出　　处：《杭州师范大学学报（社会科学版）》2008年第3期5-9,共5页Journal of Hangzhou Normal University(Humanities and Social Sciences)

摘　　要：20世纪初以降,自从教育制度西化之后,在开启科学思维理性之窗时,却关闭了自己"象思维"的悟性之窗,致使中国学人陷入失去主体话语境地。后来几代学人,由于只有单一科学思维理性,以至于不能真正进入和领会中国传统经典。中西思维方式不同,源于语言不同。"象思维"作为前语言前逻辑的思维,是最具本原性和原创性的思维。在"轴心时期",西方在"象思维"基础上产生出理性的逻辑的概念思维,并逐渐构成西方文化主流的思维方式。而中国的"象思维"则经过儒、道、佛三家而推向高级形态,构成中国文化主流的思维方式。崇尚不同最高思想观念(非实体与实体)的中西思维方式,各有不同的功能和价值,但都非万能。两种思维方式相互不能取代,而只有经过会通,才能推进各自文化的创新与发展。Since the early 20th century, with the introduction of Western education into China, Chinese people has closed the window of perception of ＂ image thinking＂ while trying to open the window of rationality of scientific thinking, which put Chinese scholars in a situation of losing their subjective discourse. And later generations only pursue the single rationality of scientific thinking and cannot grasp the essence of traditional Chinese classics. The difference between Chinese and Western thinking modes derive from the difference of languages. Image thinking, as a pre-language and prelogical thinking mode, has its originality. During the Axial Period, the concept thinking, which was characterized by reason and logic, was developed in the West on the basis of Chinese image thinking and gradually became the main thinking mode in Western culture. The image thinking was a high-level form evolved from Confucianism, Daoism and Buddhism and became dominant in Chinese culture. Though Chinese and Western thinking modes, with their plural concepts （entity and non-entity）, have distinct functions and values, they are not omnipotent. That is to say, they cannot replace each other but complement each other. Only the complementation can promote cultural innovation and development.

关 键 词：象思维 概念思维 悟性 理性 实体 非实体 诗意联想 会通 

分 类 号：B804.2[哲学宗教—思维科学]