汉传因明“逻辑解读型”范式困境解析  

The predicaments of “Logical Interpretation” paradigm of Han-Sect Hetuvidya

作　　者：甘伟 GAN Wei(College of National Culture and Cognitive Science,Guizhou Minzu University,Guiyang 550025,China)

机构地区：[1]贵州民族大学民族文化与认知科学学院,贵州贵阳550025

出　　处：《重庆理工大学学报（社会科学）》2021年第9期46-55,共10页Journal of Chongqing University of Technology（Social Science）

基　　金：国家社会科学基金青年项目“法称《诤正理论》译释及研究”(20CZJ004)。

摘　　要：近代以来,汉传因明研究大体呈现了经典注释型、佛教解读型和逻辑解读型3种研究范式,其中以最后一种为主流,这种范式的特征是依据三段论逻辑评判标准来断言三支比量是演绎还是归纳的性质。其实,对因明进行逻辑解读型的论证范式是不合理的。于是,基于论证的结构,从理由和主张两个层面来考察这种论证范式:首先,因明论证尤其关注对理由真实性的检查,理由为真的检验是靠规则来约束的。其次,因明论证对理由之真实性的把握是以主张为本位的,即通过对主张的确认来追溯理由的真实性,这就更体现了因明论证关注语境、文化和社会因素对论证活动的影响。最后,基于三段论本身的形式结构,将三段论定义为是一种“空架子”的论证,理由的真实性以及理由对主张的支持程度并不是它关注的问题。因此,“逻辑解读型”范式在因明研究中并不合理。Since 1920s,three main paradigms of Hetuvidya research have appeared in China,namely“Classic Annotation”“Buddhist Interpretation”and“Logical Interpretation”.In the three paradigms,the“Logical Interpretation”plays a leading role and the argumentative characteristic of this paradigm is that whether Buddhist interpretation is deductive or inductive is predicated by the logical assessment criteria of syllogism.In fact,the reasoning paradigm of logical interpretation of reason is unreasonable.Therefore,based on the structure of argumentation,this kind of argumentation paradigm is investigated from two levels of reason and claim.First,reason argumentation pays special attention to the inspection of the authenticity of reason,and the verification of reason is restricted by rules.Secondly,the grasping of the authenticity of reasons is based on claims,that is,to trace the authenticity of reasons through the confirmation of claims,which further reflects that reasons pay attention to the influence of context,culture and social factors on argumentation activities.Finally,based on the formal structure of syllogism itself,syllogism is defined as a kind of“empty frame”argument,and the authenticity of reasons and the degree of support for the claim are not its concerns.Therefore,the paradigm of logical interpretation is not reasonable in the study of causal reasoning.

关 键 词：因明 论证 理由 主张 逻辑解读型 

分 类 号：B81[哲学宗教—逻辑学]