王船山对理学“气质之性”说的检讨与重释  

The Reflection and Re-interpretation on the Nature of Wang Chuanshan's Neo-Confucianism

作　　者：陈明[1,2] Chen Ming

机构地区：[1]中国社会科学院大学哲学院 [2]中国社会科学院哲学研究所

出　　处：《哲学研究》2023年第8期83-92,128,共11页Philosophical Research

摘　　要：王船山针对程朱将人之不善归于先天“气禀”或“气质”的观点,提出了一种兼具普遍共通性、特殊个体性以及动态发展特征的人性论。然而,船山在不同的诠释文本与论说脉络下,因择取“重释”与“批判”的不同取径,因此对于理学“气质之性”说,表现出复杂分歧的论述。本文结合具体的诠释语境与问题指向,对于这些诠释观点之间的同异作出了细致解读与分析。进而指出不能将船山这些论说分歧简单理解为观点论述之内在矛盾,或仅依著作时间即认为其观点主张发生了截然转变。笔者认为,王船山依不同之文本诠释脉络与论说重点,展现出一种融会经典诠释与理论建构的卓越灵活的哲学创造能力。Wang Chuanshan,a scholar who lived in the late Ming and early Qing period,puts forward a dynamic theory of human nature which combines commonality and individuality,as a response to Cheng Zhu's statement that human badness should be attributed to an innate"characteristic"However,Wang himself offered highly distinct views in his own texts on"the nature of temperament"of Neo-Confucianism,all of which issued from his changing approaches,either"critical"or"re-interpretative"and from various hermeneutic and theoretical perspectives,to this,essential notion.,Taking into consideration of specific hermeneutic contexts and orientations of the problematic,this article wili establish a detailed explanation as well as analysis of the differences and similarities in Wang's views on"the nature of temperament".Furthermore,the author will point out that differences in Wang's discourse cannot be understood simply as a contradiction in his thought nor merely as a complete change of mind through his lifetime.Rather,proceeding from different hermeneutic contexts and theoretical focuses,Wang shows an excellent and flexible creativity in his philosophy that integrates both interpretation of classics and construction of theories.

关 键 词：王船山 理学 气质之性 人性论 

分 类 号：B249.2[哲学宗教—中国哲学]