古因明的论辩风格和特点  

Argumentative Style and Characteristics inAncient Hetuvidyā

作　　者：任然 Ren Ran(College of Philosophy,Nankai University Tianjin 610065,China)

机构地区：[1]南开大学

出　　处：《科学．经济．社会》2023年第6期94-104,共11页Science Economy Society

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重点项目“印度正理派逻辑思想研究”(22AZX019)。

摘　　要：古因明论辩与古希腊的“论辩型辩论”相似,但这种相似是偶然巧合,东方论辩有其独特的风格和特征。与古希腊论辩通常采用演绎论证不同,东方学者通常采用类比方法。而这种类比与其说是西方逻辑中的类比推理,倒不如说是一种譬喻方法。就古因明而言,虽然印度思想家可能在形式化程度上不如希腊人,但在语用论辩上可能强于希腊人。东方思想家的语用论辩常常采用一种“悖论式判断”,他们往往通过让论辩对手陷入“前后不相副”的困境来反驳对方的观点。这里包含着“既是又不是”的二难。论者可以通过一个“既非是也非不是”的回答非常有效地反驳敌论者的观点。这种论辩表面上看类似于“复杂问语”的语用论辩,但实质上有其独特的东方风格。因此,因明论辩不论在历史上还是在内容上都与西方逻辑学不同。Ancient HetuvidyāArgumentation is similar to the“polemical debates”of ancient Greece,but this similarity is a coincidence,and Eastern argumentation has its unique style and characteristics.Unlike ancient Greek polemics,which usually used deductive arguments,Eastern scholars usually used analogical methods.And this analogy is not so much an analogical reasoning in Western logic as it is a metaphorical method.As far as ancient Hetuvidyāis concerned,while Indian thinkers may have been less formal than the Greeks,Indian thinkers may have been better than Greeks at discursive argumentation.The discursive arguments of Eastern thinkers often employ a kind of“paradoxical judgement”,in which they refute their opponents’arguments by putting them in an“inconsistent”dilemma,which consists of the dilemma of“both yes and no”.The dilemma of“neither yes nor no”is involved here.It is a very effective way of refuting the opponent’s point of view.This kind of argument is superficially similar to the linguistic argument of“complex questioning”,but in essence it has its own unique oriental style.Therefore,both historically and in terms of content,Hetuvidyāargumentation is different from logic,which is a subdiscipline of Western philosophy.

关 键 词：古因明 论辩风格 语用论辩 论辩结构 

分 类 号：B812[哲学宗教—逻辑学]