Mengzi on Rectification of Names——A Study Within the Context of Pre-Qin Debates over Name and Reality  

先秦名实之辩背景下的孟子正名思想

作　　者：Yuyu Liu 刘玉宇(中山大学外国语学院英语系)

机构地区：[1]Department of English,School of Foreign Languages,Sun Yat-sen University

出　　处：《逻辑学研究》2024年第6期93-116,共24页Studies in Logic

摘　　要：Set in the context of pre-Qin period,Mengzi's contribution to the discussions of language issues connects later debates over name and reality to Kongzi's idea of zhengming.Inheriting Kongzi's socio-political concern,Mengzi disclosed the ambiguity and contradictions latent in contemporary philosophical discourse through his argumentation.In response to Mengzi,Gongsun Long and later Moists developed the logico-linguistic strain implied in Mengzi's discussions,but diverged from each other in two oppositional veins.While Gongsun Long attempted to defend Mengzi's project of rectifying reality in terms of the correct use of names,the later Moists proposed the opposite,denying the possibility to use language as the standard to rectify reality.Combining the pragmatism of later Moists with Zhuangzi's antilanguage position,Xunzi renounced the logico-linguistic approach and prioritized tradition and common sense over logical and linguistic standards of right and wrong.近代以来,由于受到西方哲学的影响,学界一直视孔孟的“正名”理论与先秦时期的名实之辩为两种不相关的哲学体系。本文将孟子的语言观置于从孔子到荀子的先秦哲学发展脉络之中,探讨孟子的论辩如何将孔子的正名说与战国中后期名实之辩联系起来。有理由认为,尽管孟子没有对名实关系作出直接论述,但他在哲学论辩中所揭示的语言问题与后来的名实之争有明确联系。从孔子的正名说到战国中后期名实之辩的发展进程中,孟子是个不可或缺的重要环节。孟子一方面继承了孔子正名学说的社会政治关怀,但另一方面又通过论辩揭示了孔子的正名理论中事实描述与价值判断之间的矛盾。公孙龙与后期墨家关于名实问题的论争,恰恰建立在对孟子所遗留的语言难题的回应之上。但他们的回应形成了两条对立的路线。公孙龙试图发展孟子以名正实的正名学说,而后期墨家则提出了相反的主张,否定了语言可以用作矫正现实的标准。荀子将后期墨家的实用主义与庄子的反语言立场相结合,摒弃了以名正实的逻辑语言进路,认为判断是非依赖的是传统和常识,而不是逻辑和语言规则。

关 键 词：NAMES discussions CONTRADICTION 

分 类 号：B222.5[哲学宗教—中国哲学] B811