人性恶的论证:荀子的经验类比  

The Argumentation for Human Nature: Xunzi's Empirical Analogy

作　　者：何远长 Yuanchang He

机构地区：[1]武汉大学哲学学院

出　　处：《逻辑学研究》2025年第1期36-50,共15页Studies in Logic

摘　　要：逻辑与人性学说是荀子研究中的重要部分,但对二者的研究缺乏交集,由此导致对体现荀子逻辑思想的素材的忽视,对“性恶”的说明则依赖概念的抽象辨析。但回到文本可发现,诉诸经验的类比是荀子论证人性的主要方式,即通过与植物生长、产品制作和人工培育这三类经验事态做类比,谈论“人之性恶”的三种意义:顺是之恶、矫正之恶、后天积恶。可见,基于逻辑论证的研究更有利于说明相关的思想问题,即“性恶”的多义性取决于对不同经验素材的类比;而把思想学说纳入逻辑研究的视野也更有利于拓宽对中国逻辑的理解,即类比的论证与说服更为重要。Logic and the Theory of human nature are important parts of Xunzi's study, but the lack of intersection between these two part has led to neglecting the important material that reflects Xunzi's logical thought and resorting to abstract conceptual analysis to explain that “human nature is bad”. Returning to the text, we can find that Xunzi argues for human nature by means of empirical analogies, i.e., by making analogies with the three types of empirical states of affairs, namely plant growth, product production, and artificial cultivation, he hold that “human nature is bad” in three dimensions: The natural development of human nature is bad, human nature requires correction, and cultivation of human nature can have bad results. So, it can be seen that research based on logical argumentation is more conducive to explaining the related thought issues, i.e., the revelation of the different meanings of human nature relies on the analogies of different empirical states of affairs? and carry out the study of logic by focusing of thought issues is more conducive to broadening the understanding of Chinese logic, i.e., analogical arguments is more important in Chinese logic.

关 键 词：荀子 性恶 逻辑 论证 类比 

分 类 号：B81[哲学宗教—逻辑学]