从形质论到文质论——中希古典哲学互鉴的一个尝试  

From Hylomorphism to Physiomorphism--An attempt of Chinese-Greek Classical Philosophy Mutual Reference

作　　者：吴飞[1] Wu Fei

机构地区：[1]北京大学哲学系,北京100871

出　　处：《中国社会科学》2025年第2期167-185,208,共20页Social Sciences in China

摘　　要：晚近围绕亚里士多德形质论的许多哲学争论,是为了在笛卡尔式二元论与机械物质主义之间寻求一个更好的现代宇宙观。亚里士多德形质论本是为了克服柏拉图二元论,但因为其固有的形式优先的特点,而常常陷入新的二元论模式。中国古典哲学中的文质论传统与形质论有非常类似的理论特点,但因为对自然优先的坚持,可以避免形质论的这种诠释倾向。通过详细比较自然认知、工具制造、文明制作三个语境中的形质论与文质论模式,我们发现形质论与文质论并不仅仅是中西哲学的各自特点,而本就是互相渗透、互为表里的。通过形质论思考激发文质论传统的哲学力量,并以文质论模式纠正形质论的可能倾向,是利用中西古典哲学思考现代问题的一种可能性。Recent debates surrounding Aristotle's theory of hylomorphism seek to develop a modern cosmology that transcends Cartesian dualism and mechanical materialism.Originally intended to overcome Platonic dualism,hylomorphism,with its emphasis on the primacy of form,has often led to new forms of dualistic thinking.The physiomorphistic tradition in Chinese classical philosophy shares notable similarities with hylomorphism but,due to its prioritization of nature,avoids some of its shortcomings.A comparative analysis of these frameworks in the contexts of epistemology,tool-making,and civilization-building reveals that they are not merely distinct characteristics of Chinese and Western thought but are intrinsically interconnected and mutually illuminating.The introduction of hylomorphism into Chinese philosophy could stimulate philosophical thinking within physiomorphism,while the latter can,in turn,address some of the interpretative challenges of hylomorphism.This cross-cultural dialogue offers a productive approach for applying classical Chinese and Greek philosophy to contemporary issues.

关 键 词：形质论 文质论 中希互鉴 自然 文明 

分 类 号：I20[文学—中国文学]