站内搜索
  您现在的位置: 科技哲学教研室 >> 人大科哲 >> 教学与招生 >> 学位论文 >> 正文
2017—崔树芝:牟宗三科学观研究
  作者:PST    文章来源:本站原创    点击数:    更新时间:2017-5-18    
】【】【

题目:牟宗三科学观研究

作者:崔树芝

指导老师:王鸿生

答辩时间:2017516

 

目录

       1

0.1 论文选题及选题意义     1

0.1.1 论文选题      1

0.1.2 选题意义      2

0.2 文献综述 4

0.2.1国内研究综述        4

0.2.2国外研究状况        8

0.3 研究方法和创新点 10

0.3.1 研究方法      10

0.3.2创新点   12

 

1 科学与牟宗三早年学思历程  14

1.1科学的时代呼声与科学主义  15

1.1.1 要求科学、民主成为时代课题  15

1.1.2 “科学主义”思潮      16

1.2 牟宗三早年的学术探索 20

1.2.1 现代新儒家与科学派的不足      20

1.2.2 独立的运思,接受西方哲学训练      22

1.2.3 架构的思辨,接上西方文化传统      25

1.3熊十力对牟宗三科学观的影响       27

本章小结         30

 

2 牟宗三对西方科学源流的反思       32

2.1从古希腊传统到现代自然科学的发展  32

2.1.1 中西文化观念的差异  32

2.1.2 古希腊开启“学之为学“的科学传统      33

2.1.3 “化质归量”的现代自然科学  37

2.2理性之架构表现与科学精神  40

2.2.1 理性之架构表现与概念的心灵  41

2.2.2 知性的逻辑性格与形式科学      42

2.2.3 “化质归量”的自然科学  45

2.3无体、无力、无理的现代科学       48

2.3.1 论“无体、无力、无理”  49

2.3.2 批评“向所而驱”的西方科学哲学传统  50

2.3.3 “归能而逆”:为科学寻求实践的安顿    51

本章小结         52

 

3 牟宗三对中国科学无而能有的思考       54

3.1羲和传统与中国古代科学       54

3.1.1 中国有无科学的争论  55

3.1.2 “羲和传统”:中国的科学传统         56

3.1.3 中国存在发展出科学的可能      58

3.2中国没有科学的深层文化原因       60

3.2.1 “仁”的文化系统对“智”的统摄  61

3.2.2 政治文化对学术文化的统驭      64

3.3内圣开出新外王:科学在中国如何无而能有       67

3.3.1 科学是“共法”,无中西之别    68

3.3.2 “良知坎陷”开出知性主体      68

3.3.3 科学从政治权力的统驭中解放出来  71

本章小结         75

 

4 牟宗三中西会通的科学观       76

4.1 智的直觉与两层存有论 77

4.1.1 康德未能充分证成现象和物自身      78

4.1.2 智的直觉如何可能      79

4.1.3 两层存有论  82

4.2 科学与良知坎陷     83

4.2.1 科学的本质是识心之执      84

4.2.2 “良知坎陷论”的阶段发展      87

4.2.3 良知与科学的深层关系      95

4.3 “三统并建”的现代文明     98

4.3.1 开出学统以求科学的独立  98

4.3.2 认识政统以求政治之客观架构  99

4.3.3 继续道统以守护道德的理想主义      101

本章小结         103

 

5 牟宗三科学观的定位       104

5.1 科学观在牟宗三思想体系中的地位     104

5.1.1 对牟宗三哲学过往研究的不足  104

5.1.2 牟宗三科学观的“半边天”地位      105

5.2 牟宗三科学观在中国科学哲学史上的地位 107

5.2.1 科学哲学史的研究视域      107

5.2.2 中国科学哲学史的起点和流派  110

5.2.3 基于中国文化立场的科学观      113

5.3 牟宗三科学观的结构与局限 115

5.3.1 牟宗三科学观的结构  115

5.3.2 牟宗三科学观的局限  121

       125

参考文献         128

       137

博士在读期间论文发表情况         140

 

论文摘要

牟宗三是当代新儒家的代表人物。因为标签化的“新儒家”身份,学界往往关注牟宗三当代新儒学思想体系的建构,而忽视了促发他进行哲学思考以及其整个学思历程的动源。据牟宗三晚年回顾,他的一生念兹在兹是在思考一个问题,就是中国文化的历史发展方向,如何从内圣开外王,他出入于中西两大文化传统,以求中西会通,从中国方面而言即要求一个大综和,就是吸收西方的科学传统、自由民主传统。显而易见,牟宗三哲学即是在处理五四新文化运动中提出的时代课题,即要求科学、民主。科学在牟宗三的哲学中实居半边天的角色,不得不予以重视。本论文即研究牟宗三对科学的系统反思。

本论文除绪论外有五章内容。

绪论主要论述选题依据和选题意义,以及文献综述和研究方法,并介绍本论文的创新之处。

第一章主要介绍牟宗三科学观的文化背景以及他早期学术研究的特征。笔者将指出,科学问题是牟宗三进行哲学思考的起点。牟宗三不满于当时浮泛的学风,故而决定去研究科学由以产生的西方文化传统。熊十力则把牟宗三带入了中国文化的堂奥。牟宗三在其早期学术生涯中,已经确立了出入中西文化而求会通的志愿,从其学思历程来看,他确实两线并行,但又有重点。他先致力于西方哲学,后致力于中国的内圣之学,最后会通中西。

第二章主要介绍牟宗三对西方科学的理解。他认为西方文化是智的文化系统,自古希腊开始即出现了独立发展的知性,这一“概念的心灵”正是科学得以产生的深层文化原因。在牟宗三看来,科学是伴随知性主体的呈露而出现的。但是,从古希腊理性科学转变为“化质归量”的近代自然科学,这实是一步“坎陷”,这一步“坎陷”并没有什么不好,但自然科学发展到后来则成了“无体、无力、无理”的“堕落”。在这里,牟宗三看到了西方科学发展的限度,科学需要寻找到实践的安顿,方能避免科学一层论的弊病。

第三章主要介绍牟宗三对中国有无科学的看法。牟宗三认为中国有自己的科学传统,即“羲和传统”。可是,羲和之官却在王官失守之后一变再变而转为阴阳家,结果“始也为用,终也为用”,最终未能发展出科学,虽没有发展出科学,羲和传统却表明中国有发展出科学的可能性。然而,中国没有发展出科学实有深层的文化原因。一方面,中国是仁的文化系统,智的知性形态受制于圣贤人格的直觉形态的统摄,无法得以独立发展;另一方面,学术文化受制于政治文化的统驭,也无法得以解放。科学本是知性之能,在人类文化中本无中西之别,科学在中国文化背景下如何无而能有,牟宗三的回答是“由内圣开出新外王”。这里的关键实为从中国文化中发展出独立的知性主体,这不仅需要让“智”从“仁”的统摄中释放出来,科学也要从政治的统驭中解放出来。为此,他提出“三统并建”的思想。

第四章主要介绍牟宗三中西会通的科学观。在经过“西—中”两个阶段后,他以康德为媒介实现中西哲学的会通(合)。他指出人是否有智的直觉是中西哲学判分的标志。他从中国文化传统出发,认为人可以有智的直觉,由此保住中国文化的本位,肯定中国文化的价值。人有智的直觉,且人虽有限而可无限,由此他证成道德的形上学,并由此而言两层存有论,即本体界的存有论(无执的存有论)和现象界的存有论(执的存有论),知性乃是由知体明觉(良知)的坎陷而成,其本质即为识心之执。如此,他既肯定了科学在现象界的独立地位,也给科学一理性上的安顿,即科学虽为知性之能,但本质上乃是良知的坎陷。“良知坎陷论”有一发展的过程,经历“坎陷论”、“开出论”,至“存有论”方为圆熟。牟宗三还把科学放在“三统并建”的现代文明观中加以考察。

第五章是对牟宗三科学观的定位。牟宗三的科学观在牟宗三整个思想系统中居于半边天的地位,并且具有科学哲学史上的意义。大体而言,牟宗三的科学观以“内圣开出新外王”为自觉的文化使命,以德性与知性的二分为结构特征,以“开出学统”与“摄智归仁”为理路,以“三统并建”为归宿。但是,牟宗三的科学观也存在着明显的局限,表现为:1、本质主义的思维倾向;2、对西方科学哲学的发展缺乏同情的了解;3、缺乏实践上的操作步骤。但平心而论,牟宗三的科学观试图把人类文明中的理性注入中国文化生命的长河,从而提升中华文明的理性程度。这种科学观即便在今日仍具有现实意义。

关键词:牟宗三;科学观;科学哲学史;当代新儒家

 

ABSTRACT

    Mou zongsan is the representative figure of the contemporary New Confucians. Because of the label of "New Confucian", academic circles tend to focus on his system of the contemporary new Confucianism, but neglect the dynamic source contributing to his philosophical thinking and the whole learning process. According to the review of Mou Zongsan in his late year, he had always reflected on a problem through his whole life, that is how to open new kingliness from inner sageliness in the direction of Chinese culture. He went into both Chinese and western cultural traditions, so as to realize the merging of them. From the aspects of China, it needs a great synthesis, which would involve absorbing the Western traditions of science and liberal democracy. Obviously, the philosophy of Mou zongsan is to deal with the contemporary issues put forward in the May fourth New Culture Movement, which requires science and democracy. Science takes the half proportion of the philosophy of Mou Zongsan. In this paper, I will research on the systematic reflections on Mou Zongsan’s thinking of science.

    This thesis has five chapters except the introduction.

    The introduction mainly discusses the basis and significance of selected topic, as well as the literature review and research methods, and introduces the innovation of this paper.

The first chapter mainly introduces the cultural background of Mou Zongsan's thinking of science and the characteristics of his early academic research. I will point out that thinking of science is the beginning of philosophical thinking of Mou Zongsan. Mou zongsan dissatisfied with the impetuous atmosphere of his time, and decided to go deep into the tradition of western culture which gives birth to science. Xiong Shili took Mou zongsan into the deep of Chinese culture. In his early academic career, Mou zongsan has set up the ambition to realize the synthesis between Chinese and western culture. From his learning and thinking course, he went with two parallel line, but there was the point in each period. He researched on western philosophy firstly, then Chinese theory of “cultivating himself”, at last the merging of Chinese and western tradition.

The second chapter mainly introduces Mou Zongsan’s understanding of western science. He thinks that the culture of the western culture is typical of intellectual system. From the ancient Greek, there has emerged the independent development of intellect, they owns conceptual mind which is to the deep cultural cause of science. From Mou Zongsan, Science is along with the reveal of the cognitive subject. But from the ancient Greek rational science to modern natural science typical of "quality to quantity", there is a step of the "negation" which is nothing wrong. In the later development, natural science appears with "no bodywu ti无体), no powerwuli无力) and no reasonwuli无理)". Mou Zongsan treats it corrupted. So mou zongsan finds the limits of the development of western science, science need trace back to the source of practice, then it can avoid the disadvantage of scientism.

The third chapter mainly introduces Mou Zongsan’s views on whether China had science. Mou Zongsan thinks China has its own scientific tradition, namely "Xi-he tradition". However, government experts turned to be the Yin-yang school after they left from the government. "Xi-he tradition" characterized with "beginning to use, and eventually also for use", eventually failed to become science. But xihe tradition suggests the possibility that China could develope science. However, there has deep cultural reasons for China without science. On the one hand, Chinese culture is the system of Ren(仁), intellectual form of wisdom is subject to the intuitional form, and has no chance of independent development; On the other hand, Academic culture is under the control of political culture, also cannot be free. Science is the function of cognitive. There is no diference between China and the West. Then how science can be developed under the background of China, the answer of Mou Zongsan is "inner sageliness opens new outer kingliness". The key here is to turn up the independent intellectual subject from Chinese culture, that means science need rid out of burdens from morals and politics. For this reason, he put forward the doctrine of Pay Equal Attention to three Orthodoxies.

The fourth chapter mainly introduces the Mou Zongsan's thinking of science from the merging of Chinese and western tradition. After two stages, "West to China", he tries to realize the merging of Chinese and western tradition with Kant philosophy as his medium. From Chinese tradition, he thinks that people can have intellectual intuition, and people are limited and unlimited, therefore he justifies moral metaphysic, and claims two layers of ontology, the ontology of noumenon and the ontology of phenomenon. Cognitive is from self-negation of conscience. So he justifies the independent status of science in the phenomenon world, also give a rational settle for science. Namely, science is from self-negation of conscience. The theory of self-negation of conscience has a process of development, from "negation" to "open", then to "ontology". Mou zongsan puts science the doctrine of Pay Equal Attention to three Orthodoxies.

The fifth chapter mainly discusses the position of Mou Zongsan's thinking of science. Mou Zongsan’s thinking of science takes half part position in the whole philosophical system of him and has great significance in the history of Chinese philosophy of science. In general, Mou Zongsan’s thinking of science takes “open new kingliness from inner sageliness” as cultural mission, with the dimidiate structue of virtue and intellect, the clue of “open academic tradition” and “ take intellect into virtue”, and takes the doctrine of Pay Equal Attention to Orthodoxies as the destination. However, Mou Zongsan’s science also exists obvious limitations, characterized by: 1, essentialism tendency; 2, lack of sympathy for the development of western philosophy of science; 3, lack of operation steps in practice. But to be fair, Mou Zongsan’s thinking of science tries to put reason in human civilization into the long river of Chinese cultural life so as to promote the rational degree of Chinese civilization, which still has realistic significance nowadays.

 

Key words: Mou Zongsan; thinking of Science; history of philosophy of science; the Contemporary New Confucianism

  • 上一篇文章:
  • 下一篇文章: 没有了
  • 打印】  【关闭】  【返回
    Copyright © 2010-2014 Philosophy of Science and Technology,Renmin University of China All Rights Reserved.
    中国人民大学哲学院科技哲学教研室 版权所有 京ICP备10216924号;京公网备110108007581