English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 11 |  Items with full text/Total items : 89686/119522 (75%)
Visitors : 23947598      Online Users : 136
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    政大機構典藏 > 文學院 > 哲學系 > 期刊論文 >  Item 140.119/53366
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/53366


    Title: 比較孟子與荀子的「性善說」
    A Comparism on Mencius' and Hsün-tze's Views of Hsing-shang-Shuo
    Authors: 何淑靜
    Ho, Shu-Ching
    Contributors: 政大哲學系
    Keywords: 孟子;荀子;性善說;性善之性;性惡善偽;;成善能力;內在本有;主謂式/重言式分析關係;經驗之實然;自然之性;道德之性;超驗之無限的創造性
    Mencius;Hsün Tze;Hsing-Shang Shuo;Hsing-Shang che Hsing;Hsing-O Shang Wei;Hsing;the good ability;originally innate;originally Innate/subject-predicate analytical relationship;empirical fact;natural nature;moral nature;transcendental and infinite creativity
    Date: 2009-12
    Issue Date: 2012-08-23 14:44:10 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 一般都忽略了荀子有他自己對「性善」的了解與看法。本文主要就依據孟子與荀子自己的了解與觀點來比較他們對「性善說」的看法。結論是:(1)兩人都認為「性善」表示「性」與「成善能力」的能力為「分析關係」的「不離」,即為人所「內在本有」。但,(2)孟子之了解是兩者為(嚴格意義之)「重言式的分析關係」,荀子則為「主謂式的分析關係」。(3)關於「內在本有」,在荀子為「生而有」的,乃自然之順取進路之所了解的;在孟子則不是。孟子取道德之送取方式了解人之所以可能做道德實踐之根據乃內在於人且為人本有。(4)因之,對孟子,性善」之「性」為「道德之性」,對荀子則為「自然之性」。(5)依孟子的了解,此性為「超驗而無限的道德創造性」;對荀子則只為經驗實然之自然之性。最後,(6)依荀子,「性善說」不可能成立;孟子則主張「性善說」。
    This study is purposed to compare Mencius' and Hsün Tze's views on Hsing-Shang (the goodness of human nature), by tying up with their own understandings-in the case that scholars generally neglect the fact that Hsün Tze has his own understanding and view on Hsing-Shang. And the conclusion turns out to be: (1) For both Mencius and Hsün Tze. Hsing-Shang indicates that the relationship between human nature and the ability enable one to have good action is inseparably, i.e. analytical relation. But, (2) for Mencius, it is in the form of subject-predicate, while for Hsün Tze in tautological form. (3) As to the nature in Hsing-Shang Shuo, Mencius takes to be what one originally and internally has, i.e. not what one is endowed by nature, whereas for Hsün Tze one has it while one is born. (4) The nature, for Mencius. is the Four Beginnings, which is essential to be moral. while, in Hsün Tze's view, it is a natural ability, essential to he natural. (5) In Mencius' view, the nature is the creativity of morals. transcendental and infinite, but it is impossible to be so in Hsün Tze's understanding: it is just an empirically nature. (6) In Hsün Tze's theoretical system, there is no room for Hsing-Shang Shuo. and so the relationship between the nature and the good ability is empirically synthetic, but Mencius takes Hsing-Shang Shuo to be valid.
    Relation: 鵝湖學誌, 43, 1-36
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[哲學系] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    10213732-200912-201109070002-201109070002-1-36.pdf7822KbAdobe PDF736View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback