哲学社会科学版
陕西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)
中西哲学“物”观念研究
早期中国的“物”观念
PDF下载 ()
李 若 晖
(复旦大学 哲学学院, 上海 200433)
李若晖,男,湖南长沙人,文学博士,复旦大学哲学学院教授,博士研究生导师,湖南大学岳麓书院国学研究与传播中心兼职研究员。
摘要:
“物”之初文“勿”象以刀切物之形,本义为分割,其后起本字为“刎”。在古代观念中,“全”与“纯”是一体的,故而由分割导致的不全可等同于不纯。在殷商甲骨文中,“勿”即已借为否定词,但“勿牛”合文中的“勿”已表示杂色。后世“勿牛”合文演变为形声字“物”,本义即为杂色牛,于是“物”也可表示对混杂之物的辨别,即“物色”。物色之实质为归类,故“物”又有“物类”之义。分类的实质即是立法。中国哲学的“物”观念是内在包含秩序性的。诸子对“物”观念的推衍主要有两条路径:其一为名学,《墨经》以“物”为达名,在“达、类、私”三“名”的层级中来达致知识论与逻辑学的一致性。其二为道家,老庄对“物”的兴趣仅限于与“道”相对之“物”,亦即作为类型之“物”,而非个体之物。早期中国的“物”观念对于中国思想的类型化思维起着奠基作用。
关键词:
物; 类; 法则
收稿日期:
2016-06-28
中图分类号:
B22
文献标识码:
A
文章编号:
1672-4283(2017)01-0005-06
基金项目:
国家社会科学基金一般项目“北京大学藏汉简老子研究”(14BZX039);国家社会科学基金重大项目“出土简帛四古本《老子》综合研究”(15ZDB006);中国社会科学院重大项目“中华思想通史”春秋战国卷;教育部人文社会科学研究规划基金项目“道之言:由‘名’之分析建构老子哲学”(13YJA720008);湖南大学岳麓书院国学研究与传播中心2013年度国学招标课题“老子集注汇考(第2—11章)”(13YBA366);复旦大学“985工程”三期整体推进人文学科研究项目“老子道论”(2011RWXKZD010)
Doi:
The Concept of “Wu(物, things)” in Early China
LI Ruohui
(School of Philosophy, Fudan University, Shanghai 200433)
Abstract:
As the original character of 物,勿symbolized the action of cutting something with a knife, so that its original meaning was to divide something. A new character刎 was created later to refer to this meaning. In the thinking of ancient people, the concept of “全(quan, complete)” and “纯 (chun, pure)” were unified. The concept of “incomplete” which was caused by division could equal to “impure”. On the oracle bone inscriptions in Yin or Shang, 勿 had already borrowed from the character of negative adverb. However, 勿 had already implied “variegated” as a part of the compound character勿牛. Later, this compound character evolved into a new phonogram物, which means variegated cattle. As a result, 物 could also refer to the action of distinguishing something from mixed things, which means “物色 (wu se, to seek out)”. The essence of “物色 (wu se, to seek out)” is classification so that物 could also refer to “物类 (wu lei, categories of things)”.Actually, the essence of classification is to set up norms. The concept of “物 (wu, things)” in Chinese philosophy involves the idea of order intrinsically. There were two main routes to derive the concept of “物 (wu, thing)” for ancient thinkers. The first route lead to the study of名 (ming, names). In Mo Jing (The canons of the Mohists), 物 was considerd as “达名 (da ming, unrestricted names)”. The uniformity of epistemology and logic was reached in the three levels of 名 (ming, names): 达 (da, unrestricted) ,类 (lei, classifying),私 (si, private). The second route lead to the school of Tao. For Laozi and Zhuangzi, their interests in “物 (wu, things)” were restricted to a certain perspective, which was “物(wu, things)” related to Tao. Such a concept of “物(wu, things)” was not considered as individual, however, it was considered as type. The concept of “物(wu, things)” in early China should be regarded as a cornerstone for typological thinking in Chinese thoughts.
KeyWords:
Wu(物, things); Lei(类, type); norms