老子的自然哲學;Nature of Philosophy of Laozi

NCUIR > College of Liberal Arts at National Central University > Graduate Institute of Philosophy > Electronic Thesis & Dissertation > Item 987654321/79514

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://ir.lib.ncu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/79514

Title:	老子的自然哲學;Nature of Philosophy of Laozi
Authors:	譚宇權;tan, yu-chuan
Contributors:	哲學研究所
Keywords:	道;自然;道家哲學;老子自然哲學;詩人哲學家;Dao;nature;Daoist philosophy;Nature Philosophy of Laozi;Poet phhilisopher
Date:	2019-01-29
Issue Date:	2019-04-02 14:35:20 (UTC+8)
Publisher:	國立中央大學
Abstract:	本論文的目的，是設法延續袁保新當年從事老子形上學重建的工作，希望能找到較好的理解老子哲學方法。在他的研究中，我發現他設法以超越主客對立的方式，來詮釋老子之道，於是創造出，肯定老子之道有實體部分之說。其次我認為，他對於唐君毅的批評是有相當說服力的理由；因為唐君毅對中國哲學的理解變成知識論之理解。但我更認為：唐君毅的老子詮釋，有一個重要的盲點，是將老子以詩人的原始思維棄而不顧，而直接使用西方哲學家之知識進路，將老子哲學置於手術台上，做主觀之分析。而牟宗三雖然能從中國哲學的特質與產生背景（周文疲弊）上，為了解老子哲學研究注入解釋中國哲學必須有的見識，但由於過去他對中國哲學理解，一概是以「生命哲學」做為起點來論，所以他總是生命之內在與超越，來符合老子也內在超越之說。可是除此呢？他的說法有缺陷嗎？至於袁保新之說，在指出：老子之道有實有的成分。然而，他忽略老子在建立其道時，是以「無名」作為其道的重要性質。換言之，這種道之概念，是他一手創造出來，也是他在內心經過反思的結果。而且他已明言：這種道是他經由直觀而來，因此，我們絕不可以一般西方哲學家在客觀世界中建立之道同日而語。又，牟宗三周文疲弊之說，只是我們研究老學之開端，因為他已啟發我們進一步去追問：到底這種完全不同於儒家之道的哲學思維何來？根據我對老子生活的楚國的了解，老子除了與孔子一樣，會常讀一本書是《易經》；這本書本來是一本用來算命的書，但它呈現的哲學意義是，從宇宙的各種現象，去推知人類的吉凶之理。而老子哲學似乎就這樣，將這本書作為藍本，做創造性的詮釋，所以造出來的自然哲學體系，希望能對充滿危機感的未來，能起解惑的智慧。之外，我們還必須了解到-老子生活在一個很特殊的環境，就是充滿中國古代神話、宗教以及大詩人出現的地區。就這在樣文化的沃土上，已匯集許多產生老子這種型態哲學家的條件；通常，詩人會以原始的思維的整全一體的思維，來想像宇宙的來源，或多以隱喻來說明其所體會出的道理。所以，我不但以詩 ii 人的哲學創作來分析《老子》，並順此提法，將它放入卡西勒之人類文化學中，來理解老子哲學的重要面相。這是我嘗試以現代哲學的理論為根據；包括人類文化學家卡西勒對於古代以來的各種文化的解釋，認為不能一律以科學來做詮釋；因為其中充滿不可能的描寫（具例來說，如莊子中對於萬有有情之描寫）；但為解釋這種具有神秘現象的中國哲學，如放在中國文化所產生條件中來說，則相當合適；此由於老子的整全性體思維，就是繼承神話、藝術、語言，以及因此產生之歷史。所以，今天我們可以從這種新進路來詮釋道家這種的老學。再從卡西勒的語言哲學來說，在神話時代，有神話的語言，這是一種「直接表情」的語言；譬如聽到雷聲以為是天在發怒時，便直接將雷聲作為表達，這是表情的象徵語言。同理，老子的「道」；也是作為一切構成的來源象徵而已，證據之一是以「谷神」作為萬物之母。所以老子使用「萬物之母」來一直接稱呼其道。或以一個隱喻-「玄牝」（第6 章）來直接說明它。又以「玄之又玄」，來表示它的「不可思議」，就是因為當時的人類認為：這其中，富有神祕主義的成分，而不再想去研究它。所以老子過去在西方學界的命運是如此。但若在卡西勒看來，並不如此這麼簡單；因為在神話中，包含的整全性思維。而我們在老子的哲學中，也發現這是他哲學的特徵。這就是過去我們認為的，在老子所運用的天人合一的思維中，存在的事實。所以我主張：必須從這種特殊的哲學思維，進入老子的研究。其意義就是，在儒家說必須有善惡之分時，老子卻說成：「善之與惡，相去若何？」；因為他是一位從「有無之分」，到不論道德是非是必要的，所以主張「反向思維」的大哲；譬如：在孔孟堅持的「正名」時，在老子卻主張「無名」；其意義是從儒家分別心之使用，到以無分別之心，來重新「觀看」這個世界的一切。於是，建立一種上述之一體的思維觀。所以如果說，儒家是人類中心思維，老子則是高度追求萬物一律平等的思維。其意義在於，將主宰萬物之神聖性之萬物本體之道性，釋放給萬物，讓他們都得到自生自長的機會。這在對統治者而言，當然是一種新的治國理念，就是讓為政者以「無為的方式」來統治國家。所以，我們從卡西勒的人類學來觀察老子的哲學，並不是一種高深的學問，而是設法回復到本真的狀態，來解決人類因過度使用慾望所普遍產生的生存危機。不僅如此，老子經過這樣的重新詮釋之後，整部《老子》的文學氣息就表現出來，就是他的，對萬物的觀察已形成一種新的視野；例如；他對構成萬物的原理，不再重視個別性與其差異性，而是重視其整體性。 iii 例如：他對房屋的看法、對器具的觀察，不同於一般人，只看中其實體的部分。反之，認為包括空虛部分之後之物，才真正構成一個實體。所以，他在此提出種新的哲學思維，是作為建立一種新人生觀的開始。在這方面，我必須強調：中國哲學是一種實踐體會的哲學，所以必須有這方面修養的君子；才能夠如牟宗三，除了能作哲學詮釋之外，更強調生命哲學的修養。但只看到其中的道德修為，還是不夠的；因為老子生長的環境，才是一個詩人養成的重要條件；屈原的例子，說明他代表詩人在楚國中養成的條件，而更早的老子或後來的莊子，總是以特殊的詩人想像力，使用許多隱喻來表達其對於事物之新觀點；如莊子主張之兩行之道、寓言之說，或老子的谷神之說、玄牝之說，如果我們從這樣的詩人眼光去重視新的老子詮釋，就可理解為何，從現象學來研究老子的海德格，會將詩與思做為近鄰關係來研究；其意義在於- 肯定老子是一位詩人，是兼具哲學能力的大哲。基於此，經過我的研究，我將我的成果分述於下- 一、我避開唐君毅的哲學研究之後，能回到老子作文兼具文學家與哲學家的思維，來重新理解《老子》；例如：我認為：老子是以詩人的方式從事哲學之思考；例如他在詮釋根本之道時，就是不斷使用詩人的隱喻（如以「山谷」來比喻道具有寬厚之德、以「嬰孩」來比喻道之本真）。不僅如此，這樣建立之社會，不再出現人間之是非紛擾。而且，他希望人能根據他經由想像而建立之「獨立不改、周行而不殆」之完美宇宙觀，作為對人類之啟發，以呈現為人生的智慧。此一智慧的政治運用，當然是指建立在無執與無為的統治方式上；譬如他說：「道常無為而無不為」，表現出一種經由想像所呈現之完美狀態，卻不一定能成為現實可能到達之完美狀態。因此，他是在建立價值世界之完美。這也是我主張的：必須同時以詩人的眼光來重新理解老子之主要原因。二、我從《詩經》的「玄鳥生商」的傳說，來比較老子以「玄牝」，只做到之象徵或隱喻的萬物本源，以替代創造萬物之主宰萬物之論，而得出：老子的形上學不同於西方以知識進路所建立之實體形上學，更不同於具有無上權威之上帝形上學。又在此比較之中，我認為老子之道，是經過老子給出的玄德之後，自我弱化之後的道；理由是，這個本根，已失去其主宰性萬物之性質，而且給予萬物本身具有自生自長的內在力量。三、而這個力量就是海德格說的「大寫之自然」(Nature)，或來自於老子在其內心建立之自然世界，也就是我主張之「人為自然」(artificial nature)一詞的意義。 iv 四、但在此詮釋之下，老子最重要之價值，並不是其用來解釋宇宙來源之道，反而是因此建立之人生觀，與因此產生的唯美之生命智慧；包括其對生死的看法，就是基於這樣無分別相之下，讓人知道這世上的一切都在變動中。於是，若能將人的生死都視為唯美的循環，則將能成為人中之智者，並可以以此來過安心、舒適，以及沒有煩惱的一生。五、總之，我們不要把富有詩人情懷、富有想像的老子哲學，視為一種西方哲學意義下的哲學。而忽略其中的詩人思維與文學之建構成分。反之，富有詩人情懷的莊子的偉大，就在於他能覺悟出：老子哲學的特別，於是，創造出更美的宇宙觀與人生觀。所以我主張：運用卡西勒之人類文化學與海德格的研究進路，將會對《老子》形成一種意想不到的新理解。 ;Nature Philosophy of Laozi ABSTRACT The purpose of this thesis is to try to continue the work of Pao -Hsin Yuen（袁保新） in the reconstruction of metaphysics, hoping to find a better philosophical method for understanding Laozi. In Pao-Hsin Yuen′s research, I found that he managed to interpret Laozi′s way in a style that transcends inverse conception between subjective and objective, thus creating and affirming that Laozi′s way has its entity. Secondly, I think that his criticism of Chun-I Tang（唐君毅） is quite convincing as Chun-I Tang understanding of Chinese philosophy has become an understanding of epistemology. But I also think that: Chun-I Tang’s interpretation of Laozi has one major oversight — he abandons Laozi′s original thinking as a poet and directly analyzes Laozi′s philosophy subjectively by using the knowledge of Western philosophers. While Tsung-San Mou（牟宗三）can inject insight into Chinese philosophy from the traits and background of Chinese philosophy (the Zhou dynasty culture has gradually become rigid and lost its epoch（周文疲弊1）), to understand Laozi′s philosophy. But because of the past his understanding of Chinese philosophy is based on the "life philosophy" as the starting point, so he always uses the intrinsic transcendence of life, which is also in line with Laozi’s approach. However, is his statement flawed? As for Yuen Pao-Hsin’s statement, he pointed out that the way of Lao zi has a true element. However, he ignores the “nameless” nature of Tao that Lao zi established. In other words, the concept of this Tao is created by him and is the result of his reflection in his heart. Moreover, he has made it clear that this kind of Tao comes from his direct perception through the senses. Therefore, we must not establish the same way in the objective world as Western philosophers do. 1 After the long history of the chanting, the Zhou dynasty culture has gradually become rigid and lost its epoch, which is the disorder of the whole era. vi Moreover, Tsung-San Mou’s Chinese philosophy is just the beginning of our study of Laozi, because he has inspired us to further question: What is this philosophical thinking that is completely different from Confucianism? According to my understanding of Chu, a state in the Zhou Dyna sty, Laozi, like Confucius, often read a book called the Book of Changes（易經）. This book is originally a book for fortune telling, but its philosophical significance is to infer the good or ill luck of human beings from various phenomena of the universe. Laozi’s philosophy seems to be like this, creating a creative interpretation by basing on The Book of Changes. Therefore, Laozi had created this natural philosophy system as a means for providing answers through wisdom in regards to their apprehension of future crises. In addition, we must also understand that Laozi lived in a very special environment, which was filled with ancient Chinese mythology, religion and great poets. In this background, there are many conditions that have produced this kind of philosophers like Laozi. Usually, the poet will apply a primitive and holistic viewpoint to imagine the source of the universe, or to use metaphors to explain the thought that he had experienced. Therefore, I not only analyze the book of Lao zi with the poet′s philosophical creation, but also try to understand the important aspects of Laozi′s philosophy by applying the philosophy of human culture（人類文化哲學） of Ernst Cassirer. My approach is based on the theory of modern philosophy which includes the interpretation of the spiritual scientist Ernst Cassirer. He believes that various cultures can not always be interpreted in terms of science because it is full of impossible descriptions ( for example, there is a description of having affection for all things on earth in the Book of Chuang-Tzu（莊子）). However, it does not explain this Chinese philosophy with mysterious phenomena, such as the conditions created by Chinese culture. It is quite appropriate due to Lao zi′s holistic thinking, which is the inheritance of mythology, art, language, and the resulting history. Therefore, today we can interpret Laozi′s philosophy of Taoism from this new way. From Ernst Cassirer′s linguistic philosophy, in the age of mythology, there is a mythical language, which is a kind of "direct expression" language; for example, to believe that the heavens are expressing their anger when thunder is heard. This is vii an expression of the symbolical language. In the same way, Laozi′s "Tao" is also a symbol of all forms of composition. One example of this comes from his use of “the spirit of hollowness（谷神）” to directly refer to Tao as the mother of all things. Or use a metaphor - " the profound maternal nature （玄牝）" to directly explain it. And he also used "the most mysterious of the mysterious" to expres s something beyond logic and reason because people at that time thought this phenomenon is rich in mysticism, and didn’t want to study it anymore. Therefore, Lao zi′s interpretation in Western academic circles is so. However, it is not so simple in the eyes of Ernst Cassirer because mythology contains holistic thinking. In the philosophy of Laozi, we also found this to be a feature of his philosophy. This is what we believe in the past, the fact that Lao zi uses the theory that man is an integral part of nature. Therefore, I advocate that we must approach the study of Laozi with this special philosophical thinking. The significance is that when Confucianism says that there must be a distinction between good and evil, Laozi says "What is the difference between good and evil?" Laozi is a great philosopher who advocated "reverse thinking" so he thought that "there is no difference between with and without", regardless of whether morality is necessary or not. For example, Confucius and Mencius insist the rectifica tion of named while Laozi advocated anonymity. That is to re-visit the world with no difference after using Confucianism′s difference. Therefore, he established one of the above-mentioned thinking views. So if Confucianism is a human-centered thinking, Laozi is highly concerned with the idea that all things are equal which is to release the nature of all things to themselves, so that they all have the opportunity to be self-sufficient. This is a new concept of governing a country, which is to let the politi cians adopt a “letting things take their own course” approach. Therefore, we observe the philosophy of Laozi from the philosophy of human culture（人類文化哲學） of Ernst Cassirer. It is not a profound form of study, but a way to return to the concept of authenticity to solve the survival crises that human beings face due to excessive desires. Not only that, after Laozi′s reinterpretation, the literary atmosphere from the Book of Laozi is manifested, and his observation of all things has formed a new vision. For example, the principle of making everything, he does not pay attention to its individuality and differences, but places importance on its integrity. viii Moreover, he treats the house and appliance, as they are only a part of the entity. His views are different from ordinary people. Laozi held views that differed from ordinary people. He considered that an entity is actually constituted from void. Therefore, he proposed a new philosophical thinking here to be a beginning of establishing a new outlook on life. In this respect, I must emphasize that Chinese philosophy is a philosophy of practical experience, so it is necessary to have a noble character like Tsung-San Mou, who cultivates in this respect. He owns self -cultivation of life philosophy in addition to being able to make a philosophical interpretation. Not only the moral cultivation, but also the environment where Laozi grew up in was an important condition for a poet to develop. Qu Yuan（屈原）, a poet in the Chu State, is another example. Laozi or later Chuang-Tzu, always used the special poet′s imagination to use many metaphors to express their new views on things. For example, Chuang-Tzu has the way of walking on two paths（兩行之道） and fables （寓言之說） while Laozi has the spirit of hollowness and the profound maternal nature. Therefore, if we look at Laozi from such a poet’s perspective, it is understandable why Martin Heidegger, who studied Laozi from phenomenology, considered poetry and thought to be related field of study. The significance is that - Laozi is regarded as both a poet and also a great philosopher. The results of my research are as following. I avoid the philosophical study of Chun-I Tang, and approach studying the Book of Laozi through his thinking as a writer and philosopher. For example, I think Lao zi uses a poet′s way to think about philosophy. When he interprets the fundamental way, he is constantly using the poet ic metaphors（such as "valley" is metaphor for the virtue of being generous, or "baby" is for true nature）. Such society thus established no longer has human disturbances. This perfect cosmology which is “independent, changeless, revolving, circulating and ceaseless（獨立而不改，周行而不殆）” that Laozi has established through his imagination is presented as his wisdom of life to inspire all human beings . The political application of this wisdom, of course, can be applied in the forms of "never insisting （無執）" and “not acting （無為）". For example, he said: "The Tao in its regular course does nothing for the sake of doing it, and so there is nothing which it does not do（道常無為而無不為） ", showing a perfect state through imagination, but not necessarily the perfection ix that reality can reach. Therefore, he is perfect in building a world of values. This is the main reason why Laozi should be studied from a poet’s perspective. First of all, from the legend of The Book of Songs（詩經）, "the mysterious bird gives birth to shang（玄鳥生商）", I compare Laozi with "the profound maternal nature" and only achieve the symbolism or metaphor of the origin of all things instead of creating the doctrine of all things. Therefore, I conclude that the metaphysics of Laozi is different from the physical metaphysics established by the approach of using Western knowledge, and is also different from the God metaphysics with supreme authority. In this comparison, I think that the Tao of Laozi is produced through the process of self -weakening after Laozi has "the profound virtue（玄德）". The reason is that this root has lost its nature to dominate all things, and gives all things the inherent strength of self-sufficiency. Secondly, this power is the "Nature" that M. Heidegger said, or from the natural world that Laozi built in his heart, that is, the meaning of "artificial nature" that I advocate. Third, under this interpretation, the most important value of the Book of Laozi is not the way to explain the source of the universe, but the established outlook on life, and the resulting aesthetic life wisdom. Including his view that does not distinguish between life and death and letting people know that everything in this world is changing. Therefore, if you can regard human life and death as a beautiful cycle, you will be able to become a wise man, and you can use it to live with peace of mind, comfort, and live without troubles. In short, we should not regard the poetic feeling and the imaginative Laozi′s philosophy as a philosophy in the sense of Western philosophy. On the contrary, the greatness of Chuang-Tzu, who is full of poetry, is that he can realize that Laozi′s philosophy is special, so he creates a more beautiful view of the universe and life. Therefore, I advocate that the use of Ernst Cassirer′s the philosophy of human culture（人類文化哲學） and Martin Heidegger′s research approach will create an unexpected new understanding of the Book of Laozi. x
Appears in Collections:	[Graduate Institute of Philosophy] Electronic Thesis & Dissertation

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
index.html		0Kb	HTML	389	View/Open

社群 sharing

Loading...