:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:以陽明自蔽其心之自我概念論人之惡
書刊名:中國文哲研究集刊
作者:陳士誠 引用關係
作者(外文):Chen, Shih-chen
出版日期:2018
卷期:52
頁次:頁45-78
主題關鍵詞:自蔽主意自欺責任自我Self-occlusionIntentionSelf-deceptionResponsible ego
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(3) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:2
  • 共同引用共同引用:127
  • 點閱點閱:3
陽明以為人之惡最本原處在於人自蔽其心,即謂:惡是有意為之,本文即對此進行倫理學之先驗分析。首先,需區別開屬心理上氣質扭曲本心之誘使因,它可說明人被誘使而生惡行,與屬道德意識的歸責因之概念,它可以說明人因自主而能承責其惡行之主體基礎。依此以詮釋陽明論人之惡,乃是藉其所言自蔽其心之主意,以揭示所謂歸責因乃在一意識層面之自我概念中被理解,從而人能承其責。自蔽不限於人類學的氣質,亦在於自蔽於理而有識蔽;自蔽之所以涉人之惡而不是道德中立的心理事件,乃因它涉否認本心之主意,以至於它須倫理地被理解-被評為惡。然自蔽乃表人之自欺,即是,本心乃實現善之能力,現在人只因無意、不肯於此,而藉口無能而不為。然而,人亦因其無意與不肯而受責,人才能倫理地被理解為一可承責者。
Human evil, according to Wang Yangming, primarily originates in self-occlusion of one's moral mind. That means it is deliberately performed; thus this paper intends to carry out a transcendental ethical analysis of this self-occlusion. It is necessary first to distinguish the concept of seduction from the concept of imputation: the former indicates how the occurrence of evil can become understandable, and the latter how the concept of responsibility can become possible. The interpretation of Yangming's ethical understanding of evil, therefore, is dependent upon revealing a cause of the imputation belonging to moral consciousness of the self-concept in order to explain the possibility for the concept of responsibility by the intention of the self-occlusion of the original mind. Self-occlusion belongs not only to human physical temperaments, but also to something reasonable, so that it may be characterized as obscuration of knowledge. The reason self-occlusion related to evil is not an ethically neutral mental state is that it is an intention to deny its moral mind so that it is certainly understood ethically and is evaluated as evil. Self-occlusion means a self-deception, which indicates that the mind is essentially an ability for good, but now is negated by the excuse of inability to carry it out, but which is really due to one's unwillingness to carry out such an intention. A human, however, can be evaluated as evil and responsible only because of his lack of awareness and unwillingness; ethically, he can be seen as bearing responsibility.
期刊論文
1.陳士誠(20090200)。牟宗三先生論道德惡與自由決意。揭諦,16,29-67。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.陳志強(20150100)。陽明與蕺山過惡思想的理論關聯--兼論「一滾說」的理論意涵。國立政治大學哲學學報,33,149-192。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.陳士誠(20140100)。從決意、道德秩序與心、理關係論《孟子》倫理學論證之問題。國立政治大學哲學學報,31,141-187。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.李明輝(19940300)。從康德的實踐哲學論王陽明的「知行合一」說。中國文哲研究集刊,4,415-440。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.陳士誠(20171000)。知-行合一之哲學史及其倫理學的先驗說明之探究。國立臺灣大學哲學論評,54,43-82。new window  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.劉宗周、戴璉璋、吳光(1996)。劉宗周全集。臺北:中央研究院中國文哲研究所籌備處。  延伸查詢new window
2.牟宗三(2003)。康德的道德哲學。聯經出版事業股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
3.陳來(2013)。有無之境:王陽明哲學的精神。北京:北京大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
4.楊國榮(1997)。王學通論--從王陽明到熊十力。台北:五南圖書出版公司。  延伸查詢new window
5.唐君毅(1991)。道德自我之建立。台北:臺灣學生書局。  延伸查詢new window
6.王守仁、吳光、錢明、董平、姚延福(2011)。傳習錄。上海:上海古籍出版社。  延伸查詢new window
7.王畿(2000)。王龍豁先生全集。臺北:廣文書局。  延伸查詢new window
8.牟宗三(2003)。康德「純粹理性之批判」。臺北:聯經出版事業公司。  延伸查詢new window
9.黃宗羲(2012)。明儒學案。臺北:世界書局。  延伸查詢new window
10.Kant, Immanuel(1968)。Kants Werke。Berlin:Walter de Gruyter & Co。  new window
11.林月惠(20050000)。良知學的轉折:聶雙江與羅念菴思想之研究。臺北:國立臺灣大學出版中心。new window  延伸查詢new window
12.牟宗三(1985)。圓善論。臺灣學生書局。  延伸查詢new window
13.唐君毅(1991)。中國哲學原論.原教篇。臺灣學生書局。  延伸查詢new window
14.王守仁、吳光、錢明、董平、姚延福(2011)。王陽明全集。上海古籍出版社。  延伸查詢new window
15.牟宗三(2003)。從陸象山到劉蕺山。聯合報系文化基金會。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.李明輝(1998)。劉蕺山論惡之根源。劉蕺山學術思想論集。臺北:中央研究院中國文哲研究所籌備處。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.李瑞全(1993)。人性與行為之道德責任--康德孟子之比較。當代新儒學之哲學開拓。臺北:文津出版社。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE