:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:韓非論人新說
書刊名:政治與社會哲學評論
作者:詹康 引用關係
作者(外文):Chan, Kang
出版日期:2008
卷期:26
頁次:頁97-153
主題關鍵詞:利己美學Self-interestHuman natureInnate dispositionsHeartVital energyAesthetics
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(8) 博士論文(1) 專書(1) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:7
  • 共同引用共同引用:342
  • 點閱點閱:213
韓非知道人類行為是多樣的,而現有三種對韓非人論的詮釋未能對其所敘述的人類行為多樣性提供周全或合理的解釋,因此需要重新探討。 韓非所敘述的人類行為可分為三個類型:自己至上的放肆利己觀、在禮法規範下求利的審慎利己觀、和追求美善與利他的高貴利己觀。實存狀況是權力菁英崇尚放肆利己觀,而其他人(上至君主,下至平民)認同高貴利己觀,至於審慎利己觀雖非實存狀況,但卻是韓非所嚮往的新國家之基礎。 實存中的高貴和放肆利己傾向是由人的四個組成成分所生出的。人的性與情是相似的概念,造成人重視自己的生命、關心自己和他人的福利。人的心和氣增強這些基本傾向,使人變為過份愛利自己和他人,這又分為無恥擴權的自愛,與學習經書和增長德行的自愛。後者是社會輿論所認可的,認可的原因來自於美感上的愉悅。 韓非的意圖是把過份愛利的人(權力菁英和其他人)教化為審慎利己的人,為達此目的,需要社會工程以關閉心和氣的審美能力,及從審慎愛利的性與情中篩檢出審慎利己的性向。
Han Fei knows that human conduct is quite varied, but the current three main interpretations of his view of human beings fail to give a comprehensive and reasonable account. Therefore, a fresh approach is needed. Human conduct as described by Han Fei can be divided into a three types: an unrestrained, self-aggrandizing pursuit of self-interest, a prudent pursuit of self-interest conducted within the framework of rules (e.g., law, morality and convention), and a noble pursuit of self-interest through attaining goodness and beauty in oneself and by acting altruistically. On Han Fei's view, in reality the power elites practice the unrestrained pursuit of self-interest, while most people (from princes down to commoners) approve the noble pursuit of self-interest, and as for the second, prudent pursuit of self-interest, it is rarely realized, but as the rational foundation of the new state, it is what Han Fei aspires to. The unrestrained and noble pursuits of self-interest that Han Fei considers to be common are generated by four elements in people: human nature, innate dispositions, the heart, and vital energy. The former two are similar; they cause a person to value his life and to care for the welfare of himself and others, in accordance with the framework of rules. The latter two amplify these former two fundamental inclinations and make a person love benefit excessively, either in the direction of ruthless self-seeking or in the opposite direction of learning the classics and cultivating virtue. The latter direction, i.e. the noble pursuit of self-interest, is what public opinion endorses, and this endorsement is in turn based on aesthetic pleasure that learning and virtue provide. Han Fei aims to transform those who have excessive love of benefit (both the power elites and the rest) into people who engage in the prudent pursuit of self-interest. This goal requires social engineering in order to shut down the aesthetic activities of the heart and vital energy, and then one can draw a tendency toward prudent pursuit of self-interest out of human nature and innate dispositions, which themselves originally incline to prudent love of benefit.
期刊論文
1.傅玲玲(20070700)。「不以善惡論之」--韓非人性論之討論。哲學論集,40,79-96。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.林金龍(19961000)。韓非美學思想探析。哲學與文化,23(10)=269,3073-3089。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.Harbsmeier, Christoph(1990)。Confucius Ridens: Humor in the Analects。Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies,50(1),131-161。  new window
4.蕭振邦(19880500)。韓非哲學的人性觀探論。鵝湖,13(11)=155,30-38。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.王利器(1991)。文學古訓辨證。香港中文大學中國文化研究所學報,22,103-113。  延伸查詢new window
6.Moody, Peter R., Jr.(2008)。Rational Choice Analysis in Classical Chinese Political Thought: The Han Feizi。Polity,40,95-119。  new window
學位論文
1.林雯瑤(1995)。臺灣地區公共圖書館的社會角色與功能之研究(碩士論文)。淡江大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.李增(2001)。先秦法家哲學--先秦法家、法理、政治、哲學。台北:國立編譯館:華泰文化事業。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.繆文遠(1987)。戰國策新校注。四川成都:巴蜀書社。  延伸查詢new window
3.Martin Ostwald、Aristotle(1999)。Nicomachean Ethics。Upper SaddleRiver, New Jersey:Hackett Publishing Company。  new window
4.許雅棠(2005)。《民本治理學》。臺北市:臺灣商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
5.Hume, David(1985)。Essays: Moral, Political, and Literary。Indianapolis, IN:Liberty Classics。  new window
6.(1988)。說文解字注。上海:上海古籍出版社。  延伸查詢new window
7.陳榮捷、楊儒賓、吳有能、朱榮貴、萬先法、黃俊傑(1993)。中國哲學文獻選編。巨流圖書股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
8.孟軻、趙岐、焦循、沈文倬(1987)。孟子正義。北京:中華書局。  延伸查詢new window
9.左丘明、韋昭(1980)。國語。臺北:里仁書局。  延伸查詢new window
10.陳啟天(1969)。增訂韓非子校釋。臺灣商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
11.Hansen, Chad(1992)。A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought: A Philosophical Interpretation。Oxford University Press。  new window
12.李文標(1977)。韓非思想體系。臺北:幼獅文化事業股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
13.唐端正(1981)。先秦諸子論叢。臺北:東大圖書公司。new window  延伸查詢new window
14.熊十力(1978)。韓非子評論。臺灣學生書局。  延伸查詢new window
15.王邦雄(1977)。韓非子的哲學。台北:東大。  延伸查詢new window
16.蕭公權(1982)。中國政治思想史。臺北:中國文化大學出版部。  延伸查詢new window
17.蔡英文(19860000)。韓非的法治思想及其歷史意義。臺北:文史哲出版社。new window  延伸查詢new window
18.張純、王曉波(1983)。韓非思想的歷史研究。臺北:聯經。new window  延伸查詢new window
19.Hobbes, Thomas、Tuck, Richard(1991)。Leviathan。Cambridge University Press。  new window
20.姚蒸民(1986)。法家哲學。東大圖書股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
21.谷方(1996)。韓非與中國文化。貴州人民出版社。  延伸查詢new window
22.唐君毅(1986)。中國哲學原論.原道篇。台北:臺灣學生書局。  延伸查詢new window
23.屈萬里(1983)。尚書集釋。聯經出版事業股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
24.Schwartz, Benjamin Isadore(1985)。The world of thought in ancient China。Belknap Press of Harvard University Press。  new window
25.馮友蘭(1991)。中國哲學史新編。藍燈文化事業股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
26.勞思光(1984)。新編中國哲學史。三民。  延伸查詢new window
27.陳麗桂(19910000)。戰國時期的黃老思想。臺北:聯經。new window  延伸查詢new window
28.高柏園(19940000)。韓非哲學研究。臺北:文津。new window  延伸查詢new window
29.左丘明、楊伯峻(1990)。春秋左傳注。中華書局。  延伸查詢new window
30.韓非子、陳奇猷(2000)。韓非子新校注。上海古籍出版社。  延伸查詢new window
31.王夢鷗(1987)。禮記今註今譯。台北:台灣商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
32.曹謙(1992)。韓非法治論。韓非法治論。上海。  延伸查詢new window
33.Kant, Immanuel(1983)。Perpetual Peace and Other Essays on Politics, History, and Morals。Perpetual Peace and Other Essays on Politics, History, and Morals。Indianapolis, IN。  new window
圖書論文
1.林義正(1990)。先秦法家人性論之研究。中國人性論。臺北:東大圖書公司。  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