我们已经注意到华人的思维是联想式的，或者说是审美式的。这种思维方式中，界定世界秩序的组成分子保存其独特性。这是因为在这个秩序里，并没有超越原理可以把这些组成分子统一起来。
而在西方的理性思维中，统一性的概念备受注重。就是说，组成分子失去了其独特性。
所以郝大维与安乐哲在‘期待中国’这本书中说：
在古代西方形而上学中，遇到统一性与独特性的模棱两可情况下，偏向选择统一性。因此，早期对于单一秩序宇宙提出了各种各样的概念的有条理的哲学家，在其任何的概念中，组成世界的众多现象都是按照统一的原理来解释的。这些原理决定了世界事务的本质。
古典时期的中国人对世界秩序的思索中，遇到统一性与独特性的模棱两可情况下，偏向选择独特性。所以无名的道产生了‘一’，由此繁殖。古代中国自然哲学中不要求一个单一秩序的宇宙。
.
We have noted that the Chinese way of thinking can be described as correlative, or aesthetic. In this way of thinking, it is said that the particular individuals defining the world order are said to be unique. This is because in this order, there is no transcendent principle by which its constituent particulars can be called to be unified.
On the other hand, the concept of ‘unity’ is emphasised in the Western rational way of thinking. That means the constituent particulars will not retain their uniqueness.
Roger T. Ames and David L. Hall therefore said in the book Anticipating China:
In classical Western metaphysics, the equivocation between ‘unity’ and ‘uniqueness’ is resolved in favour of ‘unity’. Thus in any of the various conceptions of a single-ordered universe assumed by the early systematic philosophers, the many phenomena comprising the world are defined in accordance with unifying principles which determine the essential realty of the things of the world.
In classical Chinese reflections on world order, the equivocation between ‘unity’ and ‘uniqueness’ is resolved in favour of ‘uniqueness’. Hence, the nameless dao engenders an individual ‘one’ which proliferates. The natural philosophy of classical China does not require a single-ordered world.
而在西方的理性思维中，统一性的概念备受注重。就是说，组成分子失去了其独特性。
所以郝大维与安乐哲在‘期待中国’这本书中说：
在古代西方形而上学中，遇到统一性与独特性的模棱两可情况下，偏向选择统一性。因此，早期对于单一秩序宇宙提出了各种各样的概念的有条理的哲学家，在其任何的概念中，组成世界的众多现象都是按照统一的原理来解释的。这些原理决定了世界事务的本质。
古典时期的中国人对世界秩序的思索中，遇到统一性与独特性的模棱两可情况下，偏向选择独特性。所以无名的道产生了‘一’，由此繁殖。古代中国自然哲学中不要求一个单一秩序的宇宙。
.
We have noted that the Chinese way of thinking can be described as correlative, or aesthetic. In this way of thinking, it is said that the particular individuals defining the world order are said to be unique. This is because in this order, there is no transcendent principle by which its constituent particulars can be called to be unified.
On the other hand, the concept of ‘unity’ is emphasised in the Western rational way of thinking. That means the constituent particulars will not retain their uniqueness.
Roger T. Ames and David L. Hall therefore said in the book Anticipating China:
In classical Western metaphysics, the equivocation between ‘unity’ and ‘uniqueness’ is resolved in favour of ‘unity’. Thus in any of the various conceptions of a single-ordered universe assumed by the early systematic philosophers, the many phenomena comprising the world are defined in accordance with unifying principles which determine the essential realty of the things of the world.
In classical Chinese reflections on world order, the equivocation between ‘unity’ and ‘uniqueness’ is resolved in favour of ‘uniqueness’. Hence, the nameless dao engenders an individual ‘one’ which proliferates. The natural philosophy of classical China does not require a single-ordered world.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment