摘要
传统的格义借用本土的概念来解释外来佛学的术语,近代的反向格义是以西方的哲学概念解释中国本土的术语。传统的格义是普及性、启蒙性、工具性的,是权宜之计;而近代反向格义却是研究性、专业性的,是主流的或正统的方法。对反向格义的利弊得失应该进行严肃的反思和讨论。西方哲学概念的体系是对立二分的,与中国古代哲学中的成对的概念体系有重要不同。将物质和精神、实然和应然的概念引入对老子之道的定义或解释,难免陷入困境。在用反向格义的方法来解释中国的哲学术语时,对其困难和局限应该有自觉的意识和说明。此外也不妨尝试用描述的方法来解释古代的哲学术语,从而避免以西方现成概念来对应中国哲学术语时方枘圆凿的困境。
The traditional geyi or analogical interpretation practice purports to help the Chinese understand and accept Hindu Buddhism through employing Taoist terms to interpret Buddhist terminology. Modern geyi, on the other hand, is the opposite： Western philosophical ideas are employed in the interpretation of ancient Chinese terms; thus, we may name itfanxiang geyi or reverse analogical interpretation. However, this practice gives rise to difficulties that put even scholars in dilemmas because few Western philosophical concepts match the meaning of Chinese philosophical terms that refer to them. This article attempts to examine the intricacy in this popular exercise through two examples. One is the long period argumentation on whether Laozi＇s dao is material or spiritual. The other is a deeper concern as to whether dao is both metaphysical and of human value. The intricacy and arguments generated by the divergence of Chinese and Western terminological systems, as well as of general cultural background. In Chinese thought, there are no dichotomized concepts such as metaphysics and physics, matter and spirit, and fact and value. It is true that Chinese philosophical terminology has many terms in pairs, such as Heaven and man, knowledge and practice, and benefit and righteousness; but the terms in a pair are not always separate and antagonistic： both terms may be given within the same system and could be interchanged in a certain sense. Therefore, we cannot find a simple correspondence between Western concepts and Chinese terms. Given this difficulty, we should explore the difference between the Western and Chinese terms and try to avoid using a ready Western term to define a Chinese exoression.
出处
《南京大学学报（哲学．人文科学．社会科学）》
CSSCI
北大核心
2006年第2期76-90,共15页
Journal of Nanjing University(Philosophy,Humanities and Social Sciences)
关键词
反向格义
中国哲学
方法论
老子
道
reverse analogical interpretation
Chinese philosophy
methodology
Laozi
dao
