【楊曉偉】仁禮關系與甜心寶貝一包養網仁的形而上學結構及其思惟史意義

In the Confucian thinking system behind Confucius, benevolence, as a main concept of thinking, has always been clear and clear, so it is relatively difficult to master, because in most cases, benevolence refers to a certain kind of inner moral emotion that can be explained by words such as benevolence or kindness, or a specific virtue that is thought based on this moral emotion. But for Confucius, the situation was much more complicated. As we all know, Confucius talked about the problem of benevolence on various different meanings; among these meanings, benevolence sometimes refers to a specific virtue, sometimes refers to a moral principle, and sometimes even refers to a high-priced stance that does not matter to morality but is related to education. And the most original thing in all his thoughts is the meaning of a leading positionHe established an internal connection between benevolence and gifts, and regarded this connection as the essential provision of benevolence. In this guiding meaning, benevolence has become something that is completely different from other meanings but is more fundamental. Regardless of what is the case, at most, the reason why people cannot answer the question of what kindness is in Confucius’ contemplation until tomorrow is precisely because of the grand difficulties brought to people’s understanding and mastery. But the actual situation is that although Ren has multiple meanings of interest in Confucius’ interest in referring to differences, these meanings are relatively clear in themselves. So the real problem is that people have never tried to clarify what benevolence refers to in these differences and what relationships can have between them. Instead, they use a sense of raw swallowing to clearly regard these differences as multifaceted metaphors for a constituent thing with a sense of natural devotion. It is said that few people know that this is enough to be in the case where the polygon of benevolence has an internal consistency in logic, but the actual situation is that these meanings actually refer to the most fundamental differences, so they do not have this internal consistency, nor do they need to have this internal consistency.

One

For a long time, people have always been accustomed to the pluralistic nature of benevolence in Confucius’s benevolence, and use it to be the ambiguity of Confucius’ benevolence in interpreting history. Therefore, few people notice that it is precisely because the multiple meanings of benevolence do not have logical internal unity, so it has the richness of the internal fact that it does not constitute the richness of benevolence; if it is satisfied with the richness of benevolence in this internal fact, it will conceal the real main things in Confucius’ contemplation. In fact, the benevolence in the main meaning stipulated in the benevolence and kindness relationship is just because of this inner provision of nature, and it truly has a rich mindset to be clarified. Although Confucius himself had no intention of systematically philosophical analysis of this benevolence with a focus position in all his thinking, and thus constructing a moral philosophy system, this did not interfere with this unconscionable inner structure that needs to be sorted out from the perspective of moral philosophy. Because of the directive meaning of benevolence in Confucius’s thinking, this sorting out the practical and useful understanding of Confucius’ entire thinking is the most important thing. But it is interesting to think that although few people would deny the focus of benevolence and kindness in Confucius’ benevolence, since few people really understand this decisive element in the development of later Confucianism’s main concept of benevolence, this intentional benevolence has always been exclusive to Confucius himself, and therefore has never obtained useful clarification in its structure. In the past century, some domestic and foreign countriesScholars began to focus on the relationship between benevolence and kindness, but what they did was mostly just to list the relationship between the two by citing the classics of the two, and few people focused on the relationship to determine what the benevolence specified in the relationship is and what the structure of existence it actually had, and thus make a useful division between this most basic meaning and other meanings. Therefore, the question of what Confucius’ benevolence was still unclear, and many of the main moral and philosophical problems related to it are still difficult to understand.

In modern times, people often complain that Confucius did not give benevolence a definite definition; this kind of complaint can actually be regarded as a kind of convincing complaint has always been the main reason for the continuation of the meaning of benevolence. As for Confucius, among the various scenes in which he answered the questions of the door life, his answers were rarely definite. But rarely does not mean no. His answer to purity is definite; and in this unique definite answer, benevolence is defined for its internal connection with the gift: “Purely asks benevolence, saying, ‘Careful and sweet rebirth is benevolence.’” (“Speech·心王”) But on the other hand, although Confucius’ answer is clear, its meaning, especially the internal connection between benevolence and benevolence, is not difficult to understand and master. Until the last 30 or 40 years, public rights understood this connection as an internal relationship. In his place, benevolence is not just the virtue of benevolence and love. Confucius, a descendant of the Shang Dynasty, used the harmony of the Shang Dynasty to invent the complex and strict things of Zhou Dynasty: “In the vastness of the Yin Dynasty, he discovered the principle of benevolence and love, and then combined the Zhou Dynasty and formed a system that combines the Zhou Dynasty and used it to form a system that combines the Zhou Dynasty. Therefore, the master of Zhou Dynasty first obtained a profound meaning, and the final destiny and goal of Confucius’ political thoughts was established. Since the benevolence of this last goal was created by Confucius’ statement that he was able to be understood by the Tao of the Yin Dynasty, benevolence was first gained by Confucius. …The way is enough to correct the direction of Zhou people’s ruthless governments.”[1]

Everything to correctly regard benevolence stipulated by the relationship between benevolence and mercy as “the benevolence of the last goal”, but in this paragraph, the public right obviously treats this relationship as an internal relationship. To him, benevolence is something to be used to reconcile with gifts. However, in “Theory”, benevolence is related to the usefulness of gifts in personal behavior: “What is the gift like if a person is not kind?” (The Ba Lai)); accordingly, from the quality regulations of “low and sweet gifts”, the usefulness of gifts in personal behavior is also decisive to the reason why benevolence is benevolence.

Not to mention the so-called gifts include a lot of repetitive content. In any case, gifts always express a political-social order. As for Confucius, although he had many beautiful words about Zhou Rong, it was only because from historical experience, Zhou Rong seemed relatively suitable for him, even if it was not impossible to improve. From the phrase “I am the Eastern Zhou Dynasty” (“Speech Zihan”), for Confucius, the real main thing is not the summer gifts, business gifts or Zhou gifts, but the gifts that he means, that is, the order of keeping society in a stable state. Just as various specific virtues are good with various objective values ​​of care for the body, the order is also a good with its own objective value