文化的自我轉型－戴震與尼采

Cultural Self-Transformation-Dai Zhen and Nietzsche

10.6503/THJCS.2008.38(2).02

劉滄龍(Tsang-Long Liu)

文化的自我轉型 ； 文化批判 ； 身體哲學 ； 視角主義 ； cultural self-transformation ； cultural critique ； philosophy of body ； perspectivism

清華學報

38卷2期（2008 / 06 / 01）

209 - 230

繁體中文

本文試圖對比地探討戴震（1724－1777）與尼采（1844－1900）的文化批判所蘊涵之文化自我轉型的策略，期望藉由此一對照能夠揭示出戴震與尼采如何面對他們所屬的文明傳統（儒家與柏拉圖－基督教文明）所遭遇的文化危機，並藉由不同途徑來達到文化自我轉型的目的。筆者嘗試指出，他們所進行的文化改造工作不約而同地替其後的文化發展指出了一個共同的轉折方向，他們的文化批判也同時是一種思想結構轉型的要求與實驗。戴震與尼采的文化批判隱含了重視個體性、主張自然人性論及以身體為準繩的行動規範等三點正面的主張。這三個主張匯聚成一思想結構轉型的要求，即反對替規範尋得一超越的同一性，而主張從人性的實然經驗出發，一方面重視個體的具體性與特殊性，另一方面又試圖以身體為準繩，從自然整體論的視角替個體的行動規範提供必然的準則。我們將要進一步檢視，倘若戴震與尼采的文化批判可以被看成是一種身體哲學的嘗試，以便提供個體的行動規範，他們是否真能藉此實現文化自我轉型的目的，還是文化母體的價值重構正好瓦解了文化價值的核心意涵，加速了文化傳統崩解的速度。

In a period of cultural crisis, a significant mission of philosophers is to provide a framework for the re-establishment of cultural self-identity. The purpose of this framework is to facilitate the self-transformation of cultures, and the aim of this is to regain the ground of legitimation for the sake of cultural evolution. This paper compares the cultural critique of Dai Zhen (1724-1777) and Nietzsche (1844-1900) and explores the cultural self-transformation strategies which are implied in their cultural critiques. I describe how these two philosophers faced the crisis of their own culture (Confucianism and Platonism-Christianity) and what approaches they used to transcend their culture. We can draw a parallel between Dai Zhen's efforts and Nietzsche's efforts to reconstruct their own cultural traditions. There are some similarities to be found in their cultural reconstructions, which also signify a transformation of thought structure. The cultural critiques of Dai Zhen and Nietzsche implicitly put forth the following: 1. an emphasis on the individual 2. an emphasis on the naturalness of the human being 3. the body as a basis for human conduct. These require a refutation of the transcendental identity of the norm but an acceptance of the empirical aspects of human nature. On the one hand, Dai Zhen and Nietzsche emphasize the concreteness and particularity of the individual; on the other hand, they try to provide a necessary code of conduct from the perspective of naturalistic holism, using the body as a basis for human conduct. We examine whether the cultural critiques of Dai Zhen and Nietzsche can be seen as a test of the philosophy of body to provide a code of conduct for every individual. There are two possible outcomes for this trial: either Dai Zhen and Nietzsche can achieve their goal of cultural self-transformation, or, the revaluations of their cultural matrices are nothing but an accelerated destruction of cultural and traditional core values.

1. 冰冷的激情：尼采、傳柯與哲學的美學化。藝術觀點，29，16-24。
2. Philippa Foot,Daniel W. Conway.(ed)(1998).Nietzsche: Critical Assessments.London:Routledge.
3. Ulrich Beck.(1997).Was ist Globalisierung? Irrtümer des Globalismus-Antworten auf Globalisierung.Frankfurt am Main:
4. Werner Stegmaier(1994).Nietzsches Genealogie der Moral.Darmstadt.
5. 艾爾曼著、趙剛譯(1997)。從理學到樸學－中華帝國晚期思想與社會變化面面觀。南京:江蘇人民出版社。
6. 貝克著、孫治本譯(1999)。全球化危機：全球化的形成、風險與機會。台北:商務。
7. 林端(2002)。儒家倫理與法律文化：社會學觀點的探索。北京:中國政法大學。
8. 林慶彰主編、張壽安主編(2003)。乾嘉學者的義理學。台北:中研院文哲所。
9. 張岱年主編(1995)。戴震全書。合肥:黃山書社。
10. 戴震、湯志鈞校點(1980)。戴震集：孟子字義疏證。上海:上海古籍出版社。

1. 何育真(2013)。Reimer 及Elliott 音樂教育哲學再探究：批判教育學的觀點。藝術教育研究，26，37-79。
2. 施盈佑(2019)。戴震的「理－禮」視域新探－以《孟子字義疏證》為中心。東吳中文學報，38，59-86。