隱喻與情理—孟學論辯放到當代西方哲學時

Metaphor, Feeling and Reason: Positioning Mencius' Argumentation in Contemporary Western Philosophy

10.6503/THJCS.2008.38(3).05

鄧育仁(Norman Y. Teng)

隱喻 ； 感情 ； 重新框架 ； 孟子 ； 羅爾斯 ； metaphor ； feeling ； reframing ； Mencius ； John Rawls

清華學報

38卷3期（2008 / 09 / 01）

485 - 504

繁體中文

本文由隱喻的角度，分析孟子的論辯。孟子善於由重新框架議題之所以成立的預設，調節人對議題的看法和感覺：本文稱此論辯手法為「重設法則」。對孟子而言，論辯的要點不會只在結論成不成立，而重新框架也不會只限於論辯的場合。善用隱喻而重新調節感覺，特別是道德與政治場域中合不合乎情理的感覺，尤為重要。孟子的重設法則，放到現代的民主生活，特別是羅爾斯稱為「合理多元的事實」所成立的脈絡裡，依然適用。本文由重設法則的講理方式，比較羅爾斯的正義論與孟子的政治思想。

This study offers a metaphorical analysis of Mencius' arguments. A prominent tactic that Mencius uses in his arguments is reframing. He does not merely argue for or against a conclusion; instead he also reframes the presuppositions and changes the metaphors surrounding a particular issue and, in doing so, alters people's views on that issue. The Mencian tactic of reframing is applied not only to argumentation; it is also used to readjust people's fee lings and perceptions of what is reasonable in moral and political domains. The fact of reasonable pluralism in our time, as characterized by John Rawls (1993 /2005), makes this reframing tactic even more apt. A comparison of Rawls' theory of justice and Mencius' political thought is made with reference to the reframing perspective.

1. 鄧育仁(2005)。生活處境中的隱喻。歐美研究，35(1)，97-140。
   連結：
2. 清焦循、沈文倬點校(1998)。孟子正義。北京:中華書局。
3. 清戴震、張岱年主編(1995)。戴震全書。安徽:黃山書社。
4. Allan, Sarah(1997).The Way of Water and Sprouts of Virtue.New York:State University of New York.
5. Chong, Kim-chong(2007).Early Confucian Ethics.Chicago:Open Court.
6. Damasio, Antonio R.(1999).The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness.New York:Harcourt.
7. Damasio, Antonio R.(2003).Looking for Spinoza: Joy, Sorrow, and the Feeling Brain.New York:Harcourt.
8. Damasio, Antonio R.(1994).Descartes` Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain.New York:C. P. Putnam`s Sons.
9. Fauconnier, Glues(2002).The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind`s Hidden Complexities.New York:Basic Books.
10. Fauconnier, Glues,Mark Turner(1998).Conceptual Integration Networks.Cognitive Science,22,133-187.
11. Feldman, Jerome A.(2006).From Molecule to Metaphor: A Neural Theory of Language.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
12. Freeman, Samuel(2007).Rawls.New York:Routledge.
13. Freeman, Samuel(2006)."Frontiers of Justice: The Capabilities Approach vs. Contractarianism" (reviewing Martha C. Nussbaum, Frontiers of Justice: Disabilities, Nationality, Species Membership).Texas Law Review,85,385-430.
14. Gallie, Walter Bryce(1956).Essentially Contested Concepts.Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society,56,167-198.
15. Hansen, Chad(1992).A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought: A Philosophical Interpretation.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
16. Johnson, Mark(2007).The Meaning of the Body: Aesthetics of Human Understanding.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
17. Lakoff, George(1999).Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought.New York:Basic Books.
18. Lakoff, George(1999).Whose Freedom? The Battle over America`s Most Important Idea.New York:Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
19. Lakoff, George,Mark Johnson(1980).Metaphors We Live by.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
20. Lao, D. C.(1963).On Mencius`s Use of the Method of Analogy in Argument.Asia Major (New Series),10,173-194.
21. Larmore, Charles,Samuel Freeman (Ed.)(2003).The Cambridge Companion to Rawls.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
22. Mio, Jeffery Scott(1997).Metaphor and Politics.Metaphor and Symbol,12,113-133.
23. Nussbaum, Martha C.(2006).Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
24. Poppet, Karl R.(1968).His Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge.New York:Harper & Row.
25. Rawls, John(1985).Justice as Fairness: Political Not Metaphysical.Philosophy and Public Affairs,14,223-252.
26. Rawls, John(1999).The Law of Peoples.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
27. Rawls, John(1999).A Theory of Justice.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
28. Rawls, John(1993).Political Liberalism.New York:Columbia University Press.
29. Searle, John R.(1995).The Construction of Social Reality.New York:Free Press.
30. Slingerland, Edward(2005).Conceptual Blending, Somatic Marking, and Normativity: A Case Example from Ancient Chinese.Cognitive Linguistics,16,557-584.
31. Slingerland, Edward(2003).Effortless Action: Wu-wei as Conceptual Metaphor and Spiritual Ideal in Early China.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
32. Teng, Norman Y.(2006).Metaphor and Coupling: An Emhodied, Action-oriented Perspective.Metaphor and Symbol,21,67-85.
33. Turner, Mark(1996).The Literary Mind: The Origins of Thought and Language.New York:Oxford University Press.
34. 甘懷真(2004)。皇權、禮儀與經典詮釋：中國古代政治史研究。台北:台灣大學出版中心。
35. 李依瀅(2006)。沒有道再見。中國時報(2006/10/28)。
36. 李明輝(2005)。儒家視野下的政治思想。台北:台灣大學出版中心。
37. 陳大齊(1968)。孟子的名理思想及其辯說實況。台北:台灣商務印書館。
38. 楊儒賓(1996)。儒家身體觀。台北:中央研究院中國文哲研究所。
39. 滾石(2001)。媽媽的怕怕線。台北:富春文化事業公司。
40. 鄧育仁(2008)。隱喻與意向性。現象學與當代哲學。
41. 鄧育仁(2006)。意志的品質：選擇的困局及其解決之道。國立政治大學哲學學報，15，135-161。

1. 陳寅清(2016)。以當代概念隱喻之視角解析道家的「丘」、「壼」隱喻─以《列子》為中心所作的考察。東華漢學，24，29-60。
2. 陳寅清(2018)。《列子》歸墟五山神話之寓意探析。東華漢學，27，35-62。
3. 鄧育仁(2011)。隱喻與公民論述：從王者之治到立憲民主。清華學報，41(3)，523-550。
4. 鄧育仁(2011)。隱喻與自由：立命在民主與科學聯合脈絡中的新意涵。臺灣東亞文明研究學刊，8(1)，173-208。
5. 鄧育仁、孫式文(2010)。身境與隱喻觀點中的創意。中正大學中文學術年刊，16，141-160。
6. 黃莘瑜(2013)。晚明「情種」說之文化意涵及多重向度。臺大中文學報，41，177-224。
7. 黃猷欽(2010)。臺灣與中國郵票裡的中國文字設計與書寫。清華學報，40(3)，543-581。
8. 賴錫三(2013)。《孟子》與《莊子》兩種氣論類型的知識分子與權力批判。清華學報，43(1)，1-52。
9. 鄭毓瑜(2011)。1870年代中、日漢詩人的視域轉換─以博物知識、博覽會為認知框架的討論。淡江中文學報，25，95-130。
10. (2023)。夢、隱喻與思想：從意象基模解析《列子．周穆王篇》之夢寓及篇章意旨。嶺南學報，20，37-70。