從隱喻到崇高－中、法美學對話的幽徑之一

From the Metaphorical to the Sublime-An Attempt of Dialogue between Chinese and French Aesthetics

10.7065/MRPC.200910.0035

沈清松(Vincent Shen)

隱喻 ； 崇高 ； 中國哲學 ； 法國哲學 ； 平面崇高 ； 垂直崇高 ； Metaphor ； Sublime ； Chinese Philosophy ； Contemporary French Philosophy ； Horizontal Sublime ； Vertical Sublime

哲學與文化

36卷10期（2009 / 10 / 01）

35 - 53

繁體中文

在本文中，本人從隱喻的語言層面、心理層面、形上層面，來討論法國哲學與歐洲哲學和中國哲學的可能對話與相遇之道。由於隱喻的類比性質，既相似又不相似，使人的思維得以超乎經驗和邏輯的限制，發揮齊物與民主的精神，而能以多聲帶、多元論述的方式，來呈露實在本身甚或終極實在的豐富面貌，而不會落入黨同伐異的經驗描述或邏輯論述，也因此頗適於發揮歐洲哲學與中國哲學中的靈活成份。 我藉著隱喻中所揭示的差距進入崇高的討論。從李歐塔平面的崇高，回到康德垂直的崇高，也藉此顯豁出康德的動態崇高仍有所不足。雖然人總是熱切地嚮往無限，然而，在西方哲學看來，總難免有天人二元對立，人被界定為主體，而在垂直的崇高之中，主體會自覺渺小，敬畏無限，終究無以接近無限。比較起來，中國哲學嚮往莊子所謂遊於無窮，與造物者遊，更適於雖有限而願無窮的人性。總之，曲徑可以通幽，而幽徑裡也還可以分出岔路，然而重點在於終究可以藉著哲學活動獲得心身的自由，而在自由中又仍與多元他者、與終極實在有著親密的動態關係。

This paper was first delivered as a speech at the ”Workshop on Chinese Philosophy and Interpretation” organized by the Department of Philosophy, National Chengchi University on December 13, 2008, then polished now as a paper based on the textual record keyed-in by Prof. Molly Chuang. In this paper, I'll discuss the linguistic, psychological and metaphysical levels of metaphor to work out a scheme of thought in which Chinese Philosophy and contemporary French philosophy in particular, or European philosophy in general, could meet and dialogue with each other. The use of metaphor brings human thought, by its analogical nature, i.e. a way of thinking that holds in view both similarity and difference, continuity and discontinuity, to go beyond the limit of empirical description and logical reasoning, which, though neutral in appearance, are quite often used in party-taken, biased criticism, or in dominative discourses. Metaphor could encourage a vision of reality that is multifaceted and analogical, and a form of discourse that is pluralistic, equalitarian and democratic that would allow Chinese philosophy and European philosophy to meet and dialogue on their vivid and creative components. Then, I'll enter into a discourse on the sublime through the concept of difference revealed by my discussion of metaphor. I make the distinction between ”horizontal sublime” and ”vertical sublime,” and thereby I characterize Lyotard's concept of sublime only as horizontal, and move on to Kant's vertical sublime all in showing its limit. It is true that in the feeling of sublime there is always a dynamic element of enthusiasm. However, in the tradition of Western aesthetics, there is always the presupposition of a dualistic relation between Heaven and Human. Human being is seen as a subject and is defined by its subjectivity, and, in the feeling of sublime, the subject of the aesthetic feeling of is always repressed by the infinite, to the extent of feeling small, with a sense of awe in the face of the unapproachable infinite. However, in Chinese philosophy, as in the case of Zhuangzi, human is in play with the infinite, which according to my interpretation, fits more human nature in finitude looking for an intimate relation with the infinite, the ultimate reality.

1. 沈清松(2004)。感性、表象與崇高。中山人文學報，19(Winter)，1-15。
   連結：
2. Freud, Sigmund.,James Strachey.(translated)(1976).The Interpretation of Dreams.New York:Penguin Books.
3. Lacan, Jacques.(1966).Ecrits.Paris:Editions du Seuil.
4. Lyotard, J. F.(1988).Le postemoderne expliqué aux enfants.Paris:Editions Galilee.
5. Nietzsche.(1971).Cours de rhétorique, traduit et présenté en français par P. Lacoue-Labarthe et J.-L. Nancy in Poétique, n° 5.Paris:Editions du Seuil.
6. Otto, R.,John Harvey. (translated)(1958).The Idea of the Holy.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
7. R. Czerny(trans.),K. McLaughlin,J. Costello.(1977).English translation as The Rule of Metaphor: Multi-Disciplinary Studies in the Creation of Meaning in Language.Toronto:University of Toronto Press.
8. Ricoeur, P.(1975).La métaphore vive.Paris:Editions du Seuil.
9. Shen, Vincent. entry,Donald M. Borchert(editor)(2006).(5000 words) in Encyclopedia of Philosophy.Detroit:McMillan Reference USA.
10. 朱熹(1983)。四書章句集註。北京:中華書局。
11. 沈清松(2006)。從內在超越道道界域跨越－隱喻、敘事與存在。哲學與文化，389，21-36。
12. 郭慶藩(1985)。莊子集釋。台北:世界書局。