题名

丁若鏞哲學本體論研究:當代新儒家與天主教思想之比較為中心

并列篇名

A Study On the Ontology of Jeong Yakyong: A Focus on the Comparative Study of Neo-Confucianism and Catholicism

作者

金玟(Gyoel GIM)

关键词

丁若鏞 ; 天主教 ; 本體 ; 上帝 ; 人格性 ; Jeong Yakyong ; Catholicism ; Noumenon ; God ; Personality

期刊名称

哲學與文化

卷期/出版年月

47卷5期(2020 / 05 / 01)

页次

131 - 145

内容语文

繁體中文

中文摘要

本文目的在於證明丁若鏞哲學的本體論是建基於天主教理論。為達成此目的,本文將試圖探討不僅是丁若鏞哲學中所出現的「上帝」,丁若鏞本人所理解的「本體」也是與天主教的「上帝」同樣充滿具有神學意涵。其討論過程中,本文所持之論證要點有三:一、儒家不同於與天主教同樣的宗教形態,其不同之處就是神的人格性;二、明末來華的傳教士將人格化的「上帝」當作其哲學體系的本體看待,這也是傳教士們批判且否定「理」的原因所在;三、丁若鏞對「理」的否定所凸顯的問題意識與傳教士是一脈相通。由此可見,丁若鏞並不是否定本體,而將人格化的「上帝」放在原來「理」所代表的本體之位。

英文摘要

The purpose of this paper is to prove that the ontology of Jeong Yakyong's philosophy is based on Catholic theory. In order to achieve this goal, this article will try to explore not only the "God" that appears in Jeong Yakyong's philosophy, but also the "Noumenon" that Jeong Yakyong himself understands is also full of theological meanings of the Catholic "God." In this discussion, there are three main points of argument. First, broadly speaking, although Confucianism can be the Humanist Religion with religious characters by emphasizing "immanent transcendence", it is impossible to equate with Catholicism, because of the personality of God. Second, the missionaries who came to China in the late Ming Dynasty regarded the personified "God" as the Noumenon of their system of thought. This is also the reason why the missionaries criticize the Li (理). Third, Jeong Yakyong's questioning of Li is focused on the Li as the Noumenon but without reason and action. In this regard, the critical mind Jeong Yakyong has on the issue of the Li is parallel to the missionaries who denied the Li based on the personality of God. It can be seen that Jeong Yakyong does not deny the Noumenon, but puts the personified "God" in the position of the Noumenon represented by the Li.

主题分类 人文學 > 人文學綜合
参考文献
  1. (宋)朱熹(2007).朱子語類.北京:中華書局.
  2. (宋)張載(2006).張載集.北京:中華書局.
  3. (漢)孔安國(傳),(唐)孔穎達(疏),李學勤(編)(1999).周易正義.北京:北京大學出版社.
  4. Longobardi, Nicholas. “A Short Answer Concerning the Controversies about Xang Ti, Tien Xin, and Ling Hoen and other Chinese Names and Terms,” in A Collection of Voyages and Travels, Some Now First Printed from Original Manuscripts, Others Now First Published in English: With a General Preface, Giving an Account of the Progress of Navigation, from Its First Beginning. Published in London by Awnsham Churchill, 1732.
  5. 丁若鏞,茶山學術文化財團校(編)(2012).定本與猶堂全書.首爾:圖書出版松樹.
  6. 朴承燦(2007).인 격 개념의 근원에 대 한 탐 구.人間研究,13
  7. 牟宗三(2004).生命的學問.臺北:三民書局.
  8. 利瑪竇,梅謙立(注)(2014).天主實義今注.北京:商務印書館.
  9. 吳道宗(2013).深知所信:基督徒基要真理.臺北:中華福音神學院出版社.
  10. 李明輝(2018).儒家與康德.臺北:聯經出版社.
  11. 康德,李明輝(譯注)(2019)。康德歷史哲學論文集,臺北:
  12. 麥克.彼得森外,孫毅游(譯)(2005).理性與宗教信念:宗教哲學導論.北京:中國人民大學出版社.
  13. 麥葛福,王瑞琦(譯),劉良淑(譯)(1998).基督教神學手冊.臺北:校園書房出版社.
  14. 聖多瑪斯.阿奎那,陳家華(譯),周克勒(譯)(2008).神學大全.臺南:中華道明會.
  15. 蔡振豐(2010).朝鮮儒者丁若鏞的四書學—以東亞為視野的討論.臺北:臺大出版中心.
  16. 簡鴻模,輔仁大學宗教學系(編)(2013).宗教學概論.臺北:五南圖書出版公司.
  17. 羅光(1957).儒家形上學.臺北:中華文化出版事業委員會.