戴君仁與唐君毅論朱子陽明格致思想異同

A Comparison Between the Thoughts of Dai Junren and Tang Junyi on the Gewuzhizhi Philosophy of Wang Yangming

陳政揚(Chen, Cheng-yang)

朱熹 ； 《四書集注》 ； 陸象山 ； 濠梁之辯 ； Zhu Xi ； the Collections of Texts from the Four Books(SishuJizhu) ； Lu Xiang-shan ； ADebate between Chuang Tzu and Hui Shi

當代儒學研究

22期（2017 / 06 / 01）

39 - 41+43-83

繁體中文

在〈朱子陽明的格物致知說和他們整個思想的關係〉中，戴君仁表示此文的機緣之一者，即是呼應唐君毅先生在《清華學報》所發表的〈大學章句辨證及格物致知思想之發展〉。然而在戴文中，卻未進一步辨析其異。戴、唐分別為當代經學與哲學領域的奠基者。二者在相同議題中的見解異同，本就可形成一項十分值得探析的研究。二先生在此議題所未盡的發展，更是可供後續研究者可努力的目標。基於此，本文扼要勾勒戴文對陽明格物致知說之省察。其次，則探究戴文辨析陽明評朱子象山說格物之失。再者，本文對比戴唐二者論陽明格物致知說之異同。最後，反思戴唐在「所見略同」處的儒學意義。

In The Relationship between Zhuzi and Wang Yangming: On ＂The Investigation of Things and the Extension of Knowledge＂ (gewuzhizhi, 格物致知) and Their Holistic Thoughts, Dai Junren stated that one of his motivations for writing the article was to respond to The Debate on the Annotation of the Great Learning (da xue, 大學) and the Development of the Thoughts on the Investigation of Things and the Extension of Knowledge published by Tang Junyi in the Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies. However, aside from a mere mention of Tang's conclusion, the article included no further investigation. Both renowned for their significance in pioneering contemporary studies of Confucian classics and philosophy, Dai and Tang demonstrate in triguing differences and similaritiesin their respective arguments on Wang Yangming's philosophy. This paper therefore regards this incomplete attempt and gap in the literature as worthy of exploration on its own and as a direction for future studies. The research procedure of this paper is divided in to four sections as follows. First, an outline of the review is presented, concerning the thoughts on gewuzhizhi observed in Dai's article. Second, this study investigated how Dai analyzed the flaws inYangming's criticism of the theories of Zhuzi and Lu Xiangshan on gewu. Moreover, this study compared Dai's argument with that of Tang and specifically analyzed the differences and similarities in their perspectives on gewuzhizhi. Finally, this paper concludes with are thinking of the implications of similarities in their perspectives in the field of Confucian studies.

1. 王陽明(2010)。王陽明全集（新編本）。杭州:浙江古籍出版社。
2. 朱傑人編(2002)。朱子全書。上海:上海古籍出版社。
3. 朱傑人編(2002)。朱子全書。上海:上海古籍出版社。
4. 牟宗三(2000)。從陸象山到劉蕺山。臺北:臺灣學生書局。
5. 牟宗三(1990)。心體與性體。臺北:正中書局。
6. 凌廷堪(2009)。凌廷堪全集。合肥:黃山書社。
7. 唐君毅(1993)。中國哲學原論‧導論篇。臺北:臺灣學生書局。
8. 唐君毅(1992)。中國哲學原論‧原道篇。臺北:臺灣學生書局。
9. 唐君毅(2004)。中國哲學原論‧原教篇。臺北:臺灣學生書局。
10. 唐君毅(1991)。中國哲學原論‧原性篇。臺北:臺灣學生書局。
11. 唐君毅(1974)。哲學概論。臺北:臺灣學生書局。
12. 唐君毅(2000)。中國哲學原論‧原道篇。臺北:臺灣學生書局。
13. 郭慶藩集釋(1991)。莊子集釋。臺北:貫雅文化事業公司。
14. 陸九淵(2008)。陸九淵集。北京:中華書局（中國書店發行）。
15. 勞思光(1997)。新編中國哲學史。臺北:三民書局。
16. 黃忠天(2006)。周易程傳註評。高雄:高雄復文出版社。
17. 戴君仁(1981)。戴靜山先生全集。臺北:臺灣開明書店。
18. 戴君仁(1981)。戴靜山先生全集。臺北:臺灣開明書店。
19. 戴君仁(1981)。戴靜山先生全集。臺北:臺灣開明書店。