坤道:安乐哲‖王堃《坤道与空阙》序

免费测运势 免费批八字：

师父微信： master8299

王堃《坤道与空阙》序

安乐哲（文）坤道，李骏博（译）

【编者按】王堃：《坤道与空阙：“女性”的诗性正名》，上海三联书店2022年8月版坤道。王堃（1981），山东大学儒学高等研究院博士，北京大学高等人文研究院博士后，中山大学哲学系（珠海）副教授。主要研究领域：儒家伦理学。曾在CSSCI、AHCI等刊物上发表论文20余篇，出版专著3部，主编论文集1部。曾主持国家社会科学基金青年项目“儒家女性伦理研究”、博士后面上项目“朱熹女性伦理研究”、省教育厅重点项目“诗情儒学：苏轼儒家思想与文艺创作之关系研究”等项目。

【作者简介】安乐哲（Roger T. Ames），美国夏威夷大学教授、北京大学人文讲席教授，刘殿爵中国古籍研究中心学术顾问、尼山圣源书院顾问，世界儒学文化研究联合会会长、国际儒联副主席坤道。

【译者简介】李骏博，中山大学哲学系（珠海）硕士研究生坤道。

能够坐下来为王堃的这部新著作序，我深感欣慰坤道。这部著作以儒家视角深入、细致地切入并探讨女性性别问题。王堃的学术研究的显著特征是，从细致的经典研读中产生哲学洞察力，并将此洞察力贯穿在研究当中，而她的研究出发点很恰当地落实在《周易》的形而上学宇宙论上。在道家和儒家的诸经典中，有这样一些经典文本，它们在作为中国思想史的典范表达上具有同等的重要性，并同样可作为中国早期宇宙论的文本证据。然而，在持续获得中国历代学者的研究兴趣上，以及在对于儒家自我理解的影响力上，也许没有一部文本足以与《周易》相媲美。在任何意义上，《周易》持续保留居于儒家经典的首位。这的确是一部开放式的经典，关于它的注疏、传文以及诸家评论经历了几个世纪的积累，凝聚为一套关键术语，这套术语的形成意味着一个不断演进的儒家宇宙论的确立。

在很大程度上，王堃是依据《易传》所表述的过程宇宙论（process cosmology）展开其研究的，而《易传》则成为其阅读和理解儒家文本的解释背景坤道。她对性别问题的反思是以“变通”的“侧面性语言”（aspectual language）来建构的，在此诗性的语言中体现出一种生态的、生成性的构思。游于诗性语言，她致思于一种既演变而又持续的世界观：这种世界观如何历时性地沉淀并表现在中国语言文本的结构与内容中，这种生长着的文明如何在其中得到延续。关于无限复杂的生命的生成，这里有着一种敏锐的宇宙论意识，即“恰在‘当下’的无尽繁育”（ceaseless procreation in the very “now”）中生成着无限生命的宇宙论。这种意识关乎《周易》中“生生不已”、“生生之谓易”所表达的持续而必然的转化（transformation）的深刻意义。而此生生的过程在《易传》有关“天地之大德曰生”的这段文本中获得了规范性的地位。

在王堃的著作中突出表现了一个重点，那就是，我们的宇宙论通常被理解为我们自身观念向宇宙的投射，这些观念源于我们自身以及我们生活方式的设想：法律与秩序、爱与冲突、战争与和平，或许最根本的是，我们身处其中的、已深度性别化了的关系（relations）坤道。黑格尔在《小逻辑》的导言部分强化了关于我们宇宙论起源的这种设想，他认为一切哲学探究的开端就在于，主体在担负起对世界进行哲学化这一挑战时对其自身的自我理解。

王堃著作的第二个显著特征是她对于“语言本体论”（the ontology of language）的兴趣——使主体哲学化为“语言动物”的根本性的话语本质，以及把世界言讲为存在的自然语言能力坤道。最近在一个研究生研讨课上，我用了王堃的一篇文章；在这篇文章中，她主要以荀子的“正名”思想为例，通过对“正”的传统翻译“rectification”的分析，揭示了把“正名”当作逻辑语义学意义上的“矫正名称”这一流行的误读。在过程宇宙论中，“真”是由演化的“适宜性”（appropriateness）给出的，这种适宜性只能实现在话语共同体本身的语用学当中，并且必须依据实际情况的随时变化进行前瞻性的调整。约翰·杜威看到了那些诉诸一整套的理论、固化的定义、以及可回收的概念来进行哲学思考者的职业病（déformation professionnelle），并称这种积习无异于“哲学谬误”（the philosophical fallacy）。

展开全文

在这部专著中，王堃就一套术语及其相关含义与相互关联给出了细致、精密的叙述，在原始经典文本与早期现代的宋明理学所构成的儒家传统中，她揭示了这套术语所经历的“实体转化”（transubstantiation），并对此术语给出了以性别问题为中心的表述坤道。这套术语包括阴阳、乾坤之道、乾坤之德（virtuosity）、以及德的不一样方面在乾坤上的分配，例如“诚”、“仁”、“礼”分配于“乾”，而“敬”、“义”、“智”分配于“坤”。在她对性别语言进行“正名”的尝试中，她将此计划视为一种语用学的探索与梳理，即在话语共同体自身之中，在不断变化的历史语境之中，探索语境的变化如何贡献于语言意义的化生。她的分析始于这样一种理解：这些术语在相互渗透且相互蕴含的意义上总是有着“侧面性”（aspectual）意蕴，并且它们总是处于持续变化的过程之中。比如，在乾坤之道中得以区分的每种德都是在包容着其它各德于其中而获得其必然的位置的。不存在使它们分离或独立的二元论。并没有任何东西（或任何人）在范畴意义上是阴的或阳的，而恰恰是在阴阳当中，人与事件之间的关系其实是特定而变化的语境的功能。

植根于《周易》文本的基础上，王堃将其研究带入到对朱熹关于女性伦理的对象语言与元语言的分析中坤道。尽管乾德是公共话语的来源，而坤德从属于它，可正是后者作为一种积极的“空阙”（positive absence），先于作为对象语言的公共话语的建立，并作为言讲私人经验的元语言，给出了对公共话语的解释。是乾德、坤德之间的关系设定了对象语言，也正是乾道、坤道之间的协作构成了元语言。由此我们可以得出如下结论：由于坤道本身正是元语言的基础，那么在女性的私人经验中培养女性之德（坤德）对于公共话语的建构具有一种决定性的作用。朱熹非常重视与父系家族生活样式密切相关的坤道与坤德。

王堃的论证具有深刻的内涵坤道。完全的平等和自主在古希腊的实体本体论中是两种崇高的价值，因为严格的同一性——自足存在者（L. per se “它们自身”）及其实现（G. telos）的同一性特征（G. eidos）的复制——构成了知识的逻辑，告诉我们“什么是什么”。在向我们保证了可证明真理的亚里士多德逻辑中，这是A与A无矛盾原则的基础。

但相比之下坤道，《中庸》阐明了《周易》中“过程宇宙论”的潜在假设：

天地之道可壹言而尽：其为物不贰，则其生物不测坤道。

在《周易》的宇宙论中，万物各有其位，各是其所是，万物各自获得其差异性的存在是整个自然的生态世界成为其自身的必要条件坤道。天虽大，无地无人亦无天。不一样于古希腊实体本体论中简单的平等与同一，中国儒家传统主张“和而不一样”（relational equity and an achieved diversity）。王堃恰恰表明了这样的观点：小孩子喝牛奶强身健体，而爷爷喝红酒促进睡眠，这就体现了“和而不一样”。一个幸福的家庭中的各种不一样，恰恰使家庭中的每个人各具差异，各成其性。

Preface to Wang Kun

KunWaymaking and Positive Absence:

Confucian Thinking on the Feminine Gender

Roger T. Ames

It is with great pleasure that I sit down to write a preface for Wang Kun’s new monograph in which she explores with depth and in considerable detail Confucian thinking on the feminine gender. A signature of Wang Kun’s scholarship is penetrating philosophical insight born of a close reading of the classical canons, and her starting point is quite properly the metaphysical cosmology made explicit in the Book of Changes. As important as the Daoist and Confucian canons have been in the articulation of Chinese intellectual history and as much as they can be appealed as textual evidence for claims about early Chinese cosmology, perhaps no single text can compete with the Book of Changes in terms of the sustained interest it has garnered from succeeding generations of China’s lettered classes, and the influence it has had on Confucian selfunderstanding. The Book of Changes has been and still remains, in every sense, the first among the Confucian canons. Indeed, it is this openended classic with its centuries of accruing commentaries that has set the terms of art for the evolving Confucian cosmology.

Wang Kun relies heavily upon this process cosmology as it is expressed in the Great Tradition commentary (Dazhuan 大傳) that then serves as an interpretative context for reading and interpreting the Confucian texts. Underlying her reflection on the issue of gender is the ecological and generative assumption captured in the aspectual language of “persisting in change” (biantong 變通). It is on this basis that she thinks through how an always evolving and yet persistent worldview is over time sedimented into and conveyed in both the structure and the content of the Chinese language and the texts through which this living civilization is continued. There is a keen awareness of the unbounded complexities of lives lived within a cosmology of “ceaseless procreation in the very ‘now,’” and a profound sense of ongoing and ineluctable transformation captured in the Book of Changes mantras: 生生不已 and 生生之谓易. At the same time, this process of generative procreation is made normative in a complementary passage that celebrates vitality as the ground of a shared cosmic morality itself: 天地之大德曰生坤道。

Importantly, as is much in evidence in Wang Kun’s monograph, our cosmologies are commonly understood as projections onto the cosmos that have their origins in assumptions about our own persons and the ways in which we live our lives: law and order, love and strife, war and peace, and perhaps most fundamentally, our heavily gendered relations. Hegel reinforces this assumption regarding the origins of our cosmologies when in the introduction to his Encyclopedia Logic he insists that the beginning of all philosophical inquiry lies in the selfunderstanding of the subjects themselves in taking up the challenge to philosophize about the world.

A second signature of Wang Kun’s work is her interest in the ontology of language—the fundamentally discursive nature of philosophizing subjects as “language animals,” and the power of their natural languages to speak a world into being. In a graduate seminar recently, I used an article of Wang Kun’s in which she uses primarily Xunzi to bring “rectification” to the prevailing misreading of zhengming 正名as the logicalsemantic undertaking of “rectifying names.” Given what does the work of “truth” in this process cosmology is an evolving “appropriateness,” such appropriateness can only be achieved from within the pragmatics of a community of discourse itself, and must be attuned prospectively as always local situations continue to change in time. John Dewey sees the déformation professionnelle of those who would philosophize by appealing to potted theories, fixed definitions, and recyclable concepts, calling this inveterate habit nothing less than “the philosophical fallacy.”

In this present monograph, Wang Kun gives a nuanced and sophisticated account of the cluster of terms with their various implications and associations as they have been transubstantiated in the Confucian tradition in the original classical texts themselves and in early modern neoConfucianism to give expression to issues surrounding gender. She appeals to yinyang, the way of qian and kun, the virtuosity of qian and kun, the assignment of distinctive aspects of virtuosity to qian and kun such as sincerity (cheng), consummatory conduct (ren), and ritual propriety (li) to qian, and respect (jing), appropriateness (yi), and wisdom (zhi) to kun. In her efforts to zhengming this gender language, she sees such a project as exploring and untangling the pragmatics to seek out how the always changing context contributes to meaning within the community of discourse itself. Her analysis begins from the understanding that these terms of art are always aspectual in the sense that they are interpenetrating and mutually entailing, and that they are always to be located within a continuing process of change. For example, each of the virtues that are differentiated in the ways of qian and kun, has its own necessary place, with the other virtues being subsumed within it. There is no dualism that would make them discrete and independent. And there is nothing and no one who is categorically yin or yang, where the relationship between them is always a function of a specific and changing context.

Having set the root of her research in the Book of Changes itself, Wang Kun then brings this framework to an analysis of Zhu Xi’s understanding of the objective and metadiscourse on feminine ethics. While the virtuosity of qian is the source of the public discourse, and the virtuosity of kun is submissive to it, it is the virtuosity of kun that as a positive absence precedes the establishment of the objective discourse, and serves as the basis for a metalanguage for interpreting the public language through private experience. In this way, it is the relationship between the virtuosities of qian and kun that set the objective language, and it is a collaboration between the ways of qian and kun that constitute the metalanguage. What can be concluded here is that since the way of kun is itself the very ground for the metalanguage, the cultivation of female virtuosity in her private experience has a determinative role in the public discourse. Zhu Xi puts great emphasis on the way of kun and the feminine virtues as they are implicated in the patrilineal family.

The implications of Wang Kun’s argument are profound. Simple equality and autonomy are high values in the substance ontology of the ancient Greeks because strict identity—the reduplication of a selfsame identical characteristic (G. eidos) of selfsufficient beings (L. per se “in themselves”) and their realization (G. telos)—constitutes the logic of knowledge, telling us “what is what.” This is the basis of the principle of noncontradiction 无矛盾原则of A and A in an Aristotelian logic that promises us demonstrable truth.

But by way of contrast, Focusing the Familiar 中庸makes explicit an underlying postulate in the Book of Changes process cosmology:

天地之道可壹言而尽：其为物不贰，则其生物不测坤道。

The waymaking of the heavens and earth can be captured in one phrase: Since things and events are never reduplicated, their generation is unfathomable.

In the Book of Changes cosmology everything is what it is because it has its place 位 and each in its difference is a necessary condition for the ecology to be what it is. As exalted as 天 might be, there can be no天 without 地or without人. Instead of simple equality and uniformity, there is relational equity and an achieved diversity 和而不一样. Wang Kun is making the point that there is this relational equity achieved diversity when baby has her milk to grow strong bones and grandpa has his glass of wine for a good night’s sleep. It is just such differences that in a happy family make all the difference.

责任编辑：吴多键

着眼“活的思想”，推动儒学复兴坤道。

投稿邮箱：dangdairuxue@163.com

本文链接：https://www.daojiaowz.com/index.php/post/63052.html

转载声明：本站发布文章及版权归原作者所有，转载本站文章请注明文章来源！