requestId:68499ac3295743.42481440.
Critical assessment of the “two kinds of Yangming” of Yukoko
——Taking the “reason” in Wang Yangming’s thinking as an example
Author: Chen Xiaojie (Doctor of Civilization Negotiation in japan (Japan) and lecturer at Wuhan University of Science and Technology)
Source: “Humanities and Culture Forum” Issue 01, 2018
Time: Confucius was in the 2570 year of Jihai Puyue, Renchen
� June 24, 9th
1. “Two kinds of Yangming Learning”
Wang Yangming’s thinking and learning experience have been regarded as “mind learning”. This is of course due to his advocacy of “mind is reason” and “confidant is the law of heaven”. In other words, “(normal) principles” are not in the hearts of people and scattered in all things, but are from the conscience of people’s original intentions (“confidant”). The conscience of people’s original intentions is the ultimate source of “reason”. However, Wang Yangming rarely has a positive statement about what “reason” means, but he always uses “A is the principle of heaven” or “A is the concept of heaven”. This obviously uses “reason”. Therefore, even if Wang Yangming’s understanding of “reason” is discussed in the academic world, he always believes that Zhu Xi’s “reason” thinking is the condition of acquaintance.
It is worth noting that the late japan (Japanese) student Yuzo Shiguchi (hereinafter referred to as “后”) published an influential essay “Two Symptoms of the Symptoms” in the 20th century. He believed that although both China and Japan strongly emphasize that morality, law and motivation are in the hearts of the people, there are still many differences in reality. The re-construction of “reason” as the main line in the history of thought and even economic history to understand the problem consciousness and characteristics of Yangming, which is indeed worth pondering. Its important points (the contents of the inclusive love affairs that are not related to this article) are as follows: “Reason” is inherently complete in my conscience, that is, my confidant, which also means the denial of the “theorem” (page 69). The so-called “theorem”, that is, the inherently authoritative and established principle, although Zhu Zi also advocated the two-sided skills of “inside” (respect) and “outside” (research on things), in fact, Zhu Zi students in the Ming Dynasty only “means theorems that are based on the inner”, thus forming the lack of responsibility of the inner subject (page 70). Yang Mingzhi opposed this “theorem” of sensibility, and actively developed from the changeless reality, and explored and confirmed the actress who was opposite to the reality (called “regeneration” by the mouth) and the reality. In the book, the heroine uses the corresponding ‘reason’ of this document, but this “rebirth”The subject is not the “unlimited ‘I’, but the ‘I’ who is the confidant of the human being of the law of nature (page 70th官网). In contrast to the japan (Japanese) Yangming studies during the Jiang period, for example, the focus of the Chinese salt “learning Taiwei” thinking, “Taiwei” in the Song and Ming cognition structure is based on “the special view of the unity of man and nature in China with reason as the preface” [1] (page 75), while the Chinese salt “learning Zhongwei” believes that “there is no human desire, the heaven is in the heart, and the heart is the heaven…平台官网…The things in the hearts of a person are the principles in the hearts of a person.” “reason” is not inherent in human beings, but only flows out of the heart when the “heart” eliminates desires through the past and reaches a pure and unrealistic “integrity” (page 77). Therefore, this “harmony of man and nature” does not take “reason” as the preface, and also lacks the connection between people and people. As long as it is the direct unity of individual people and the sky. This purely viewed and inner mastery of “mind learning” can be extended in the thinking of the wise scholars after the end of the temple (page 79).
Above, this article will review Wang Yangming’s “reason” concept from three aspects, in order to respond to the above views of the mouth.
2. Bao Stories “Mind is reason” or “reason is mind”
When Wang Yangming rejected Zhu Zi’s academic “theorem” and tried to explore the diversity of “reason” (presented when it was developed in the real world), and believed that Wang Yangming’s thinking on unity between man and nature is still based on the “flow of nature and law”. From this we can see that the fact that the truth is still determined. Although Wang Yangming often advocated Zhu Zixue’s studies, he did not challenge the essential regulations of “reason”. As common knowledge in the academic world, the above views can be made from the beginning. This article will follow the point of the “mind is reason” issue and conduct a structural analysis.
“The mind is principle”, in terms of language, belongs to “A is B”. As we all know, in Chinese philosophy, “中” is a very complicated word. Although under several circumstances, the word “中” can understand what we say tomorrow “equivalently”, for example, the widely known teaching thinking “中文” is obviously not “中文” equals “中文”. In the Lutai Sect, this thinking is developed in the “three views of unity and dedicated mind”, that is, when a person observes the “delusion mind” in his mind at this moment, he realizes that “emptiness”, “fake”, “middle”, and even “three thousand” of “thirty thousand” are all manifested by this mind, and thus it is proved that the meaning of emptiness of one’s nature is enlarged. “Bodhi” is not the transcendent entity or world on this shore of “two worries”. Without “two worries”, there is no “bodhi” to speak of. [2]The Master’s thinking also said that “two ties are Bodhi”, and there are differences with the Lute sect in understanding, but he still denies the nature and physical nature of “bodhi” (same “two sects” also have no physical nature).
Back to the perspective of Song and Ming Ching, the term “i.e. B” cannot be used in most cases. [3] The saying of “heart is reason” is of course related to the “nature is reason” advocated by Cheng and Zhu Xi. We understand that “heart is reason”, but in fact, it is based on a large number of “nature is reason” discussions learned by Cheng and Zhu. So what are the characteristics of the fate of “nature is reason”? If we pay attention to the “nature” and “reason” between the “i.e.”, we will find that the connotation and connotation of “reason” are far greater than “nature”. Taking Cheng’s “reason” thinking is based on the study of Ichikawa Anji, which means there are “certain principles”, “natural principles” and “shengInclusive NetworkThe principle of decline” “the principle of rebirth and stopping” “The principle of things”, [4] These “reasons” are difficult to further change. For example, Cheng said: “It is like a gentleman who does not do anything, but people do not say it, and the most righteous person does not have anything, so he will discuss it. This is a principle. The most white one is easy to be defiled, and this is a principle.” [5] This real state that is not suitable for Confucian fantasy is also called “reason” (which Zhu Xi called “change principle”, and Wang Yangming liked to master “reason” from the perspective of “highest goodness”. He would not think that this can be called “reason”). This kind of “reason” is obviously difficult to combine with the principles of nature good deeds mentioned above. As for Zhu Xi, on the basis of Cheng’s “reason” thinking, he added a large number of discussions on “game”, which reflected Zhu Xi’s thoughts on the real aspect of many differences and various ideas. On the other hand, due to the “too extreme” thinking of Zhou Dunxi, his understanding of “reason” has developed towards the goal of physicalizing – even if Zhu Xi himself refuted to emphasize that “reason” is not “one thing”.
The “nature” of “nature is reason”, whether it is Cheng or Zhu Xi, is importa