「異議」的再議－－近世東亞的「理學」與「氣學」

Reappraisal of ‘Dissent’: Li Xue (Neo-Confucianism) and Ch’i Xue (Philosophy of Ch’i) in Early Modern East Asia

本文為楊儒賓《異議的意義——近世東亞的反理學思潮》的主題書評，由於該書涉及宋明理學與近世反理學思潮，代表臺灣儒學研究的另一趨向，值得關注。本文指出楊儒賓此書在儒學理想類型的分析、相偶性倫理學、氣學的檢證，有其獨特的觀點，並彰顯反理學思潮作為「異議」的理論「意義」。筆者也以東亞儒學為視域，聚焦於宋明「理學」與「氣學」，以及東亞儒學的研究方法，提出不同的思考與批判，指出：基於宋明理學分類框架下的「氣學」，只具描述功能，不具理論的獨立意義，應該退場；作為反理學的後天型「氣學」，雖有其獨立意義，但與理學思維並不相容；而「相偶性倫理學」也有其道德難題，無法成為反思現代性的利器。至於目前東亞儒學研究之見林不見樹、求同略異，尤該警醒。

This article is a thematic book review of Rur-Bin Yang’s The Significance of Dissent: Intellectual Trends against Neo-Confucianism in Early Modern East Asia, whose treatment of Neo-Confucianism and early modern Anti-Neo-Confucianism represents a different trend among Taiwanese Confucianism Studies. It is argued that the unique perspective of Yang’s remarkable monograph embodies in its analysis of ideal types of Neo-Confucianism, its discussions about the ethics of reciprocity, and its examination of Ch’i Xue. Via these, Yang illuminates the theoretical ‘significance’ of Anti-Neo-Confucianism as ‘dissent’. Looking from the perspective of East-Asian Confucianism, and focusing both on Li Xue and Ch’i Xue and on research methods of East-Asian Confucianism, this article provides a different approach of thinking and a correspondent critique. Thus it further argues that, under the systematic classification of Neo-Confucianism, Ch’i Xue can only serve the descriptive function; therefore relevant attempts to establish an independent philosophy of Ch’i should be withdrawn. Although Ch’i Xue, as a branch of a posteriori Anti-Neo-Confucianism, has its independent significance, it is incompatible with Neo-Confucianism. Due to its deficiency in dealing with moral issues, the ethics of reciprocity cannot facilitate reflections on the modernity. As for current studies of East-Asian Confucianism, we should take heed of serious warnings such as failing to see the wood for the trees, and seeking similarities but ignoring differences.