從「物」、「實」之別看公孫龍名學的價值──以荀況為參照

Distinguish the Notion of 'Wu'(物) and 'Shi'(實), Review The Ming-xue(名學)of Kong-sun Long: Use Xun-Zi as a Reference

先秦諸子論名，旨在匡正名實相怨的時弊，公孫龍也不例外。但是其以實正名的學說宗旨，卻並不為同時代諸子贊同，以致荀況斥之為「惑於用名以亂實者也」（《荀子‧正名》）。究其原因，乃公孫龍所論之名，與此時代之一般理解旨趣殊異。概言之，公孫龍看到了「名」的兩種用法。即，名既可命物（個體物），是為「物名」；亦可命實（個體物的性質），是為「實名」。公孫龍特別強調的是為當時人所忽略的後一種用法，其價值與其說是邏輯的，不如說是形而上學的。因此，不論與同時代諸子相比，或從其後中國哲學發展的思維取向來看，公孫龍的這一發現和闡述都是獨特且別具價值的。

Suffering the problem of Ming-Shi-Xiang-Yuan(名實相怨) in Pre-Qin era, Zhu-zi (諸子), which include Kong-sun Long, are thus paying more attentions to the notion of Ming(名). The principle of Yi-Shi-Zheng-Ming(以實正名) purposed by him, however, meets with no acceptant of contemporaneous Zhu-zi. The repulsion of Xun Zi, which argues that ”making a delusory usage of Ming, could disturb (the orders of) Shi(實)(we have recognized)”, refers to the practice of Kong-sun Long. Provoking criticism universally, the theory of Kong-sun Long is of so distinctive objective, that differs from the general notions of philosophy in that period. In short, the two diversions of Ming(名), to which Kong-sun Long refers, are on one hand to signify (on certain individual), the ”Wu Ming”; while on the other hand to refer (the nature of the individual itself), the ”Shi Ming”, are discovered by Kong-sun Long. The value and doctrine of which highlighted by him is obviously the later, which overlooked in that period, would rather be regarded as Metaphysical rather than logical. It is even significant to discover and elaborate of philosophy of Kong-sun Long, while comparing with the thoughts of contemporaneous Zhu-zi and the other philosophers in the process of development of latter Chinese philosophy.