中西哲學理論對比研究之省思──以《莊子》對比冥契主義為例

Thoughts on the Comparative Studies of Chinese and Western Philosophies Taking the Contrast Between Zhuangzi and Mysticism as an Example

本文以關永中與楊儒賓對於「《莊子》思想是否為冥契主義」的論斷分歧為例，反省當代中西哲學理論對比研究之模式。哲學研究通常奠基於文本解讀研究，而中西文化語言本質不同，以至於批評者認為中西哲學之間的理論對比研究，因文本語言差異而無法進行，然筆者認為文本僅是人類哲學思維活動下的產物，而非哲學思維活動本身，「人的思維活動」才是哲學研究的主要對象。若我們重新確立學界共通的研究關懷網絡，學術立場的衝突可能得以透過不同層級的研究關懷之關係而化解，因此在關注「人類共通哲學思維活動」的研究關懷下，當代中西哲學理論之間的對比研究，將可以在「探究跨文化哲學理論是否等同」的文本解讀研究模式之外另闢蹊徑，轉而為「探究人類共通的哲學思維活動究竟如何運作」的研究取向。

Extending from Wing-chung Kwan’s and Rur-bin Yang’s disagreement on whether the thoughts of Zhuangziare characteristic of mysticism, this study attempts to examine the contemporary comparative studies of Chinese and Western philosophies. Philosophical research is usually conducted on the basis of text interpretation; however, owing to the differences in nature of the Chinese and Western cultures and languages, some critics argue that the comparative studies of Chinese and Western philosophical texts cannot be performed. Against this stance, I argue that philosophical texts are not so much thinking activity per se as products of human beings’philosophical thinking. Thus, it is the thinking activity of human beings that should serve as the object of philosophical research. For this reason, if we map out the network of common concerns among researchers, the conflicts among different research positions will be resolved. With the spotlight cast upon the common philosophical thinking of human beings, a new approach to contemporary comparative studies of Chinese and Western philosophies can be developed, beyond the limitation of the mode of textual interpretation which centered in exploring whether philosophies of different cultural backgrounds can be treated as equivalent or not.