試論牟、李、林、黄四家儒學分期思路之異同

On the similarities and differences between the periodization ideas of Confucianism of Mou, Li, Lin and Huang

自牟宗三提出儒學三期論之後，儒學分期就成了學術界幾十年來的熱點問題之一，李澤厚四期論、成中英五期論、錢穆六期論紛紛出世。但目前學界對於分期論的研究普遍陷入誤區：僅僅對比分期的數字。其實分期話題的精髓反而不在於分幾期的數字，而在於每種分期論都反映了提出這種分期論的學者的知識結構、價值取向，甚至在一定程度上反映出了論者的人生經歷，例如，林安梧是牟宗三的嫡傳弟子，為何同一師門內兩代人的儒學分期方法不同？再如，李澤厚、黃玉順都想用「情」突破傳統形而上學，並以此作為儒學分期的新標準，但李澤厚的「情」是主體性的，而黃玉順的「情」兼有主體性、前主體性的「雙重觀念層級」並側重於後者......而每種儒學分期論的「最後一期」也通常反映了提出這種分期論的那個時代的社會焦點。

Since Mou Zongsan put forward the Three-phase Theory of Confucianism, the periodization of Confucianism has become one of the hot issues in the academic circles for decades. Li Zehou’s Four-phase Theory of Confucianism, Cheng Zhongying’s Five-phase Theory of Confucianism，Qian Mu’s Six-phase Theory of Confucianism were put forward one after another. However, at present, the research on the periodization theory has generally fallen into a misunderstanding: only the numbers of periodization are compared. In fact, the essence of the topic of periodization lies not in the number of periods, but each periodization theory reflects the knowledge structure and value orientation of the scholars who put forward this periodization theory, and even reflects the life experience of the commentator to a certain extent. For example, Lin Anwu is disciple of Mou Zongsan, why is the Confucian periodization method different between the two generations within the same master’s sect? For another example, Li Zehou and Huang Yushun both want to use“emotion”to break through traditional metaphysics and use it as a new standard for Confucian periodization, but Li Zehou’s“emotion”is subjectivity, while Huang Yushun’s“emotion”has both subjectivity and pre-subjectivity and focuses on the latter...... The last issue of each Confucian periodization theory usually reflects the social focus of the era in which it was proposed.