荀子與名、墨二家在「名理」方面論辨之商榷

Having a discussion on the criticism of role-identification and rationality between Hsun-Tzu and the nominatists with the Mohists

荀子名理思想奠基於名、墨二家基礎之上，因而躋登先秦名學的高峰；卻是入室操其戈而伐之，深嫉二家為「亂名改作」，以此歸罪之。然而，荀子以其經驗的理智思維，以破除名、墨二家純粹思辨之弊，在名理之學卓有建樹；而其得、其失，卻仍有商榷的餘地。本論文著意在此，擬探究荀子批判名、墨二家名理之說處，藉以揭示荀子名理學之得失。

Hsun-Tzu’s thought of role-identification and rationality was built on the foundation of the nominalists and the Mohists, and therefore went up to the summit of “The famed school in the era before Shih Huang Ti of the Chin Dynasty”. Though it was like this, yet the fact was that he attacked them with his own writings, and deeply had a detestation of confounding the name and substance, reformulating writing of the two schools, he laid the blame on them. But, on the other hand, Hsun-Tzu made use of his intellect thought and experience to eliminate the drawbacks of the nominalists and the Mohists, and had a high achievement. However, there is some room for discussion. This article focuses on the study of the interpretation of Hsun-Tzu’s criticism for role-identification and rationality of the nominalists and the Mohists to reveal gain and loss in Hsun-Tzu’s points of views.