| Abstract: | 本論文以「《莊子》『典範人格』義蘊的詮釋與重構」為題，旨在從《莊子》文本的探索中，對應於「歷來相關研究成果」提出「反思性」與「融貫性」的詮釋問題。依此，回顧「歷來相關研究成果」大體可分為兩種取向：Ⅰ、以單一「典範人格」為研究對象，從不同的「視域」進行「最高層次之形上詮釋」；Ⅱ、以諸「典範人格」為研究對象，進行總體分析與觀察，但多僅以「體道境界」的差別思考其同異問題。對此，就《莊子》文脈之動態性義涵觀之，諸「典範人格」實多有「單出」、「換用」與「並列連用」等情形，而筆者則借由一系列「問題」的思索與探問，嘗試突顯其「歷史性」與「普遍性」之間的思考關係、「微觀」與「宏觀」下的層次性差異與立體性聯繫，以重新探討「歷來相關研究成果」所涉及與尚未涉及的相關問題。
對此，本論文之研究目的主要包涵了三個階段：(1)首先，從「思考的歷史性」出發，藉由《莊子》文本蘊涵之線索與提示，嘗試建構出理解「莊子」諸「典範人格」，即「至人」、「神人」、「聖人」與「真人」之歷史情境及其相關的意義問題；(2)其次，根據(1)之成果，回到《莊子》文本諸脈絡，透過「單出」、「換用」、「並列連用」等觀測角度的相互支援，詮釋諸「典範人格」之「微觀」與「宏觀」性義涵；(3)進一步又從其「差異」與「同一」的關係中，回歸其「普遍性之思考」，以揭顯其內在之體系性問題與解構性意義。
順此，在第一個階段的導引性建構中，筆者透過「以物易其性」、「好知而亂天下」、「以賞罰為事」、「儒、墨之是非」與「楊、墨之駢枝」等文本提示，在「周文疲弊」與「道術將為天下裂」之二重宏觀的語境中，嘗試微觀的分疏與架構出一組「二層五段」之動態相續的反思性問題，以突顯出《莊子》文本內在的「歷史情境」與「問題意識」，以及諸「典範人格」立基於「通」的歷史意義。
繼而，在第二階段的分析詮釋中，筆者則藉由：A、「單出」的情境，釐析不同名相之「典範人格」於不同文脈中分別涉及了哪些思想史脈絡與議題，以回應「二層五段」之導引性問題而勾勒其歷史圖像，並演繹出諸「典範人格」在「莊子」對於「普遍性」問題思考的線索與意義；B、順此，對於「換用」之情境應如何詮釋的問題，筆者則嘗試提出「中介性質之導引」、「對各類人物之評價性符號」、「兼具『中介性質之導引』與『對各類人物之評價性符號』」與「內涵佊此相蘊」等概念，以解釋諸「典範人格」在同一脈絡情境中，分別表徵之不同的意義與作用；C、繼此，根據本文的分析，諸「典範人格」在「並列連用」的情境中，微觀的看固有其脈絡上的分殊義，但整體的看不僅呈顯出「莊子」對於「普遍性」問題的思維，亦隱涵了諸「典範人格」在總體關係問題上的「宏觀性基準」。
依此，到了第三階段的重構與解構，筆者方以「己」、「功」、「名」、「知」等宏觀性關鍵字句，討論並總攝上論成果中，諸「典範人格」於相同或不同脈絡之各別意義與作用。同時，也環顧「其一也一，其不一也一」與「道未始有封、言未始有常」等「莊子」思維內容與方式，以作為諸「典範人格」之「宏觀」與「微觀」問題在聯繫上的思考基點。準此，筆者認為「『己→名』『名→功』『功→己』/『知』」，實循環而有機地共構出諸「典範人格」在總體關懷上的「一體四相」。如此，「微觀」的見其「差異」，則「至人」、「神人」、「聖人」與「真人」，皆分別彰顯了「己」、「功」、「名」、「知」等不同面向的實踐問題與工夫意義；但「宏觀」的察其「同一」，其「無己」、「無功」、「無名」、「真知」，亦同屬體「道」之「境界」而同時解構並超越了「一體四相」之諸問題。
This essay is to discuss the theme of “The Interpretation and Reconstruction of Chuang Tzu ’s Paradigm Personality”, and aims to propose the interpretation questions about reflectivity and coherence from the overall related research results in the process of exploring Chuang Tzu. According to this, there are two approaches to retrospect the overall related research results. The first is metaphysically interpreting each single paradigm personality on the highest level from different horizons. The second is analyzing and observing all the paradigm personalities comprehensively but only focus on the difference and similarity between the states of intuiting the Dao(道).From observing the dynamic meaning of the context in Chuang Tzu, how the paradigm personalities to be used which has several situations, such like solely, in rotation, and side by side. Through considering and inquiring a series of problems, the author tries to expose that not only thinking about the relation between historicity and universality but also observing the hierarchical difference and stereo connections from macro and micro-perspective, and to once again discuss the issues that involved in the overall related research results or not.
Therefore, the purpose of this essay contains three main stages. First, for the thinking historicity, it’s to construct the historical situation in order to realize all the Chuang Tzu’s paradigm personalities, such like “Zhi Ren” (至人),“Shen Ren”(神人), “Sheng Ren” (聖人),“Zhen Ren”(真人), and any other related meaning questions by the clues and directions involved in Chuang Tzu. Second, according to the forward result, it’s to interpret the meaning of Chuang Tzu ’s paradigm personalities from macro and micro-perspective by combining the viewpoint of all the situations that they are used solely, in rotation, and side by side in Chuang Tzu. Third, within the relation between the difference and identity of them, it’s to reveal the inner-systematical structure and deconstructing meaning with universal thinking.
In the guiding construction of the first stage, through the directions such as “Yi Wu Yi Qi Xing”(以物易其性), “Hao Zhi Er Luan Tian Xia”(好知而亂天下),“Yi Shang Fa Wei Shi ”(以賞罰為事),“Ro Mo Zhi Shi Fei ”(儒墨之是非),“Yang Mo Zhi Pian Zhi ”(楊墨之駢枝) in the text, the author tries to analyze and construct a group of reflection questions that dynamically following with five-segments-in-two-layers from micro-perspective both in the macroscopic context with two layers like “Zhou Wen Pi Bi ”(周文疲弊) and “Dao Shu Jiang Wei Tian Xia Lie”(道術將為天下裂) and moreover, tries to emphasize the historical situation and inspire the consciousness about this issue in Chuang Tzu, even highlight the historical meaning that the paradigm personalities are all based on “Tong”(通).
In the analysis and interpretation of the second stage, (A) through the situation that being used solely in the text , the author distinguishes that each paradigm personality in every different context which is involved in what issues, origin, or development in the history of philosophy, so as to respond to the guiding questions with five-segments-in-two-layers and outline a map of history, and furthermore, deduce the clues and meaning of all the paradigm personalities in Chuang Tzu’s thoughts about the universality questions. (B) For the above-mentioned reason, towards how to interpret the situation that the paradigm personalities are used in rotation, the author tries to propose the concepts, such as “the guidance with intermediary character” (中介性質之導引), “the valuing symbols to all the personalities”(對各類人物之評價性符號), “both 〝the guidance with intermediary character〞and〝the valuing symbols to all the personalities〞” (兼具中介性質之導引與對各類人物之評價性符號), and “the connotations involved in each other”(內涵彼此相蘊), for the purpose of explaining that all the paradigm personalities individually indicate different meanings and effects in the same context. (C) And then, according to the analysis of this essay, when the paradigm personalities are used side by side, it’s no doubt that they have individual meaning in the context microscopically, but examining the whole, it not only represents Chuang Tzu’s thoughts about the universality questions but also implies the macroscopic norms of all in universal relation questions.
After all, in the reconstruction and deconstruction of the third stage, by means of the macroscopic keywords like “Ji ”(己),“Gong”(功),“Ming”(名),and “Zhi”(知), the author tries to discuss and integrate the individual meaning and effect of all the paradigm personalities in similar or different context within the foregoing results. In the meanwhile, also to look after both “ Qi Yi Ye Yi , Qi Bu Yi Ye Yi ”(其一也一，其不一也一)and “Dao Wei Shi You Feng , Yan Wei Shi You Chang”(道未始有封、言未始有常) which are the content and manner of thinking in Chuang Tzu, is to be the basic on thinking the connections between the paradigm personalities from macro and micro-perspective. Consequently, the author thinks that “〝Ji→Ming〞〝Ming→Gong〞〝Gong→Ji〞/〝Zhi〞” (「『己→名』『名→功』『功→己』/『知』」) altogether construct the paradigm personalities’ concern for integrity with four-aspects-in-one-unity organically and circularly. For the foregoing reason, to see the differences microscopically, “Zhi Ren”(至人),“Shen Ren”(神人),“Sheng Ren”(聖人),and “Zhen Ren”(真人) indicate the questions of practice in all the aspects as “Ji ”(己), “Gong”(功), “Ming”(名),and “Zhi”(知), but to see the identity macroscopically,“Wu Ji ”(無己),“Wu Gong”(無功),“Wu Ming”(無名), and “Zhen Zhi” (真知) not only all belong to the states of intuiting the Dao(道) but also deconstruct and transcend the problems about the four-aspects-in-one-unity. |
