【作者】 郭继民；

【导师】 何中华；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 中国哲学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 庄学研究,自魏晋以降,已蔚然大观。若要从中发现“新问题”,谈何容易?不过,若转换一下视角,用所谓西人后现代有关理论对之进行解读或曰会通,幸许能找出几分“兴味”。无疑,若进行庄子与后现代之会通,首先势必要解决几个基本问题:即后现代哲学的特点,它还关乎后现代哲学同现代性有何关联;庄子哲学的特质;庄子哲学同后现代有无会通之必要等等。对上述问题的展开与探究便构成了第一章的主要内容。后现代哲学思想并非空穴来风,亦非一个有机“系统”,其乃作为一种哲学思潮而出现:是对科技理性霸权的回应和反叛,是对基础主义、逻各斯主义、宏大叙事的颠覆,更是一种思维模式的转换/转向。这种转换(通过与现代性对比的角度)可概括为实体/语言、真理/游戏、终极/过程、宏大/微观、纵向/横向、整体/碎片、深度/平面、理性/非理性。思维转向的实质乃在于对技术宰制下人之精神“无家可归”命运的深层呵护。无独有偶,庄子哲学思维所呈现出的混沌特质在智慧、学术甚至“科学”层面与后现代均有共通之处:其所追求的人生之逍遥、“融于物中、与物俱化”的诗性表达以及对人类命运所付出的“操心”同后现代主义均有着千丝万缕的关联。“道”作为庄子的关键词,既是笔者解读其哲学的核心概念,亦是与西方哲学尤其是后现代哲学会通的纽带。道含义丰富,行、言、自然等均为道之应有之“义”。然而,作为“形而上”的本体之道乃在于“无”。由“无→有”,当为中国哲学“创生”之特点。西方传统哲学大致定位在“有→有”之层面,然经黑格尔后,“无”作为一个重要的哲学命题被重新提出,尤其在海德格尔那里,更是进一步得到显扬。“无”乃凸显出庄子之道与传统西方本体之关联,大致可概括为有与无、隐与显、内在与超越。解决庄子之道与后现代“本体”会通的问题,似乎要复杂的多:如在海德格尔那里,作为西方本体的“逻格斯”无论在“言说”、真际、通达等义上与庄子之“道”均有着神似之处;在有机主义怀特海那里则通过物我不分、彼此相关的“相融”关系与“道”走到一起。但是,在解构主义那里,情况则完全不同:因为本体已经被解构,不存在了,似乎庄子与解构的后现代失去了共同语言。然而,饶有兴味的是,当“本体”被解构、消解之时,恰恰是后现代思维由“独断理性”走向发散、多元、开放之时。于是,后现代的“全视角主义”思维模式在“道”所蕴涵的“全视阈”维度上得到“展现”和“复活”:以上就构成了第二章的内容。本文的第三章仍然围绕形上之“道”而展开,不过,此处之论并非探讨超越或玄秘之道的性质,而是针对庄子声称“言而非道”而又洋洋洒洒十数万言的“悖论”展开。其核心问题可归结为:道在哪个层面上可说(说,可说),而在哪个层面上又不可说(不可说,不说)。对上述问题,笔者运用后现代主义的有关哲学理论进行了尝试性的解读。就“不可说”而言,结构主义遵循的能指、所指把本体之道排除在能说的“经验”之外;解构主义则通过拓展、推演能指、所指的“差异性”原则,消弭了能指与所指的界限,增大了“所说”与“要说”的裂隙,使得语言不能达到“文本”;后现代解释学则通过言说主体消解的角度、文本生存论的角度、“成见、误解”的角度以及解释学目的之角度得出“语言”(哲学)的目的“不过是维持话语的进行”,并不能达到“道”本体。就“可说”的维度,则按照谁在说、说什么、怎样说的思路进行了追问。“本源”之说,乃为“道”说,道说的方式乃是通过“象”之呈现而进行的。聆听大道的圣者,能通过象而达到“意”,进而得“道”。因此,本源之说应为道言。但作为有创造力的人,亦能“制造”语言,这使得语言杂然不纯。正如庄子语言有所谓的精、粗和不期精粗之分别,西方语言学派亦把语言划分为逻辑语言和日常语言。那么,是否诸种语言均能言说大道?通过对象、言、意的分析,笔者认为即使语言能到达“道”,但须经过镜像—意象—幻象的逐步递进和转换,才有可能领悟到“不可说”之道。“怎样说”则凸显了庄子“言道”的高超技巧,庄子言道乃通过“三言”即重言、寓言和卮言的方式而达成。其独创风格的言说乃是“卮言”,正是通过卮言所描述的种种奇异幻象才既解决了说不可说之悖论,又让物显现出其“真际”。庄子化解“言道”悖论的高超技巧留给我们的绝不仅仅是奇妙的文字游戏,更有深沉的思索:哲学语言应该是何种风格?当下又当如何回归真正的哲学?对这个问题的追问、展开也顺理成章地构成第四章的主题。庄子的言说实质上是诗意的言说,哲学的元语言也应该是诗性的。在这一点上,庄子与尼采、海德格尔、德里达等后现代主义者达成共识:哲学是追求智慧,智慧的核心是自由,而诗性所固有的开放性、发散性、超越性、创造性等品质也应属于哲学,二者在本原上是一体的。事实上,庄子哲学与后现代语言风格在作为创造品质上有着共通性,概而言之,即为增补性、异域性和游牧性。那么“诗性”的内核又何在呢?答曰:隐喻。庄子能轻松地把“不可说之物”言说得如此“流利”,根底在于诗性“隐喻”之特质。并且,隐喻不仅仅能“言说”本体之物,在真理表达、科学思维中亦不可或缺。西方哲学自笛卡尔以来,其语言风格逐步走向严谨、机械甚至刻板,其中自有其崇尚理性、渴求工业发展、社会进步等学术和社会之背景,但同时亦折射出“科技理性”的话语霸权。后现代所倡导的回归“诗性哲学”,很大程度上可看作对工业社会在思想、文化领域的挑战和反叛,它反映了备受工业宰制下的人们对“诗意生存”的向往和回归。庄子(人生)哲学的终极理想乃是与道同在,游于道中。道之诗意“言说”固然能标明其对逍遥之道的渴望和企求,但是,对物的“本然”态度更能切实地表现出人们对大道之态度。事实上,庄子融于大道之逍遥境界乃通过“齐物”、“物化”之途径而达成。庄子道之视阈下的人、物乃应然的浑然一体、无所差别。这种见解在后现代主义那里也得到了回应:怀特海的“我们在世界中,世界在我们中”的有机哲学、海德格尔“在世界中对物的守侯”以及约纳斯赋予物以“自足价值”的责任伦理均是在本体论层次上对人、物关系之定位所作出的努力。但人之命运的历史展开,又使得人对“物”采取了“技”的态度,从而使人们愈来愈远离大“道”。就“技”对“道”的熏染和诱惑而言,无论庄子还是后现代主义者均对“技”持否定态度,主要表现在技术导致道德的堕落、导致人的自我迷失以及导致生态的失衡等。但当把“技”作为寻求大道的途径时,庄子又对“技”给予了肯定。不过,这种“技”并非作为索取、改变“物性”而存在:它是一种“身体的知识”和技巧,通过“技”的娴熟达到“艺”或“道”的境界。这种“艺”或“道”的态度实质上就是后现代所追求的“与物共在”的立场,是人之“是其所是”的本原状态。此乃后现代对抗“科技理性”目的之所在,亦是庄子所渴求的“物之初”态度。回到“物之初”、与物守侯不仅仅是环保、生态之必需,更为人诗意栖居之根本。更多还原

【Abstract】 The study of "Zhuang xue" has been a grand sight from the Wei and Jin Dynasty. It is not easy fou us to find the "new problem". However, we can find out some interest things if transfer the perspective into "west back modern theory" to decipher.Doubtlessly, we should settle up some fundamental problems firstly, which is what is the relation between the feature of "post-modernistic philosophy " and "modernistic philosophy". The feature of Zhuangzi’s philosophy, which is necessary to connect them , etc. To develop and study the problem aboved composed the content of Chapter I. "Post-modernism" is neither an empty one nor an organic system, which is as a response and a rebellion to the techonlogy rational hegemony to overwhelm foundationism", "logistinism", "to express things in magnificence", moreover, it is a chage of pattern of thought. The transformation though the aspect which compare with post-modernism can be summeriized, entity/language, truth/games, ultimate/process, great/microscopic, longitudinal/crosswise, whole/fragment, depth/plane, rationalily/non-rationalily. The essence of the thought changes, as a matter of fact , protect the destiny deeply which spirit can’t find the home due to the ruling of thechnology. Not come singly but in pairs, not only the special character of chaos which emerged from zhuang’zi’s thought have the common ground with "post-modernism" in wisdon, academy and scentific stratification plane, but also the peotic philosophy which pursue ramble of life , immerse in the thing and togather with thing, has closed ralation with "post-modernism", which worry the destiny of the human’ future.As the key word of Zhuangzi, Tao is not only the core concept of the writer’s philosophy explanation, but also the link between Zhuangzi and western philosophy, especially Post-modernism . The meaning of ’Tao’ is profuse: action, word, nature, etc. are all meanings of it. However, as metaphysic, the main meaning is ’nothing’. ’From nothing to have something’, is the characteristic of creating lives in Chinese philosophy. The western traditional philosophy approximately locates in the stratification plan of ’have→have’, then after Hegel, the characteristic of ’nothing’ raised, especially in Heidegger’s passages , ’nothing’ was proposed as an important philosophy proposition. The connection between Zhuangzi’s Tao and western ontology may be summarized as the following: to have and nothing, being hidden and being obvious, intrinsic and to surpass. However, solving the problem of the connection between Zhuangzi’s Tao and Post-modemic ontology seems more completed. For examples: for Heidegger, as the Western main body, "Logos" has some likeness with ’Tao’ of Zhuangzi, in the meaning of word and speech, truth , understanding, etc. In Whitehead’s organic principle, he adopted ’not distinguishing things from human beings", ’related melting relationship’ to go with ’Tao’. However, the situation is totally different in deconstructionism: the main body has been deconstructed, and no longer exists, so it seems that there is no common language between Zhuangzi and deconstructed latter-modern age. But what makes us interested in is: when the main body is deconstructed and dispelled, it is exactly the moment when the latter-modern thought forwards the dispersing, multi-dimensional, opening from arbitrary rationality. Therefore, the entire angle principle of latter-modern age obtains development and reactivating under the entire angle dimension contained in ’Tao’. The above constituted content of the second chapter.ChapterⅢis still talk about the Tao, but here is not research the Tao on magical way. The main aim at "zhangzi "who claimed that "beyond the nature of the way, but at the same time Zhuangzi claimed at and extend the "speak but not theory,"and his long chapter with wrong theory. The core issues can be summed up as follows: on Tao in which level can be said (said , can be said), but also on the level at which we can not say that (we can not say , don’t say). of the above-mentioned issue, the author is the use of post-modern philosophy a ntative answers. "can not say ", the structure is followed, that means noumenon that can be excluded from the saying "experience"; Deconstruction use expansion .deduction , and the difference principle, that eliminate the meaning of boundaries, increasing the said and want to say fissures, that makes language can not catch up text ; post-modernism hermeneutic from talking the angle of the main digestion,the text surival,the prejudice,the misunderstanding,the purpose of Hermrnrutics,that the purpose of language is "the conduct of discourse", but can’t be achieved the ontology of Tao. As far as dimension of "can say" is concerned , according to who is remarks ,what did you say and how to say . The way of Tao’s manifestation is through the Xiang . Saint who is listener of Tao can reach Yi by Xiang ,and than attain to Tao .So that the theory of originality could equal to Tao theory. But as a creative individual, who also can create language, that make language goes dis-smooth. As Zhuang language have the difference of intensive speak, extensive speak and casual speak, Western language attitude also des-seperate into logical language and routing language. Therefore, If speech can talk as theory. Analyze through appearance, talk, meaning, In my opinion, Speech can speak as theory, but need step improve and transform by appearance, meaning and imagination, that would be possible to learn from" meaningfull". "How to say" expecially show the splendid skill of Zhuang’s "Language theory", Zhuang’s speech theory go by "3 speak", those are emphasize speak, store speak and simple speak to reach the effects. Its original way of speech named Simple Speak, the reason that Simple Speak can specify those disobeyness come from its description for all kinds of imagination and say matters as it’s Truely Exist.The Superb artifice of settling the absurdity that ZhongZi giwen us is not only the paronomasia ,but also the deeply thinking: What style should be the philosophical language ? How to return the real philosophy ? So ,examine minutely and deploy the question become the main subject of chapter. The essence of ZhangZi’Speech is full of poetic flavour, in fact ,philosophical language should be full of poetic flavour. In this way, ZhongZi、Nidtzschean、Heidegger and derrida have the same viwepoint. As we know, Philosophy search wisdom, wehile the core of th wisdom is freedom, the character of the poetry such as opening、exhaling、transcending,all should belong to Philosophy ,which have the same original. In fact , both ZhangZi and post-modernism have the same attitude , for exmple , supplement、difference and nomadism. Now , we must ask , what is the core of poetry ? The answer is metaphor. What ZhangZi can express "no spokeing" qlibly ,the sercet is metaphor too. And also, Metaphor not only can express noumenon , but also play an inportant roal in searching truth and science etc. The style of philosophical language in West has become rigid , ankylose and Since Decare’ thought has accepted .Of course,the character of the philosophy is relate to the such aspects: such as advocating logos, longing for industry development、society progress etc. At same time ,Which reflect that the technological reason has dominated the world of speech. The post-modernism spaskplug to return the poetic philosophy ,in some degree, means to turn against industrt socity, which reflect the people who was dominate by the technology want to return the potic life.Zhuangzi’s philosophy (life) ultimate ideal is always with Tao, and its true meaning lies in Tao. Although Tao’s poetic sentiment and word can mark the hope and desire for the free and unfettered Tao, the attitudes towards the original nature of things can exactly express human’s attitudes towards Tao. Therefore, through the way of getting things even matter-rizations, Zhuangzi succeeded to put his Tao in the free and unfettered world. Zhuangzi holds the view that under the apparent threshold, human and things are united, without any difference, which obtains response from Post-modemism, such as Whitehead’s organic philosophy saying "we are in the world while the world is in us" ; Heidegger’s "waiting for the thins in the world" and Jonas’s responsibility ethics. Those are efforts to the definition of the relation between human and things in the ontology level. But when the history of human’s natural destiny launched, human adopted the technique attitudes towards things, which cause human to get further and further away from Tao. Speaking the technique influence and temptation on Tao, both Zhuangzi and Post-modemism holds negative attitudes towards technique, they both consider that technology causes the morals loss, human’s self-loss and ecological unbalance, etc. But when they consider technique as the method to search Tao, Zhuangzi gives affirmative attitude towards it. However, this technique does not exist as it could claim and change things. On the contrary, it is a technique of ’body knowledge’ which reaches the art or Tao’s realm through the way of getting the skill mature. This attitude of art or Tao is exactly the standpoint of ’being with things’, pursuit by latter-modernism, which is the original condition of human’s ’it is it’. Moreover, it is the purpose of the fight between Post-modemism and the technical rationality, also it is Zhuang-zi excessively demanding attitude of ’beginning of things’. Getting back to the beginning of things, waiting for things are not only the need of environmental protection and ecology, but also the basis of human’s poetic sentiment.更多还原