欧洲启蒙思想与中国文化有何相干?——就一个学界热点问题回应张西平先生

刘耘华

欧洲启蒙思想与中国文化有何相干?——就一个学界热点问题回应张西平先生

刘耘华

上海师范大学

基金项目: 上海师范大学“高水平地方大学建设比较文学与世界文学创新团队”项目的阶段性成果。

计量
- 文章访问数: 437
- HTML全文浏览量: 71
- PDF下载量: 330
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2019-03-29
- 刊出日期: 2021-03-09

Does European Enlightenment Have to Do with Chinese Culture? — A Response to Prof. ZHANG Xiping

LIU Yunhua

Shanghai Normal University

摘要

摘要: 对于16—18世纪欧洲“持续百年的中国热”，我国学界一般认为中国文化对欧洲启蒙思想与文化产生了实质的、“决定性的”影响，有的学者甚至认为，没有中国，欧洲人就不是今天的欧洲人。笔者此文以两位主要启蒙思想家对儒家之“理”的接受和诠释为切入点对此做出了一些重新反思。论文指出，自然神学为启蒙时期中西思想的交往和对话提供了良好的契机。莱布尼茨（Gottfried W. Leibniz）和马勒伯朗士（Nicolas de Malebranche）就是以自然神学为基础来接受和诠释儒家之“理”。针对龙华民和利安当在《论中国宗教的几个问题》和《论在中国传教的几个重要问题》两个重要文献中提出的关于“理”的看法（这是当时欧洲的主流意见），莱布尼茨做出了逆向的阅读。这一解读，表面看是依靠白晋，实质上则是来自自身的、以“单子论”为核心的自然神学体系。他们对于“理”的解释与中国固有的思想相差甚远。可以说，中国的“理”对于莱布尼茨的“单子有机论”并无实质的“植入式影响”（in-fluence），其间发生的只是一种“错位的契合”。这是一种具有自我想象性质的“确认性影响”（confluence）。以此来衡量，莱布尼茨的哲学与中国文化之间其实未产生实质的交融，也即，从根本上说，莱氏的哲学是一种局限于欧洲自身之内的思想运动，一种“自我成长的运动”。这个判断，可以推扩到整个启蒙时期的欧洲思想文化运动之中吗？虽然不能完全这样决断，但是本文仍倾向于认为，中国只是欧洲启蒙运动的一个“外力”，它只是刚好适合、并被欧洲启蒙思想家选择作为其自我重新建构的一个“榜样”。这个“榜样”，其内涵主要是西方借“他者”的想象所展开的自我诉求与言说（尽管其间也有不少“类似”甚至“神似”之处）。换言之：从“中国”这儿，他们找到的是他们所期望得到的东西。
- 欧洲启蒙思想 /
- 中国文化 /
- 植入式影响 /
- 确认式影响 /
- 莱布尼茨 /
- 马勒伯朗士
Abstract: In terms of the issue of“the Chinese Vogue” in Europe from the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries, Chinese academia has widely recognized that Chinese culture has an essential and decisive influence on European Enlightenment, and some scholars even believe that without China, the Europeans could not have become who they are or what they are today. This paper aims to rethink this issue by focusing on two important Enlightenment thinkers, Gottfried W. Leibniz and Nicolas de Malebranche, including their comprehension and interpretation of“Li,” a term from Confucianism. This paper also demonstrates that Natural Theology provided a good opportunity for the communication and interaction between Chinese and Western cultures during the Enlightenment. It is Natural Theology that underlies the two thinkers’ understanding of“Li.” However, Leibniz’s understanding of“Li” is a reverse reading of the European mainstream and differs from the opinions in two important texts, Traité sur quelques points de la religion des chinois by Nicolas Longobardi and Traité sur quelques points importans de la mission de la Chine by Antonio de Santa Maria. Leibniz’s reading, ostensibly based on Joachim Bouvet, was essentially on his own Natural Theology focusing of“Monad Theory.” However, the two thinkers’ explanation of“Li” deviates heavily from the original Chinese thought. It can be said that“Li” displays no essential in-fluence on the“Monad Theory,” but rather a con-fluence created from a sort of self-imagination. From this point of view, the philosophy of Leibniz does not have a substantial interaction with Chinese culture; that is to say, his philosophy is an ideological movement restricted to Europe, or rather a“self-growth.” Could such a judgement be applied to the trend of ideology and culture during the whole course of the Enlightenment? It is hard to answer 12 this question in a definite manner. This paper intends to argue that China was just an external force for European Enlightenment, a distant ideal that served as a role model for the Enlightenment thinkers’own self-reconstructions. Such a role model is basically the West’s self-expression through imagination of the Other (though not without similarities); in other words, the Enlightenment thinkers found what they had anticipated from China.
- European Enlightenment /
- Chinese culture /
- in-fluence /
- con-fluence /
- Gottfried W. Leibniz /
- Nicolas de Malebranche

HTML全文

参考文献(60)

[1]	Byrne, Peter. Natural Religion and the Nature of Religion: The Legacy of Deism. London and New York: Routledge, 1989.
[2]	Cook, Daniel J., Rosemont, Henry and Jr..“The Pre-Established Harmony between Leibniz and Chinese Thought.” Journal
[3]	of the History of Ideas 42, no. 2 (April-June 1981): 253-67.
[4]	——— eds. Leibniz: Writings on China. Chicago: Open Court, 1994.
[5]	———.“Leibniz, China, and the Problem of Pagan Wisdom.” Philosophy East and West 65, no. 3 (July 2015): 940.
[6]	Davis, W. W.“China, the Confucian Ideal, and the European Age of Enlightenment.” Journal of the History of Ideas 44,
[7]	no. 4 (October-December 1983): 523-48.
[8]	Jacobson, Stefan G.“Chinese Influences of Images? Fluctuating Histories of How Enlightenment Europe Read China.”
[9]	Journal of World History 24, no. 3 (September 2013): 623-60.
[10]	Joseph, Needham. Science and Civilisation in China. Vol. 2. Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press, 1956.
[11]	Larrimore, Mark.“Orientalism and Antivoluntarism in the History of Ethics: On Christian Wolff’s Oratio de Sinarum
[12]	Philosophia Practica.” The Journal of Religious Ethics 28, no. 2 (Summer 2000): 627.
[13]	Mungello, David E.“On the Significance of the Question‘ Did China Have Science?’” Philosophy East and West 22, no.
[14]	4 (October 1972): 467-78.
[15]	———.“Sinological Torque: The Influence of Cultural Preoccupations on Seventeenth-Century Missionary Interpretations
[16]	of Confucianism.” Philosophy East and West 28, no. 2 (April 1978): 123-41.
[17]	———.“Some Recent Studies on the Confluence of Chinese and Western Intellectual History.” Journal of the History of
[18]	Ideas 40, no. 4 (October-December, 1979): 649-61.
[19]	Reihman, Gregory M.“Malebranche’s Influence on Leibniz’s Writing on China.” Philosophy East and West 65, no. 3 (July
[20]	2015): 846-68.
[21]	Ribas, Albert.“Leibniz’s‘ Discourse on the Natural Theology of the Chinese’ and the Leibniz-Clarke Controversy.”
[22]	Philosophy East and West 53, no. 1 (January 2003): 64-86.
[23]	Swetz, Frank J.“Leibniz, the Yijing, and the Religious Conversion of the Chinese.” Mathematics Magazine 76, no. 4
[24]	(October 2003): 276-91.
[25]	侯外庐：《中国思想通史》第五卷，北京：人民出版社， 1995年。
[26]	[HOU Wailu. Zhongguo sixiang tongshi (General History of Chinese Thoughts). Vol.5. Beijing: People’s Publishing House,
[27]	1995.]
[28]	柯兰霓：《耶稣会士白晋的生平与著作》，李岩译，张西平、雷立柏校，郑州：大象出版社， 2009年。
[29]	[Claudia von Collan. Yesuhuishi Bai Jin de shengping yu zhuzuo (P. Joachim Bouvet S. J. Sein Leben und sein Werk).
[30]	Translated by LI Yan. Edited by ZHANG Xiping and Leopold Leeb. Zhengzhou: Elephant Press, 2009.]
[31]	李天纲：《跨文化诠释：经学与神学的相遇》，北京：新星出版社， 2007年。
[32]	[LI Tiangang. Kua wenhua quanshi: jingxue yu shenxue de xiangyu (Cross-cultural Interpretation: The Encounter between
[33]	Chinese Classics and Western Theology). Beijing: New Star Press, 2007.]
[34]	李文潮、H.波塞尔：《莱布尼茨与中国——〈中国近事〉发表300周年国际学术讨论会论文集》，李文潮等译，北京：科
[35]	学出版社， 2002年。
[36]	[LI Wenchao, and H. Hans Poser, eds. Laibunici yu Zhongguo: “Zhongguo jinshi” fabiao 300 zhounian guoji xueshu taolunhui lunwenji (Das Neueste über China: G. W. Leibnizens Novissima Sinica von 1697: Internationale Symposium,
[37]	Berlin, 4. bis 7. Oktober 1997). Translated by LI Wenchao. Beijing: Science Press, 2002.]
[38]	李文潮、张西平：《中国近事》，梅谦立等译，郑州：大象出版社， 2005年。
[39]	[LI Wenchao, and ZHANG Xiping. Zhongguo jinshi (Novissima Sinica). Translated by Thierry Meynard. Zhengzhou:
[40]	Elephant Press, 2005.]
[41]	刘耘华：《诠释的圆环：明末清初传教士对儒家经典的解释及其本土回应》，北京大学出版社， 2005年。
[42]	[LIU Yunhua. Quanshi de yuanhuan: Mingmo Qingchu chuanjiaoshi dui rujiajingdian de jieshi ji qi bentu huiying (The
[43]	Circle of Hermeneutics: The Jesuits’ Interpretation of the Coufucian Classics and the Response of the Chinese in the
[44]	Late Ming and Early Qing China). Beijing: Peking University Press, 2005.]
[45]	———：《依天立义：清代前中期江南文人应对天主教文化研究》,上海：上海古籍出版社， 2014年。
[46]	［———. Yitian liyi: Qingdai qianzhongqi jiangnanwenren yingdui tianzhujiao wenhua yanjiu (Meaning-Making by Virtue
[47]	of“Tian”: Jiangnan Literati’s Response to Catholic Culture in the Early and Mid Qing). Shanghai: Shanghai Chinese
[48]	Classics Publishing House Co., Ltd., 2014.]
[49]	孟德卫：《莱布尼茨和儒学》，张学智译，南京：江苏人民出版社， 1998年。
[50]	[D. E. Mungello. Laibunici he Ruxue (Leibniz and Confucianism: The Search for Accord). Translated by ZHANG Xuezhi.
[51]	Nanjing: Jiangsu People’s Publishing House, 1998.]
[52]	庞景仁：《马勒伯朗士的“神”的观念和朱熹的“理”的观念》，冯俊译，北京：商务印书馆， 2005年。
[53]	[PANG Jingren. Malebolangshi de “shen” de guannian he Zhu Xi de “li” de guannian (Malebranche’s“God” and Zhu
[54]	Xi’s“Li”). Translated by FENG Jun. Beijing: The Commercial Press, 2005.]
[55]	秦家懿：《德国哲学家论中国》，台北：联经出版事业公司， 1999年。
[56]	[QIN Jiayi. Deguo zhexuejia lun Zhongguo (German Philosophers’ View on China). Taipei: Linking Publishing Co., Ltd.,
[57]	1999.]
[58]	谢和耐：《中国人的智慧》，何高济译，上海：上海古籍出版社， 2004年。
[59]	[Jacques Gernet. Zhongguoren de zhihui (L’ Intelligence de la Chine: Le Social et le Mental). Translated by HE Gaoji.
[60]	Shanghai: Shanghai Chinese Classics Publishing House Co., Ltd., 2004.]