| Abstract: | 在中西哲學會通的議題上，由於孟子與康德都是自律道德，所以我們總是習以為常地將孟子與康德聯想在一起，但是若說康德人性論比較像孟子，這種說法是不夠準確的；另外，或是將康德根本惡的概念比附荀子，認為康德也是主張性惡，這種論述是太過片面的，以上皆不能正確表達康德與中國儒學人性論中西會通之全貌，所以必須三者一起討論才能有個完整的答案。 首先，孟子與荀子在人性論差異上最關鍵的一點，即是：人性有兩個面向。荀子只看到人性的經驗層面，而孟子不僅看到人有經驗層面，也有慧見，洞知人性有超越層面。雖然孟子承認人性有兩個面向，但是對於人為善的論述較多，關於人為惡的部分，相對的也就很少去正視，而這被忽略的部分，恰好是荀子的學說所強調的。因此，雖然「性善」與「性惡」表面上好像水火不容，但是實際上是互相補足，殊途同歸的。 再者，儒家人性論必須孟子、荀子齊看，特別是與康德人性論做比較的時候，因為，康德也認為人性有兩個面向，是具有雙重性格的。孟子性善說所指的「性」，屬於康德「睿知性格」這一層面，荀子性惡說所指的「性」，是屬於康德「經驗性格」這一層面。而且，康德根本惡的概念，對於人性本惡有更細膩的解說，對於人性本善，雖然同於孟子，但孟子比康德更進一步。 最後，康德與孟、荀人性論比較有個結論，這結論就是「康德人性論含孟、荀之成素」。這種綜合並不是將孟子之「性善」與荀子之「性惡」粗糙地「黏」起來，然後成為康德之人性論，而是運用「人之雙重性格」及「自律道德/他律道德」這兩個理論基礎將三者架構起來，以重組與再現中國儒學孟、荀之人性論，此為本文之主旨。
In the issue of intersection of Chinese and Western philosophy, we arealways accustomed to associate Mencius with Kant because both areautonomous. However, it is not accurate enough to say that Kant’stheories of human nature are more like Mencius; on the other hand, it isunilateral to say that Kant is analogous to Hs?n Tzu because he claimsthat human nature is evil. None of the above statements can accuratelydelineate the full picture how Kant’s Western philosophy meets andintersects with Chinese Confucianism. Therefore, we have to discuss all ofthe three philosophers to have a complete satisfactory answer. First, the main difference between Mencius and Hs?n Tzu on human naturelies in two aspects of human nature. While Hs?n Tzu only sees itsempirical aspect; besides that, Mencius also sees its intelligible aspectand he is aware that human nature has its transcendent aspect. AlthoughMencius acknowledges that human nature has two aspects, he has moretreatises on human good nature than evil nature, if not neglected. Thisignorance happens to be emphasized in theories by Hs?n Tzu. As a result,it appears that these two theories on human nature, either inherently goodor evil, are incompatible with each other. In fact, both are complimentaryand imply the same thing. Furthermore, the Confucian theory of human nature must examine Mencius andHs?n Tzu simultaneously, in particular when compared with that of Kant.The reason is that Kant also believes that human nature has two aspectsand is of dual character. The human nature in Mencius’s theory oninherently good human nature belongs to the intelligible character ofKant, while that in Hs?n Tzu’s evil belongs to the empirical character.Besides, Kant’s concept of radical evil portrays human evil nature inmore details. As to the good nature, Kant share the same concept withMencius, but the latter delves further more. Finally, by re-organization and re-presentation of Mencius’s and Hs?nTzu’s theories of human nature, a comparative study in Kant’s,Mencius’s and Hs?n Tzu’s theories of human nature concludes that”Kant’s theory of human nature may be said to be able to comprehend bothMencius’s and Hs?n Tzu’s theories.” It can do so by virtue of Kant’stwo theories about human nature, namely, of dual character and of autonomyv.s. heteronomy. |
