請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/71370
標題: | 朱熹與丁若鏞「道心人心論」之比較研究 A Comparative Study on Zhu Xi and Jeong Yakyong's Theory of Dao Xin and Ren Xin |
作者: | Gyoel Gim 金玟 |
指導教授: | 李賢中(Hsien-Chung Lee) |
共同指導教授: | 杜保瑞(Bau-Ruei Duh) |
關鍵字: | 道心人心論,程頤,呂大臨,中和舊說,朱熹,中和新說,知覺,丁若鏞,天主教,上帝,靈命, Theory of Dao Xin and Ren Xin,Cheng Yi,Lui Dalin,Zhonghe Old Theory,Zhu Xi,Zhonghe New Theory,Perception,Jeong Yakyong,Catholicism,God,Lingming, |
出版年 : | 2019 |
學位: | 博士 |
摘要: | 本文透過朱熹與丁若鏞的「道心人心論」進行比較研究,並聚焦於兩者對「道心」的問題意識,以此考察「道心」概念哲學含義的變化與差異。在此問題意識下,本文一方面從程頤與呂大臨關於「中」與「未發已發」之辯論開始,接續討論朱熹中和舊說與新說的理論發展,深入探討朱熹對「道心人心」論的理論含義。另一方面,首先從歷史觀點來考察身爲信西派的丁若鏞與天主教的關係;再者從與天主教理論的類似性切入,討論丁若鏞對「上帝」的觀點,深入探討丁若鏞對「道心人心」論的理論含義。本文比較朱熹與丁若鏞對「道心」的觀點,提出(1)朱熹的「道心」是必須先透過「知覺」之後才形成的道德意識,實際上不會賦予「道心」本體的涵義;(2)丁若鏞的「道心」等同於「靈明」、「天命之性」為代表的本體,而「上帝」是這些本體義所根據的終極本體。最後,本文基於以上的論述,延伸探討朱熹與丁若鏞的本體論與工夫論之比較。 This thesis compares the “Dao Xin(道心,the way of heart and mind) and Ren Xin (人心,the human’s heart and mind) Theory” of Zhu Xi and Jeong Yakyong. The philosophical meaning of Zhu Xi’s “Dao Xin” is investigated through several steps. It first focuses on the consciousness of 'Dao Xin' to examine the changes and the differences of philosophical meaning of the “Dao Xin”. The theoretical development of the old theory and the new theory of Zhong He(中和) is discussed as well to explain the “Dao Xin” further. The theories of Zhong He is brought up by Zhu Xi, from the debates between Cheng Yi and Lui Dalin on Zhong(中) and Weifa-Yifa(未發已發), which is analyzed additionally. On the contrary, Jeong Yakyong’s theory is studied in different steps. First, Jeong Yakyong's perspectives regarding the Catholicism is examined from the historical point of view. Secondly, Jeong Yakyong's thoughts and viewpoints of the Shang Di is discussed with the similarity of the Catholic theory. Furthermore, Jeong Yakyong's philosophical meaning of the Dao Xin and Ren Xin theory is analyzed in depth. The comparison between Zhu Xi and Jeong Yakyong's views on 'Dao Xin' is conducted. (1) Zhu Xi's 'Dao Xin' is a moral consciousness that must be formed after 'Perception'. Zhu Xi does not actually give ontological meaning to the Dao Xin. (2) Jeong Yakyong's 'Dao Xin' is equivalent to the 'Ling ming'(靈明) and 'the nature of Tian Ming(天命,the nature of God's will) as the representative noumenal ontology, and 'God' (上帝) is the ultimate ontology on which these ontological meanings are based. Based on the all discussions above, the comparison between Zhu Xi and Jeong Yakyong's ontology and practical theory is researched along at the end of this thesis. |
URI: | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/71370 |
DOI: | 10.6342/NTU201900538 |
全文授權: | 有償授權 |
顯示於系所單位: | 哲學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-108-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 3.92 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。