| 黄传根.亚里士多德与庄子人生“至境”之比较[J].,2015,16(4):63-67 |
| 亚里士多德与庄子人生“至境”之比较 |
| A Comparative Study of Two Doctrines of Life's Highest State |
| 投稿时间：2015-06-04 |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 人生至境是人对理想生活处境的终极性描绘，也是先哲们求解人生问题的重要体现。作为中西文明的重要思想者，亚里士多德与庄子都对此给予了丰富的阐释。立足跨文化的比较视域，两位先哲的人生至境可相应地从5大维度进行比照：样态形式——“闲暇”与“逍遥” 通达途径——“沉思”与“坐忘” 价值旨趣——“至乐”与“无用之用” 理智角色——“崇智”与“去智”以及人格形象——“完人”与“至人”。虽然亚里士多德与庄子均将人生至境指向了内在精神性的自由之境，但在5个维度上都既有相通性又有差异性，从而在一定程度上体现了中西文化于始源点上的汇通与分野。 |
| English Keywords:Aristotle Chuang-Tzu leisure shiao Yao highest state of life |
| Fund Project: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 1045 |
| 全文下载次数: 1198 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 人生至境是人对理想生活处境的终极性描绘，也是先哲们求解人生问题的重要体现。作为中西文明的重要思想者，亚里士多德与庄子都对此给予了丰富的阐释。立足跨文化的比较视域，两位先哲的人生至境可相应地从5大维度进行比照：样态形式——“闲暇”与“逍遥”；通达途径——“沉思”与“坐忘”；价值旨趣——“至乐”与“无用之用”；理智角色——“崇智”与“去智”以及人格形象——“完人”与“至人”。虽然亚里士多德与庄子均将人生至境指向了内在精神性的自由之境，但在5个维度上都既有相通性又有差异性，从而在一定程度上体现了中西文化于始源点上的汇通与分野。 |
| English Summary: |
| The highest state of life is not only an ultimate portrayal of the ideal life situation, but is an important point for the ancient philosopher to answer the essence of life. As the founders of western or eastern civilization, Aristotle and Chuang-Tzu gave a rich explanation about the highest state of life. Based on the intercultural perspectives, there are five dimensions to compare their thoughts: patterns or forms （leisure—shiao Yao），ways of access（contemplation and sitting in forgetfulness）, value orientation（supreme happiness and futility of utility ）,roles of intellect（intellectualism and anti-intellectualism） and ideal personality（perfect man and imperial person）. All of these comparisons indicate that the two philosophers share in some aspects but differe in others,though both of them think that the highest state of life could be boiled down to spiritual freedom. Of course, it also to some extent reflects the similarities and differences of the starting point of cultures. |
| 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
|
| 关闭 |