试论《孟子》中舜“窃负而逃”

An Analysis on Mencius's Idea of "Fleeding with Culprits"

近十年来,哲学界对于儒家"亲亲相隐"争鸣不止,其中尤以舜"窃负而逃"个案成为争鸣焦点所在,或斥之为典型的腐败行为,或称赞为伟大的美德壮举。引证和反驳过程中,双方都涉及到了游叙弗伦"子告父罪"的案例。面对同一问题,为什么孟子与苏格拉底的态度和抉择截然不同?以情感和理性为视角,来探析孟子伦理学和苏格拉底伦理观建立的基点,以达到"同情的理解"。同时,也采用对比的方式,辩证地分析孔孟伦理学中所彰显出来的温情脉脉的道德情感和苏格拉底伦理观中彻底普遍的理性精神;再则,解析两者在面临父子之情与法律尊严抉择时的不足。此外,在反思这两者不足的同时,关照现今法律社会对此类案例的处理,实现了将道德义务或法律强性规定向个人权利可喜的转变。

The issue of Confucian ＂Concealment＂ has long been the subject of philosophy debate over the last decade, especially in the case of ＂fleeing with culprits＂. One side considered it a typical act of corruption; the other, in contrast, praised it a great virtue. On the process of citation and refutation, the two parties both mentioned the case of ＂son informs against his father＂ in Euthyphro. Faced with the same question, why there are two distinct views between Mencius and Socrates？ From the perspective of emotion and rationality, this article will analyze the basic point of ethics between Mencius and Socrates, so as to reach the ＂sympathetic comprehension＂. Meanwhile, the paper will compare the sentimental moral emotion from Confucianism ethics and Socrates＇ thorou- gh rational spirit dialectically, and also, analyze the shortage of both sides when they are confronted with the choice between father- son affectionateness and legal sanctity. In addition, how to deal with these cases have been given good ways in the modem laws, which have released tension to a certain extent between moral emotion and ration.