谁“令人类的尊严和理性蒙羞”——对顺真教授《笛卡尔的悟道》一文的商榷

A Refutation Against Shunzhen's Article Realizing the Truth by Descartes

顺真《笛卡尔的悟道》曲解笛卡尔的"沉思"为"禅定",曲解缪勒的"宗教"概念是"对康德宗教方法的深度反驳"。对笛卡尔《沉思录》作为"冥想"形式文本进行的严肃学术研究,揭示它是帮助从经验论转向唯理论的认知训练,故正是理性沉思。笛卡尔的"直观"不是"定中现量",是数学方法的理性直观而非"悟道亲证所获之能力"。缪勒的"宗教,乃是领悟无限的主观才能"的概念,实基于康德关于纯粹理性追溯无限性先验理念的思想。顺真错乱逻辑的"哲学门在前行的路上出现断桥时",通过"神迹、通灵等现象为外在特征的神秘主义"伪劣宗教门岂能联结?

In his Article Realizing the Truth by Descartes,Shunzhen deliberately misinterprets Descartes' meditations as 'contemplatio' and dhyana,and Max Müller's concept of 'religion' as 'deeply contradicting Kant's approach to religion'. However,Descartes' meditation lacks dhyana's essential characteristic. The content of Descartes' meditation,i. e. immateriality of spiritual substance,can't be distorted as the dhyana's cognitive feature of senselessness. Strict academic study on Descartes' works as text of spiritual exercise reveal it as cognitive exercise helping turning from empiricism to rationalism. Descartes' intuition is not 'immediate perception' obtained after enlightenment as in Buddhism but rational intuition as in mathematics and science. Müller's concept of 'religion' as 'subjective ability to apprehend the Infinite' ? actually bases on Kant's idea that pure reason traces its objects to a priori ideals which are infinite. Shunzhen's argument that 'Religious enlightenment is necessary in accomplishing all the connotation of philosophia' is illogical and thus invalid.