文化的眼光:梁漱溟认识取向的特色

Cultural Outlook: Liang Shuming's Cognitive Orientation

民国初年是中国新旧学术典范的过渡时代,不仅有"化民成俗"和"为学术而学术"两种基本取向的对立,就是从认识到表述的一系列规范,也都还在形成之中。梁漱溟缺少与同龄人一样的传统滋养,却又与新学术典范不甚相合。他不新不旧,以我为主,形成独特的风格,也引起不少的争议。从他人的批评中,常能看到他认识文化的取向和表述文化的特色。即偏向从哲学的路径观察文化,不够注意名相的历史脉络,又试图用相对通俗的"文化"去表述更为虚悬的"哲学",这使得一些"学院派"的哲学研究者认为他的著作既不算哲学,也不够文化。他论学以"问题"为中心,善于搜集各方面材料,坚持"拿自己思想做主",以六经注我的方式把有些"暗合"的元素落实在横切的空间和纵向的时间上,以形成一个系统的见解。但这样以"问题"为中心广泛搜集各种知识,很容易忽略所搜材料的渊源脉络。又,梁漱溟的思想辩证,表述既试图简明扼要,又较为曲折,有意让"两个以上的道理"并存于言说之中,通过观念的竞争确立自己的"正面意思"。这样蕴涵着紧张和冲突的取向,强化了梁漱溟与新学术典范的分歧,却也表现出新学术典范具有容纳另类的开放性。

The early years of the Republic of China witnessed the transitional period of the old and new academic paradigms of China. At the time, there was an opposition of the two basic orientations of ＂customization of culture＂ and ＂study for academic＂ and, a series of norms, from the recognition to the expression, were in forming. Liang Shuming lacked the same traditional nourishment as his peers, but was not consistent with the new academic model as well. He was self-centered, neither old nor new, forming a unique style, also caused a lot of controversy. From other people＇s criticism, often see his characteristics of cognitive orientation and expression of culture. Liang Shuming＇s tendency to observe the culture from the path of philosophy, less attention to the historical context of philosophical terms, and trying to use the relatively popular ＂culture＂ to express the more virtual ＂philosophy＂, making some ＂academic＂ philosophers think his writings neither philosophical nor cultural. His study approach was ＂problem- centered. ＂ He was good at collecting all aspects of scattered materials, adhere to the ＂take their own ideas to call the shots,＂ implemented variety of elements just ＂coincide＂ in the cross-cutting space and vertical time to form a system of view. But this kind of ＂problem-centered＂ collecting a wide range of knowledge is easy to ignore the origin of the material collected. Liang Shuming＇s thinking was dialectical, and his expression was both concise and more tortuous. He intended to ＂ more than two truths＂ coexist in his discourses, established his own ＂proper meaning＂ through competition. This approach implies the tense and conflicting orientation, strengthens the differences between Liang Shuming and the new academic model, but also shows that the new academic model has to accommodate alternative openness.