“精致利己主义者”的美学书写--关于翟崇光、姚新勇的“批判”之“批判”

The Aesthetic Discourse of“Egoistic Thrusters”--The“Criticism”of the“Criticism”Made by Zhai Chongguang and Yao Xinyong

翟崇光、姚新勇先生意在讨论"信仰转向"问题,但是却没有坚持"实事求是"与"知人论世"的学术准则,而是以臆测的论点为主,作为支撑的论据也大多只是捕风捉影,全文仅"硬伤"就有十处之多。因此所谓的"批判"也就无法令人信服。学术争鸣无疑应当鼓励,但认为潘知常的"信仰转向"是对刘小枫提倡的"基督教神学转向"的继承,并处处以后者为指导原则来评判生命美学的"信仰转向",是脱离事实、不可取的。同时,"批判"本身毕竟也存在着起码的底线学术伦理,不宜为我所用、投机取巧地使用材料,不宜以抢占道德高地的方式去绑架、指责对方,也不宜越出学术讨论的边界去进行人身指责。在这方面,翟崇光、姚新勇先生的做法亟待认真反省。

Mr.Zhai Chongguang and Mr.Yao Xinyong intend to discuss the issue of"belief turn"while standing on their presumptive arguments without championing the academic principle of"seeking truth from facts"and"understanding human beings and reflecting on their social background".Their so-called"criticism"is not convincing because it is supported by ungrounded arguments.According to statistics,there are more than ten glaring mistakes in their text.Moreover,although we should encourage academic contending without any doubt,we should not follow the leadership of the theology of Christianity blindly.It is undesirable whether to measure the life aesthetics with the"origin of Christianity"and the"creed of Christianity"or to judge the"belief turn"of the life aesthetics by the"belief of Christianity".Meanwhile,"criticism"itself denotes a bottom line of academic ethics,which means that the scholars should not employ the materials in a self-serving and speculative manner,conduct the moral coercion and criticism while standing on a moral highland,nor should they attack other people verbally while going beyond the boundary of the academic discussion.For these,Mr.Zhai Chongguang and Mr.Yao Xinyong need to reflect on themselves seriously!