“中国哲学史”写作与中国思想传统的现代困境

The Writing of "History of Chinese Philosophy" and the Modern Dilemma of Chinese Thought Tradition

与西方哲学不同,"中国哲学"并不是指称一个历史文化中已然存在的、显性的思想学术脉络,胡适、冯友兰等人的"哲学史"写作乃是参照西方的体例建立中国现代学术谱系的过程,尽管这一学术谱系总是以某种"古已有之"的面目出现。至少有两个问题构成今天"重写哲学史"必须突破的瓶颈:一是所谓"中西之间"的问题。科学与启蒙理性实为主导胡适、冯友兰"哲学史"写作的基本预设,而半个多世纪以来西方哲学的自我反省、发展及其成果,基本上没有能够系统地反映到"中国哲学史"写作中来,晚年写作《中国哲学史新编》的冯友兰对此是完全隔膜的。二是如何处理"中国哲学"与"经学"的关系。胡、冯等人的"哲学史"写作,都是以否弃经学脉络及其意义系统为前提的,而与"经学"相隔绝的"中国哲学",本质上只能是外在于中国文化的。

Chinese philosophy', different from western philosophy, does not refer to a distinct and existed academic sequence of ideas. The writing of 'philosophy history' by Hu Shi or Feng Youlan is a process of establishing modern Chinese academic pedigree with the reference of western model, although the pedigree appears as something already existed in ancient time. There are at least two questions as bottlenecks to be overcome in the present rewriting of the history of Chinese philosophy. The first is the problem of 'the west and east'. Science and the sense of enlightenment are actually the basic anticipation of Hu Shi or Feng Youlan in their writing of Chinese philosophy, while the self-questioning, development and its achievement of the western philosophy in the recent fifty years was not systematically reflected in the writing of the history of Chinese philosophy. Feng Youlan, in his later years when he wrote A New Writing of The History of Chinese Philosophy, was totally unaware of the change. The second is how to deal with the relation between Chinese philosophy and the Confusion classics. The denying of the Confusion classics is the premise of Hu or Feng's writing, and the Chinese philosophy, separating from the Confusion classics, cannot represent the essence of Chinese culture.