品鉴中国式差异——安乐哲访谈录（英文）

在接受刘耘华、倪琳娜两位学者的访谈过程中,安乐哲援引了中国哲学经典中的几个范例来论证以下观点:应当充分运用我们的想象力来帮助古老的传统用自己的声音、以自己的方式说话。安乐哲表示,要想深入品鉴中国语境所孕育出的各种差异,必须解决两个重要问题。从西方视角来讲,我们在理解中国哲学时一直沿用的是西方传教士所创造的语词体系,从而造成中国哲学在世界哲学之林中被边缘化,甚至沦为一种所谓的“东方宗教思想”。而从当代中国视角出发,我们理应意识到,我们事实上正在使用诞生于19世纪下半叶的西方哲学术语之汉译本,来促成汉语和西方现代性的融合。无视此种对西方现代性的挪用,只会导致我们深陷中国式“先验说”“普救论”等令人遗憾的假说泥沼,而无法正确地将儒家真义理解为对人文价值的普及。讽刺的是,后达尔文主义对西方哲学叙事进行内在批判时针对先验说和普救论所提出的尖锐主张一直被当作一种谬论而遭到普遍抵制。

＂Bodyheartminding＂ （Xin ,心）： Reconceiving the Inner Self and the Outer World in the Language of Holographic Focus and Field

In this essay, inspired by the somatic turn in philosophy initiated by Richard Shusterman, I want to invoke the language of classical Confucian philosophy to think through the best efforts of William James and John Dewey to escape the mind-body and nature-nurture dualisms--that is, to offer an alternative vocabulary that might lend further clarity to the revolutionary insights of James and Dewey by appealing to the processual categories of Chinese cosmology. What I will try to do first is to refocus the pragmatist＇s explanation of the relationship between mind and body through the lens of a process Confucian cosmology. And then, to make the case for James and Dewey, I will return to the radical, imagistic language they invoke to try and make the argument that this processual, holistic understanding of ＂vital bodyminding＂ is in fact what they were trying to say all along.

Author＇s Reflections and Responses

Let me begin by thanking the scholars included in this symposium issue, whose thoughtful commentaries mean that they have spent much valuable time in reading and critiquing my new book, Confucian Role Ethics： A Vocabulary. They do me great honor by joining this discussion and have helped me substantially with the uniform quality of their contributions. Indeed, there are few compliments to be cherished more in our academic lives than to be taken seriously by our peers and few opportunities to be relished more than being given the opportunity by the organizers of this event-Ralph Weber and Wen Haiming-to respond to their comments and critiques. I hasten to add that it is only the fact that this manuscript grew out the Ch＇ien Mu （Qian Mu） series of lectures that I was invited to give at the Chinese University of Hong Kong in 2008 that it had to be a singled-authored volume, and I give my friend and collaborator Henry Rosemont the credit he is due for introducing the idea of Confucian role ethics, while at the same time absolving him of any blame that might be incurred by the many inadequacies in my development of his important insight. Let me turn to each of the individual commentaries on Confucian Role Ethics and respond to them seriatim.

携重而行:儒家文化的代际传承

作为拙著《儒家角色伦理学之二:21世纪视角》的总结部分,本文以一种宏观的视野对儒家文化的代际传承问题予以概述。儒家文化本身就是"道"的一种体现方式。我们把中文的"道"诠释和翻译为"travelling together through a shared cultural landscape(穿过共通的文化景观之旅)",这个术语有两个地方需要强调,一是"共通的文化景观",即文化是在人与人之间共享的,这种共享需要在一定的空间和时间中完成;而这种大规模的共享一旦跨越了时间长河,就形成了时间之旅,所以就有了第二个派生的含义:"旅程",这与"道"通常被翻译为"路the way"是相符合的。在儒家传统上,"孝"和"家庭"作为一组概念,为"共享"提供了空间上的场所和时间上的纽带,这是我要着重分析的内容。而作为"儒"的文人群体则肩负着文化传承的庄严与重量。"人能弘道",作为一种活的文化,儒学不仅长了"腿",而且是真实的、强有力的谱系,它是具象的、不死的,在每一代人中不断传承下去。