浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版)
 
   2025年5月28日 星期三   首页 |  期刊介绍 |  编委会 |  投稿指南 |  信息服务 |  期刊订阅 |  联系我们 |  预印本过刊 |  浙江省高校学报研究会栏目 |  留言板 |  English Version
浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版)  2022, Vol. 52 Issue (12): 115-125    DOI: 10.3785/j.issn.1008-942X.CN33-6000/C.2022.03.211
□ 哲学研究 最新目录| 下期目录| 过刊浏览| 高级检索 |
论“我”的三个向度
沈顺福
山东大学 易学与中国古代哲学研究中心,山东 济南 250100
On the Three Dimensions of I/Me
Shen Shunfu
Research Center for Yi Studies and Chinese Classical Philosophy, Shandong University, Jinan 250100, China

全文: PDF (888 KB)   RICH HTML
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 “我”首先是一个气质的自然人。这是中国传统文献中“我”的本义,也是“我”的第一个向度。这种“我”属于气质的小我,需要被规范,规范的依据便是人性或天理。天生的普遍人性形成了“我”的第二个向度即普遍性,形成大我,大我是气质小我与普遍人性的综合体。普遍大我需要自主性的自我才能实现,只有自主性的自我通过反思才能确定自身的普遍性身份,身份的确定与规则选定最终依赖自主的自我。这便是“我”的第三个向度即自我。小我、大我和自我分别承担了不同的职能,且关系密切、相互包含,共同构成完整的“我”。传统儒家有小我、大我的观念,缺乏自我观念。
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入我的书架
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
沈顺福
关键词 小我大我自我儒家自主性人性    
Abstract:The Chinese character “我(Wo)”, which means I or me, exists in both ancient and modern Chinese. However, the ambiguity use of “Wo” is misleading. In my opinion, I comprises three components which are called “little I”, “great I” and “self I” (ego), respectively. However, in ancient Chinese philosophy, the “self I” was missing, which means that the I encompasses two denotations, i.e. “little I” and “great I”. the concept of “little I” refers to the natural and physical being which is the agent of some behaviors driven by survival instinct. The “little I” which acts according to its natural inclination requires being obligated and normalized. Hence, traditional Confucianism claims that people may be reformed by achieving the selfless and desireless I, being detached to the natural surviving and presenting universal “great I”. By being selfless, people achieve “Axiom of Mastery”, called “Ren” or “All in One” in ancient China. In this scenario “great I” represents the unity with the universal justice. From the thinking of human survival, “great I” refers to all human beings holding natural desires. As all human beings, we are not a plural in statistics but a collection or a genus, in which the objective basis for the genus is the human nature of the genus. The presentation of the common nature or the transcendent principle changes the identity of human beings, which means that the natural “little I” is transformed into the universal “great I”, and as a result, natural being turns out to be moral being. The formation of this new identity arises from the ontological definition of the ontology of being, by means of reflection, by reflecting on one’s own belonging (such as human nature), making oneself a member of the group to which one belongs. The reflection of belonging is generated from the self-motivated “self I”, which is the acceptance of the universal entity from the autonomous “self I”. Generally speaking, it contains the common “pure I”, being open and variable. The determinate “pure I” always identifies itself in a specific action. The core of the “pure I” is autonomy which generates motivation from the thinking of the self. The entity driven by autonomy is exactly the “self I” with independence and freedom, being capable to be dominant and speak out. The survival of human being is a mutual-induction act based on the independent and free reflection of the “self I”. On the one hand, the “self I” dominates the reflection, internalizing the external common characteristics to internal identical awareness, forming the “great I”. The “great I” is the human realization of ubiquitous and common transcendence of self-existence. On the other hand, from a practical point of view, the “great I” is expressed as the chase after general principles. However, the chase after general principles requires the presence of the “self I” as only “self I” can observe and realize general principles. In this process the reciprocal induction is generated between the “self I” driven by the transcendental autonomy and transcendental entity while the “little I”, “great I” and “self I” form a unity, generating an act which has both individual freedom and social norms and order. Traditional Confucianism regards “I” as “little I” and “great I”, lacking the thinking of the “self I” which raises to the interruption during the transformation from idea to specific norm. As a result, traditional Confucianism believes in regulating people with general norms using the power of authority, placing people in the position of a gear in a machine.
Key wordsI    "little I"    "great I"    ego    Confucianism    autonomy    human nature   
收稿日期: 2022-03-21     
基金资助:2020年度国家社科基金后期资助重点项目(20FZXA005)
作者简介: 沈顺福(https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4306-3119),男,山东大学易学与中国古代哲学研究中心暨儒学高等研究院教授,博士生导师,哲学博士,主要从事中国传统哲学研究;
引用本文:   
沈顺福. 论“我”的三个向度[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2022, 52(12): 115-125. Shen Shunfu. On the Three Dimensions of I/Me. JOURNAL OF ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY, 2022, 52(12): 115-125.
链接本文:  
https://www.zjujournals.com/soc/CN/10.3785/j.issn.1008-942X.CN33-6000/C.2022.03.211     或     https://www.zjujournals.com/soc/CN/Y2022/V52/I12/115
发表一流的成果,传播一流的发现,提供一流的新知

浙ICP备14002560号-5
版权所有 © 2009 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版)    浙ICP备05074421号
地址:杭州市天目山路148号 邮编:310028 电话:0571-88273210 88925616 E-mail:zdxb_w@zju.edu.cn
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发  技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn