孟荀之“心”的概念譬喻初探 = A pilot study on the conceptual metaphor of the "mind" in Mencius and XunZhi

• Main Author: 陈欣敏 Chan, Xin Min
• Other Authors: Ngoi Guat Peng
• Format: Final Year Project
• Language: Chinese
• Published: 2009
• Subjects: DRNTU::Humanities::Philosophy::Chinese
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/10356/15008
• Institution: Nanyang Technological University

孟荀之“心”的研究目前在学界似乎不足亦不受瞩目。然孟荀二者为先秦儒家的重要思想家，对其后中国思想的发展具有深刻的影响，故此课题有其深究的必要。但现今的中国思想和哲学研究一般沿用传统的训诂考据和义理分析，又或采取西方的理论与方法加以诠释。鉴此，本文冀以另一种研究视角，即“概念譬喻”来重新审视孟荀之“心”。本人整理后的资料显示孟荀之“心”皆包含“心是实体”、“心是容器”以及“心是生命体”的概念譬喻，唯孟子之“心”同时包含一个独有的“心是泥土”概念譬喻。分析后，本人发现孟荀二人在相同的概念譬喻框架下其实有不同的侧重点，而且各概念譬喻在二人思想体系中占据的重要性也有差异。这些概念譬喻所引申出的论点为现今对孟荀之“心”的固有认识提供了反思的空间，以致我们可以进一步诘问：孟子之“心”真的是“道德主体心”而荀子之“心”又仅是“认知心”而已吗？本文希望这个研究方向以及所得出的观察，可以提供另一种视角与解释，重新检视现今学术界对孟荀之“心”的研究，并促进孟荀研究的回流与再发现。The study of “xin” (mind) in Mencius and XunZhi has not been sufficient or given much attention in the current academic field. However, this topic has its significance as the two Confucianists were representatives of Confucianism in the Pre-Qin times. The current Chinese thoughts and philosophy studies have been using traditional method of textual research and argumentation analysis, coupled with Western Philosophical methodology. This paper hoped to re-examine Mencius and Xunzhi’s “xin” from a different perspective and method---conceptual metaphor. Results showed that both Mencius and Xunzhi’s heart incorporated “xin is entity”, “xin is container” and “xin is living entity”, although Mencius had a unique “xin is soil” conceptual metaphor. Analysis of the conceptual metaphors reveal that Mencius and Xunzhi had different emphasis though they shared same conceptual metaphors and the different metaphors have varied importance in their ideological system. These points provided opp.ortunities to reflect and reassess the current understanding of Mencius and Xunzhi’s “xin”. Is Mencius’s “xin” a “moral subject” while Xunzhi’s “xin” a “cognitive mind”? This paper hoped that the research method deployed and observations made could result in the re-assessing of Mencius and Xunzhi’s “xin” and possibly the reflux of the study on their entire ideological systems.