The onto-hermeneutic approach to bentiyong 本体用 championed by Cheng Chung-Ying 成忠英 is a valuable addition to comparative philosophy. In his well-honed reading, bentiyong is described as the continuous, integrativ...The onto-hermeneutic approach to bentiyong 本体用 championed by Cheng Chung-Ying 成忠英 is a valuable addition to comparative philosophy. In his well-honed reading, bentiyong is described as the continuous, integrative substance at the base of things, which becomes known through an ongoing hermeneutic integration and interpretation of reality. However, his use of the English word ＂substance＂ to describe bentiyong is problematic, mainly because substance, being without properties and existing without change, cannot be read as part of a hermeneutic process. Luckily, there are resources within the Chinese philosophical tradition that can help in overcoming some of the difficulties in translation presented here. Namely, the way that Zhu Xi 朱熹 approaches ti-yong as a principle （li 理） provides a better and more fittingly discursive basis for expressing the onto-hermeneutic character of bentiyong intended by Cheng, and allows English translation of the term with a firm footing in mainstream Neo-Confucianism.展开更多
本体诠释学应阐释为对本体发生的一种诠释,以区别于实体化的本体论。古希腊和中国从不同的进路来讨论存在,此差异表现为作为存在的存在(being as being)和作为发生与创造的存在(being as generative or creative)。通过界定本体诠释学...本体诠释学应阐释为对本体发生的一种诠释,以区别于实体化的本体论。古希腊和中国从不同的进路来讨论存在,此差异表现为作为存在的存在(being as being)和作为发生与创造的存在(being as generative or creative)。通过界定本体诠释学的本体和追溯中西哲学的Logos与道,能够进一步展现出本体诠释学的四个核心范畴、五个命题。在此基础上可以探求如何实现超融、如何从诠释的方法看待本体诠释学。展开更多
文摘The onto-hermeneutic approach to bentiyong 本体用 championed by Cheng Chung-Ying 成忠英 is a valuable addition to comparative philosophy. In his well-honed reading, bentiyong is described as the continuous, integrative substance at the base of things, which becomes known through an ongoing hermeneutic integration and interpretation of reality. However, his use of the English word ＂substance＂ to describe bentiyong is problematic, mainly because substance, being without properties and existing without change, cannot be read as part of a hermeneutic process. Luckily, there are resources within the Chinese philosophical tradition that can help in overcoming some of the difficulties in translation presented here. Namely, the way that Zhu Xi 朱熹 approaches ti-yong as a principle （li 理） provides a better and more fittingly discursive basis for expressing the onto-hermeneutic character of bentiyong intended by Cheng, and allows English translation of the term with a firm footing in mainstream Neo-Confucianism.
文摘本体诠释学应阐释为对本体发生的一种诠释,以区别于实体化的本体论。古希腊和中国从不同的进路来讨论存在,此差异表现为作为存在的存在(being as being)和作为发生与创造的存在(being as generative or creative)。通过界定本体诠释学的本体和追溯中西哲学的Logos与道,能够进一步展现出本体诠释学的四个核心范畴、五个命题。在此基础上可以探求如何实现超融、如何从诠释的方法看待本体诠释学。
