Comparative Studies on the Tai Chen School and the Philosophy of Mencius and Xunzi

本論文目的在嘗試解決戴震思想較接近孟學或荀學之問題，以及相關思想在清代中葉時的影響。在學界紛雜不一的意見中，筆者發現戴震與孟子同樣主張性善，以及戴震思想有接近荀子之處，是各家的共識。因此判定戴震之性善論及相關思想，究竟是孟子式抑或荀子式，便成為解決此矛盾問題之關鍵。故本文先列舉與戴震相關之孟、荀思想差異，包括論性之定義、如何達成性善、禮義與情欲之關係、天人觀及聖人觀、群己關係等課題，再以此差異為判準分析戴震思想。可以發現戴震雖然主張性善，並強調禮義內在於人性，此兩點的確異於荀子，但就以情、欲、知論性，反對禁絕情欲，重視心知之智，「反對復其初」以及「重視發展、累積」等思想來看，戴震思想其實離開孟子較遠，反與荀子有許多相似之處。本文也進一步分析戴震由於崇敬孟子以及反對理學的緣故，因此認可孟子而不贊同荀子。但就思想之實質內容而言，其實戴震與荀子有著共同的核心關懷，也就是反對回歸源始，返復天理或原初之性的思想傾向。這使荀子與戴震的思想建構，皆屬於往前看、向前走，而非向上、向內回溯的思想，迥異於孟子而自成一類，也因此戴震思想實可視為「改良」或「調整」後的荀子學。最後本文也分析受戴震影響的三位學者：焦循、阮元、凌廷堪與荀子學的相近之處，並發現在重視聖人教化及給予荀子正面評價上，甚至有較戴震更接近荀子之處。戴震等四位學者正是清代中葉荀學思潮的代表人物，也象徵荀子及戴震思想的重要性及影響力。This dissertation tries to resolve whether the thought of Tai Chen is closer to that of Mencius or Xunzi and the influence of relevant thoughts in mid-Qing Dynasty. With regarding to this, though scholars hold differents opinions, there is still a consensus: though Tai Chen, like Mencius, espouses the theory of Good Nature, he still has something in common with Xunzi. Therefore, key to this paradox lies in adequately judging the doctrine of good human nature as proposed by Tai Chen to be more like Mencius or Xunzi. In order to analyze Tai Chen’s thoughts, different viewpoints in Mencius’ and Xunzi’s philolophy related to Tai Chen are listed, such as their definitions of human nature, the way to achieve the good human nature, relationship between Rites and lust, relationship between heaven and human, the thought of the Sage and relationship between society and individual. We can find that Tai Chen advocates the doctrine of good human nature and emphasizes that the Rites is within human nature. However, he opposes abstinence of lust, analyzes human nature through the perspective of affection, lust and intelligence while stressing in particular the importance of intelligence. In addition, he is “againt returning to the origin” and “emphasizes development and accumulation.” Therefore, it is obvious that Tai Chen is in fact more similar to Xunzi. This dissertation further points out the reason why Tai Chen identifies with Mencius while opposes Xunzi is that he holds Mencius in great respect and opposes the Neo-Confucianism. But, with regard to the content of their thoughts, their essential concerns are the same, that is, they are both against returning to the beginning, the Principle and the original nature. This characteristic renders both of their thought structures forward-looking and progressing, instead of up-ward and introspective, differing greatly from Mencius’ thoughts. In fact, Tai Chen’s thoughts can be viewed as an “improved” or “revised” edition of Xunzi’s philosophy. In the last part, this dissertation also discusses the similarities between Xunzi and three scholars influenced by Tai Chen, including Chiao Hsun, Ruan Yuan and Ling Ting Kan. And we found that in terms of emphasis on the teaching and influence of the Sage and positive evaluation to Xunzi, they are even closer to Xunzi than Tai Chen is. As these four scholars play a leading role in the trend of thought of Xunzi’s philosophy in mid-Qing Dynasty, it also signifies the importance and influence of the thought of Tai Chen