为理性主义美德伦理学解读孟子一辩.pdfVIP

摘 要 论文主要围绕孟子美德伦理学形态归属于情感主义还是理性主义这一问题 展开。首先从黄百锐（David Wong）、克雷格．伊哈拉（Craig K. Ihara ）和金明 石（Myeong-seok Kim 音译）的争论焦点即孟子伦理学中理性与情感的关系问题 开始研究。笔者论证指出，孟子伦理学中理性与情感的关系不是割裂的，孟子 并非是一个纯粹的休谟式情感主义者，孟子道德选择中理性起决定作用。然 后，先分析情感主义美德伦理学理论本身存在的一些问题，再主要从斯洛特的 观点研究休谟式情感主义解读孟子美德伦理学存在的问题，进而论证用情感主 义美德伦理学解释孟子的伦理学存在的问题。关于理性主义美德伦理学和孟子 伦理学的比较研究，主要是对万百安（Bryan Van Norden ）的理论做一总结评 价，最后通过对孟子美德伦理学理性主义性质论证的补充来论证和辩护孟子美 德伦理学的理性主义性质，并指出用理性主义美德伦理学解释孟子的伦理学的 优点。 关键词：孟子、美德伦理学、理性主义、道德情感主义 IV 华东师范大学硕士学位论文 ABSTRACT This thesis focuses on the question of whether Menciuss moral attitude of virtue belongs to sentimentalism or rationalism. This paper begins with the argument between the study of David Wong、CraigK. Ihara) and Myeong-seok Kim, which is about the relationship between reason and emotion in Mencius ethics. My conclusion is that in Menciuss ethics the relationship of reason and emotion is not separated, and Mencius is not a pure Hume-style emotionist, he attaches great importance to the role of reason. Then I analyze some problems exist in the sentimentalistic virtue ethics itself, and then mainly from Slotts point of view to point out its problems in the Hume-style emotionalism way to interpret Mencius’ virtue ethics, in order to argue that the sentimentalistic virtue ethics way to explain Menciuss ethics exist many shortcomings. And finally,I study the comparative study of rationalist virtue ethics and Mencius ethics, which is from Bryan Van Norden’ work. I make a summary and express my views to his work. Then through my supplement to argue that it’s better to use rationalism vietue ethics to explain Mencius’ virtue ethics than using sentimentalistic virtue ethics, and point out that the profits of Aritotle rationalism virtue ethic’s way to explain Mencius’ ethics. Key