从本体结构到伦理分途：张载与西塞罗思想比较

From Ontological Structure to Ethical Divergence: A Comparative Study of Zhang Zai and Cicero’s Thought

摘要: 本文旨在通过结构性比较，探究张载与西塞罗一个根本性的比较哲学问题：二者同以涵摄精神性的物质构建一元宇宙本体，并同样从中衍生了“义务”的伦理思想，为何最终分别导向个体的自我安定与社会的普遍和谐？论文指出，关键并非概念的表层相似，而在于二者宇宙论所蕴含的深层生成结构不同。通过精细的文本分析，本文提炼出“理性贯通”与“生机显发”一对核心范畴，用以刻画西塞罗的“以太”贯通的自然观与张载“气”论的根本差异：前者将宇宙构建为一个由普遍理性法则统摄的秩序系统；后者则将宇宙呈现为一个由内在价值生机自然显发的道德生命场域。基于此，本文进一步论证，正是这两种本体论结构的对立，必然地决定了其伦理学的不同路向——“理性贯通”结构要求道德主体通过认知遵循客观法则，从而导出以正义与合宜为核心的“义务”伦理；“生机显发”结构则引导主体通过感通体认并扩充内在仁性，从而导出以民胞物与为核心的“仁爱”伦理。本研究不仅为理解这两种思想体系提供了一种新的分析框架，也为中西哲学关于本体论与伦理学之关联的比较研究，提供了一种聚焦于内在生成结构的理论路径。

Abstract: This paper aims to explore a fundamental comparative philosophical question between Zhang Zai and Cicero through structural comparison: why did both thinkers, who similarly constructed a monistic ontology of the universe from material substance that encompasses spirituality and derived ethical ideas of “duty” from it, ultimately lead to distinct outcomes—individual self-stabilization and universal social harmony? The paper argues that the key lies not in superficial conceptual similarities, but in the differing deep generative structures inherent in their respective cosmologies. Through meticulous textual analysis, the paper distills two core categories—“rational permeation” and “vital manifestation”—to delineate the fundamental divergence between Cicero’s “ether-permeated” view of nature and Zhang Zai’s “qi” theory: the former constructs the cosmos as an orderly system governed by universal rational laws; the latter presents it as a moral field of life where intrinsic values naturally manifest through vital dynamism. Building upon this, the paper further argues that the opposition between these ontological structures inevitably determines divergent ethical trajectories: the “rational coherence” structure requires moral agents to adhere to objective laws through cognition, thereby deriving a “duty” ethics centered on justice and propriety; while the “vital emergence” structure guides subjects to expand their inherent benevolence through intuitive recognition, thereby generating an “ethics of benevolence” centered on universal kinship and harmony with all things. This study not only offers a new analytical framework for understanding these two philosophical systems but also provides a theoretical pathway focused on intrinsic generative structures for comparative research on the relationship between ontology and ethics in Chinese and Western philosophy.