德福辩证与圆善实现——牟宗三哲学中“德”“福”统一及其当代意义
Dialectics of Virtue and Happiness and the Realization of the Perfect Good—On the Unity of Virtue and Happiness in Mou Zongsan’s Philosophy and Its Contemporary Significance
DOI: 10.12677/acpp.2026.157336, PDF,   
作者: 董艳雪:贵州大学哲学学院,贵州 贵阳
关键词: 牟宗三德福关系圆善论Mou Zongsan Virtue-Happiness Relationship Theory of the Perfect Good
摘要: 本文聚焦牟宗三哲学中“德”与“福”的辩证统一关系。首先梳理中西传统德福观的局限,中国古代“以德祈福”“德福矛盾”“以德为福”观或依赖天命、或回避现实、或窄化幸福;西方理性主义、感性主义及康德“最高善”理论或简化关系、或诉诸超验。进而阐释牟宗三以“无限智心”为形上基础、“圆教”为实践路径、“诡谲的即”为辩证逻辑,重构德福统一的圆善思想。最后分析其对中西哲学会通的理论意义、实践启示,以及偏重精神境界、实践路径精英化的局限,强调需结合内在修养与外在制度实现德福统一。
Abstract: This paper focuses on the dialectical unity of virtue and happiness in Mou Zongsan’s philosophy. First, it examines the limitations of traditional Chinese and Western perspectives on their relationship. In ancient China, the doctrines of “seeking blessings through virtue”, “the contradiction between virtue and happiness” and “taking virtue itself as happiness” either relied on the mandate of heaven, evaded real-world dilemmas, or narrowed the connotation of happiness. In the Western tradition, rationalism, sensationalism and Immanuel Kant's theory of the Highest Good either oversimplified their interrelation, or resorted to transcendental presuppositions. Then, it elaborates on Mou Zongsan’s reconstruction of the Perfect Good thought, which takes Infinite Intellectual Mind as the metaphysical foundation, Perfect Teaching as the practical path, and the paradoxical identity as the dialectical logic to achieve the unity of virtue and happiness. Finally, it analyzes the theoretical significance of his thought for the integration of Chinese and Western philosophy, its practical implications, as well as its inherent limitations: overemphasis on spiritual realm and the elitist tendency of its practical approach. The paper concludes that the unity of virtue and happiness must be realized through the combination of internal self-cultivation and external institutional construction.
文章引用:董艳雪. 德福辩证与圆善实现——牟宗三哲学中“德”“福”统一及其当代意义[J]. 哲学进展, 2026, 15(7): 260-265. https://doi.org/10.12677/acpp.2026.157336

参考文献

[1] 司马迁. 史记: 卷六十一伯夷列传第一[M]. 北京: 中华书局, 1982.
[2] 杨泽波. 再议“圆善”——对卢雪崑教授批评的回应[J]. 哲学分析, 2023(5): 3-22.
[3] 蓝法典. 论“德福一致”的内在危险与实践指向——对牟宗三相关阐释的反思与辨析[J]. 人文杂志, 2021(4): 73-82.
[4] 孔安国传, 孔颖达正义. 尚书正义[M]. 黄怀信, 整理. 上海: 上海古籍出版社, 2007.
[5] 葛洪. 抱朴子内篇[M]. 贵阳: 贵州人民出版社, 1995.
[6] 王充. 论衡校释[M]. 黄晖, 校释. 北京: 中华书局, 1990.
[7] 杨伯峻. 论语译注[M]. 北京: 中华书局, 1980.
[8] 杨伯峻. 孟子译注[M]. 北京: 中华书局, 2005.
[9] 周敦颐. 周敦颐集[M]. 陈克明, 点校. 北京: 中华书局, 2009.
[10] 亚里士多德. 尼各马科伦理学[M]. 苗力田, 译. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社, 1990.
[11] 康德. 实践理性批判[M]. 韩水法, 译. 北京: 商务印书馆, 1999.
[12] 谢远笋. 体用范式下的圆善问题[J]. 中国哲学史, 2021(5): 112-119.
[13] 楼宇烈, 校释. 老子道德经注校释[M]. 北京: 中华书局, 2009.
[14] 郭庆藩. 庄子集释[M]. 郭象, 注, 成玄英, 疏. 北京: 中华书局, 2012.
[15] 苏磊. 牟宗三圆善论之再分析[J]. 中国哲学史, 2013(1): 102-108.
[16] 牟宗三. 圆善论[M]. 长春: 吉林出版集团有限责任公司, 2010.
[17] 徐波. 牟宗三哲学中的两种圆教形态及其内在张力[J]. 哲学研究, 2016(10): 65-70.
[18] 张俊. 牟宗三对康德圆善的超越与局限[J]. 孔子研究, 2008(4): 14-24.
[19] 罗义俊. 圆教与圆善: 康德与牟宗三——读牟宗三先生《圆善论》[J]. 社会科学, 2004(3): 97-108.