从“理在事先”到“理在事中”:冯友兰逻辑分析法的根基转换
From “Idea before Things” to “Idea in Things”: The Foundational Shift in Feng Youlan’s Method of Logical Analysis
摘要: 中国现代哲学的发展,始终处于古今之变与中西之争的思想张力之中。冯友兰毕生以逻辑分析法为工具,致力于为传统哲学建构形式上的系统。这一努力的结晶便是其“新理学”体系。然而,这一以“理在事先”为核心预设的体系,呈现出一种深刻的悖论:先验的理世界越是精密,就越是悬浮于现实之上。正是在这一张力之中,经由对马克思主义哲学的接触与《实践论》的阐释,冯友兰逐步看清了自己哲学体系的病根不在分析工具本身,而在它所立足的哲学根基。由此,他将逻辑分析法的根基从先验的理世界转移到“理在事中”所指向的社会历史实践。基于这一转换,冯友兰的逻辑分析法不再服务于空灵玄妙的思辨体系,而是成为在“旧邦新命”的文化实践中辨析概念、阐明哲学系统的有力工具。从“理在事先”到“理在事中”的转变,不仅是冯友兰个人思想历程的转折点,更展示了中国现代哲学如何在与马克思主义的碰撞与融合中,完成了一次深刻的方法论重构。
Abstract: The development of modern Chinese philosophy has always been shaped by the intellectual tension between the ancient and the modern, as well as between Chinese and Western thought. Feng Youlan devoted his life to constructing a formal system for traditional Chinese philosophy through the method of logical analysis. The culmination of this endeavor was his “New Neo-Confucianism” system. However, this system, premised on the core presupposition of “Idea before Things”, revealed a profound paradox: the more refined the a priori realm of Ideas became, the more it floated away from concrete reality. It was within this tension that, after his engagement with Marxist philosophy and through his interpretation of On Practice, Feng Youlan gradually came to see that the source of his philosophical malady lay not in the tool of logical analysis itself, but in the philosophical foundation on which it rested. Consequently, he shifted the foundation of his logical analysis from the transcendent realm of Ideas to the socio-historical practice implied by “Idea in Things”. Following this shift, Feng’s logical analysis no longer served an ethereal and speculative system, but instead became a powerful tool for conceptual clarification and philosophical system-building within the cultural practice of “New Mission for the Ancient Nation”. The shift from “Idea before Things” to “Idea in Things” marks not only a turning point in Feng Youlan’s personal intellectual journey but also demonstrates how modern Chinese philosophy accomplished a profound methodological reconstruction through its encounter and integration with Marxism.
文章引用:侯家祥. 从“理在事先”到“理在事中”:冯友兰逻辑分析法的根基转换[J]. 哲学进展, 2026, 15(8): 173-180. https://doi.org/10.12677/acpp.2026.158377

参考文献

[1] 严复. 穆勒名学按语[M]. 北京: 商务印书馆, 1981.
[2] 王国维. 王国维文集: 第3卷[M]. 北京: 中国文史出版社, 1997.
[3] 蔡仲德. 论冯友兰的思想历程[J]. 传统文化与现代化, 1996(5): 65-77.
[4] 迟浩然. 略论中国哲学话语的现代转化与建构——以“新理学”形上学为例[J]. 江淮论坛, 2024(4): 54-59.
[5] 马振江. 冯友兰“抽象继承法”评析[J]. 宁夏社会科学, 2012(3): 124-128.
[6] 李贵仓. 冯友兰“抽象继承法”引起争论原因及重新定位[J]. 平顶山学院学报, 2008(3): 26-30.
[7] 苏培君. 从抽象继承到历史性梳理——中国话语的马克思主义哲学方法论重构[J]. 江苏社会科学, 2022(3): 61-71.
[8] 余卫国. 西方哲学主题的历史转换与中国哲学的现代性问题[J]. 南通大学学报(社会科学版), 2005(4): 33-38.
[9] 郑家栋. “中国哲学”与现代性[J]. 哲学研究, 2005(2): 48-54+128.
[10] 耶方斯. 名学浅说[M]. 严复, 译. 北京: 商务印书馆, 1981.
[11] 金岳霖. 知识论[M]. 北京: 商务印书馆, 1996: 794.
[12] 冯友兰. 三松堂全集: 第13卷[M]. 郑州: 河南人民出版社, 2000.
[13] 冯友兰. 三松堂全集: 第2卷[M]. 郑州: 河南人民出版社, 2000.
[14] 冯友兰. 三松堂全集: 第11卷[M]. 郑州: 河南人民出版社, 2000.
[15] 冯友兰. 中国现代哲学史[M]. 广州: 广东人民出版社, 1999.
[16] 张灵馨. 20世纪50年代“抽象继承法”讨论的再思考[J]. 哈尔滨学院学报, 2017, 38(8): 27-30.
[17] 冯友兰. 三松堂全集: 第6卷[M]. 郑州: 河南人民出版社, 2000.
[18] 冯友兰. 三松堂全集: 第5卷[M]. 郑州: 河南人民出版社, 2000.
[19] 苏培君. 逻辑分析外衣下“负的方法”——冯友兰逻辑分析法探析[J]. 安徽大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2025, 49(4): 1-9.
[20] 曲兰英. 《新理学》的主要问题及其解决——冯友兰先生“理在事先”与“理在事中”思想探析[J]. 兰州学刊, 2006(10): 28-30.
[21] 牟宗三. 中国哲学的特质[M]. 上海: 上海古籍出版社, 1997.
[22] 冯友兰. 三松堂全集: 第14卷[M]. 郑州: 河南人民出版社, 2000.
[23] 张文. 实践论视域中的中国古代哲学基本问题[J]. 船山学刊, 2023(5): 88-98.
[24] 张遂五. 批判“新理学”的唯心主义反动实质[J]. 哲学研究, 1956(4): 42-63.
[25] 冯友兰. 三松堂全集: 第1卷[M]. 郑州: 河南人民出版社, 2000.
[26] 吴传启. 从冯友兰先生的抽象继承法看他的哲学观点[J]. 哲学研究, 1958(2): 85-98.
[27] 张岱年. 论哲学思想的批判继承[J]. 哲学研究, 1979(9): 33-39.
[28] 俞吾金. 如何继承中国传统哲学的遗产?——从冯友兰先生的“抽象继承法”说起[J]. 社会科学, 2013(5): 101-110.