首页> 外文学位 >A contemporary interpretation of Laozi and Zhuangzi's concepts of Dao and wuwei.
【24h】

A contemporary interpretation of Laozi and Zhuangzi's concepts of Dao and wuwei.

机译:对老子庄子道观的现代诠释。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This thesis aims at discussing how to disclose and resolve the significance of the pervading paradoxical expression of Dao and wuwei throughout Laozi and Zhuangzi. According to the principle of coherence and the principle of charity, two eminent contemporary scholars', namely Edward G. Slingerland and Chad Hansen, interpretations of Laozi and Zhuangzi will be investigated. Applying the theory of Conceptual Metaphor to Laozi and Zhuangzi's concept of wuwei, Slingerland argues that it manifests an irresoluble conceptual difficulty through the appearance of effort metaphors, which take their place uneasily alongside the dominant no-effort metaphors in the texts. By examining the meaning of wuwei in the texts, neither Laozi nor Zhuangzi suggests that it is obtained by the genuine effortlessness and unconsciousness of the agent. It is believed that such paradox is produced by the inappropriate application of the Conceptual Metaphor theory to Laozi and Zhuangzi. In order to resolve the paradox of the ineffable Dao, Hansen, based on his investigation on the difference between the descriptive nature of English and the pragmative nature of Chinese language, interprets Laozi and Zhuangzi's dao as a prescriptive discourse rather than metaphysical object. According to Hansen's interpretation, Laozi, as a linguistic skeptic, acknowledges the conventionality and reversibility of discourse that cannot provide constant guidance in action, and advocates one cannot follow one codified guide in all situations. While Zhuangzi by acknowledging all language is indexical, he equalizes different discourses and puts them in a nonevaluative perspective. However, it is arguable that whether Hansen's interpretations on Laozi and Zhuangzi cohere with the basic meaning of the texts. By analyzing the conceptual link between Dao and wuwei, a more cohesive interpretation between Laozi and Zhuangzi's philosophy will be provided. Furthermore, with the discussion of the relationship between Dao and wuwei, semantics and pragmatics' investigation in ancient China can also be revealed.
机译:本文旨在探讨如何揭示和解决在整个老子和庄子中普遍存在的道和无为悖论的重要性。根据连贯性原则和慈善原则,两位著名的当代学者爱德华·G·斯林格兰德和乍得·汉森将研究老子和庄子的解释。斯林格兰德认为,概念隐喻理论适用于老子和庄子的无为概念,它通过努力隐喻的出现显示出不可解决的概念困难,努力隐喻与文本中占主导地位的不努力隐喻的地位不易被取代。老子和庄子都没有通过对文本中“无为”的含义的考察来暗示,它是由代理人的真正的轻松和无意识所获得的。人们认为,这种悖论是由于概念隐喻理论不适用于老子和庄子而产生的。为了解决无法理解的道的悖论,汉森在对英语的描述性与汉语的语用性之间的差异进行调查的基础上,将老子和庄子的道作为一种解释性的话语而不是形而上学的对象。根据汉森的解释,老子作为一种语言怀疑论者,承认话语的常规性和可逆性,不能在行动中提供持续的指导,并且主张人们不能在任何情况下都遵循一种编纂的指导。庄子承认所有语言都是索引性的,而他却平等地对待了各种话语,并把它们置于非评价的视角。但是,汉森对老子和庄子的解释是否与文本的基本含义相吻合是有争议的。通过分析道与无为之间的概念联系,将提供对老子与庄子哲学之间更紧密的联系。此外,通过讨论道与无为之间的关系,还可以揭示中国古代的语义和语用研究。

著录项

  • 作者

    Luk, Kei Yeung.;

  • 作者单位

    Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (Hong Kong).;

  • 授予单位 Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (Hong Kong).;
  • 学科 Philosophy.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2009
  • 页码 185 p.
  • 总页数 185
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 11:37:42

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号