孔子：中国的苏格拉底，还是塞涅卡？--拉莫特·勒瓦耶、费内隆、李明的中西哲学比较研究

摘要

Three books should be paid attention to if we are wondering how French scholars understood and studied Chinese philosophy in the 17th century. The first is De la vertu des payens, by La Mothe Le Vayer, published in 1642. It saw Confucius and Socrates the same important in the history of philosophy and held that Confucius’influence on China is greater than Socrates’ influence on the Wes and Plato’s ideal of Philosopher King is come true in Confucian -dominated China. The second is The Dialogues of the Dead, written by Fran?ois Fénelon in 1687-1689. The chapter of The dialogue between Socrates and Confucius discussed the ideological differences between Socrates and Confucius, neither regarded Confucius as China's Socrates, nor believed that Confucius’ideal of Inner Sage and Outer King and Plato’s ideal of Philosopher King have a rationality in philosophy and a possibility in practice. The Third is New Memoirs on the Present State of China,by Louis le Comte, published in 1696. Instead of comparing Confucius with Socrates, it regarded Confucius as China's Seneca, a famous Roman Stoic philosopher, who devoted himself to train the philosopher king-like ruler and was unsuccessful. At the same time, he suggested that Confucianism and Neo-Confucianism should be separated in the study of Chinese philosophy. All in all, these three documents to some extent reflect French intellectual understanding of Chinese Philosophy in the 17th century.%在17世纪法国学者了解和研究中国哲学的过程中，有三本书值得关注：一是1642年出版的拉莫特·勒瓦耶的《论异教徒的道德》，认为孔子和苏格拉底在哲学史上的地位相同，但孔子对中国的影响比苏格拉底对西方的影响更大，由儒家领导的中国乃是柏拉图“哲学王”理想的实现；二是费内隆在1687—1689年撰写的《死者的对话》，其中有一篇题为《苏格拉底与孔子的对话》，论述了苏格拉底与孔子的思想分歧，既不同意把孔子比作中国的苏格拉底，也完全不相信孔子的“圣王”理想或柏拉图的“哲学王”理想具有哲学学理上的合理性和实现的可能性；三是1696年出版的李明（勒孔德）的《中国近事报道》，该书不再将孔子与苏格拉底对举，而是把他比作古罗马斯多葛派哲学家、一位致力于培养“哲学王”式的统治者却并不成功的“帝王师”塞涅卡，并认为在研究中国哲学时应把孔子思想与宋明理学区分开来。这三部文献在一定程度上反映了17世纪法国思想界对中国哲学认识的过程。