【摘要】 作为现代学科的中国哲学的研究内容却是两千年来的儒释道文化传统,故在其形式和要求与文化传统的角色和使命之间存在着紧张的关系,甚至会有相互冲突。因此,中国哲学有现代学术与民族文化两种身份和多种角色,在研究中则存在着学术研究与现实关怀两种取向。本文以此为理论框架,以天人合一的历史内涵和现代讨论为实例,进一步讨论中国哲学研究的方法和方向问题:一方面梳理上一世纪关于天人合一之讨论;另一方面则以学术界甚少讨论的宋元明清以来直接提到"天人合一"一语的文献入手,说明学术研究和文化重建是两种不同性质的工作,二者方向、方法、标准都有重要不同,并尝试就此提出初步的观察与思考,特别是对如何创造和建构现代天人合一理论提出一些想法,以期引起进一步反思和探讨。更多还原

【Abstract】 Chinese philosophy has established itself as a modern academic discipline since the 20th century with reference to Western theoretical framework,analytic methodology,and disciplinary requirements.This new identity radically conflicts with the traditional theoretical way in philosophical discussion of Confucianism,Daoism,and Buddhism,the three major fields of Chinese philosophy.Facing the conflicts,methodological reflections have become necessary and critical.The arguments of this article are based on investigation into and analyses of the usage and understanding of the popular idiomatic theme Tian-ren-he-yi(a compromised translation: Union of Heaven and Man) from the 11th to the 19th centuries and since the 1980s.Discoveries from the research reveal the hidden agendas and positions of scholars,ancient and modern,behind the intensive divergence in their understandings of and attitudes towards the theme Tian-ren-he-yi.Among all the divergences,the most fundamental one is that scholars discuss or use the theme for different purposes,such as revealing the possible original meaning in ancient contexts,or providing useful ideas for contemporary and future needs.These are the two orientations or approaches of academic research.Another fundamental divergence is that,how scholars actually define the theme and related materials: Do they take them as an object of investigation,or as sources for practical consideration and purpose? These are the two positionings of research materials.We believe that researchers’self-consciousness of the two orientations and two positionings are crucial to the advancement of the academic quality of Chinese philosophical studies.更多还原