本文選題：公孫龍子　切入點：語言　出處：《北京師范大學(xué)》2000年博士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】： 本論文以現(xiàn)存《公孫龍子》中的《白馬論》、《通變論》、《堅白論》、《指物論》為依據(jù),研究公孫龍的語言邏輯和本體論思想。共分四章。 第一章:從現(xiàn)代邏輯學(xué)及邏輯哲學(xué)的觀點出發(fā),對客方反駁“白馬非馬”說的具體論證中所出現(xiàn)的諸多問題,如,不區(qū)分“非白馬非馬”和“白馬非非馬”,“有”和“為(是)”、“無”和“非”的混用,從“有白馬為有馬”到“白馬非非馬”的推理,從“白馬非馬”到“馬之有色為非馬”的類推,不區(qū)分“白馬非馬”和“白馬異馬”,等等,作了較為詳細(xì)的分析,認(rèn)為在當(dāng)時的一般觀念中,專名和類名,個體和個體的類還沒有被自覺地區(qū)別開來,名稱實際上被直接等同于個體。 第二章:在第一章的基礎(chǔ)上研究公孫龍的“白馬非馬”說。前分析的常識的觀念由于把類和個體直接等同起來的,因而無法解釋“白馬”和“馬”的不同。公孫龍為解決這個矛盾而提出“白馬非馬”說,其主旨是強(qiáng)調(diào)類和個體的不同。但他并沒有認(rèn)識到“白馬”也是一個類,而仍把它直接等同于個體,“馬”雖被看成是類,但卻不是個體的類,而是某種脫離個體而獨立存在著的特殊“事物”即“共相”。他論證“白馬非馬”的思路大體上是這樣的:首先,從外延上根據(jù)“有馬不可謂有白馬”斷定“白馬”和“馬”不同。接著又深入到“白馬”的內(nèi)部,從內(nèi)涵上把“白馬”分析為一個合取命題“‘有白’并且‘有馬’”,進(jìn)一步解釋“白馬”和“馬”不同的原因。再把這種內(nèi)涵上的解釋理解為“白馬”作為一個個體,其中的“白”和“馬”是不可分離的,因此不是作為共相而存在的。 第三章:認(rèn)為“白馬非馬”(“二無一”),“羊牛而羊而�！�,“青白不相與而相與不相鄰而相鄰”,“堅白石可二不可三”等說法,實際上是把“白馬”看成一個邏輯積,“羊牛”看成一個邏輯和,“青白”則既不是一個純粹的邏輯和也不是一個純粹的邏輯積,“堅白石”是“堅石”、“白石”兩個邏輯積的邏輯和。 第四章:“白馬”、“堅石”、“白石”等偏正結(jié)構(gòu)的二字組合(二元邏輯積)在《指物論》中作為一個個體被稱為“物”或“物指”,而“堅”、“白”、“馬”、“石”等單音節(jié)實詞則被看成共相而稱為“指”。《指物論》就是在本體論的意義上同時確認(rèn)這樣的“物”和“指”的實體地位。
[Abstract]:On the basis of "White Horse Theory", "General change Theory", "firm Whiteness Theory" and "object Theory", this paper studies Gongsun long's linguistic logic and ontological thoughts, which are divided into four chapters. Chapter one: from the point of view of modern logic and logic philosophy, the author argues against the concrete argument of "white horse is not horse", such as, It does not distinguish between "non-white horses" and "white horses", "have" and "do", "none" and "no", and the reasoning from "having a white horse to having a horse" to "a white horse is not a horse", The analogies from "white horse is not horse" to "horse color is non-horse", without distinguishing "white horse from horse" and "white horse different horse", and so on. The author makes a more detailed analysis, and thinks that in the general concept of that time, the proper name and class name are the same. Individual and individual classes have not been consciously distinguished, and the name is actually directly equivalent to the individual. Chapter two: on the basis of the first chapter, the author studies Gongsun long's theory of "white horse and horse". The common sense concept of pre-analysis is based on the direct equivalence between class and individual. Therefore, it is impossible to explain the difference between "white horse" and "horse". In order to solve this contradiction, Gong Sunlong put forward the theory of "white horse is not a horse", the main purpose of which is to emphasize the difference between class and individual. But he did not realize that "white horse" is also a class. And still equating it directly with the individual, "horse" is regarded as a class, but it is not an individual class. It is something that exists independently of the individual, that is, the common. He argues that the white horse is not a horse, and the thinking is generally this: first of all, On the basis of the fact that "there is a horse, there is a white horse", it is concluded that the "white horse" is different from the "horse". Then it goes deep into the interior of the "white horse". The connotation of "white horse" is analyzed as a combined proposition "there is white" and "there is a horse", which further explains the different reasons between "white horse" and "horse", and then it is interpreted as "white horse" as an individual. "White" and "horse" are inseparable, so they do not exist as one. The third chapter thinks that "white horse is not a horse" ("two without one", "sheep and cow but sheep", "green white is not with each other and is not adjacent and adjacent", "Jian Bai Shi can not be three" and so on. In fact, "White Horse" is regarded as a logical product, "Sheep and cattle" as a logical sum. "Qingbai" is neither a pure logic nor a pure logical product. "Jian Bai Shi" is a logical sum of "Jian Shi" and "White Stone". Chapter 4th: "White Horse", "Jian Shi", "White Stone" and so on two word combinations (binary logical product) are called "thing" or "thing meaning" as an individual in the Theory of referring to things, while "Jian", "White", "Horse", "Stone" and so on are monosyllabic and solid. The word is regarded as the same and is called the "finger." the theory of matter is to confirm the entity status of "thing" and "finger" simultaneously in the sense of ontology.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：北京師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2000
【分類號】：B81-092

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 趙平;評公孫龍《白馬論》的內(nèi)涵主義語義學(xué)——兼析《白馬論》的論辯[J];常熟高專學(xué)報;1994年03期

2 陳建中;翻譯即闡釋──《名實論》之名與實[J];外語與外語教學(xué);1997年06期

3 田心軍;公孫龍“白馬非馬”之我見[J];周口師范學(xué)院學(xué)報;1994年S1期

4 林穎;淺議公孫龍的“白馬非馬”論[J];寧德師專學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);1995年02期

5 李叔毅;《白馬論》辨釋[J];信陽師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);1981年00期

6 張章，

本文編號：1569001