本文關(guān)鍵詞：先秦儒墨專制主義比較研究　出處：《河南大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 先秦時期 儒家 墨家 專制主義

【摘要】：學(xué)術(shù)界關(guān)于儒家專制主義的研究比較充分,然而對墨家專制主義的研究卻相對不足,然而,儒家與墨家的專制主義思想應(yīng)該受到同樣重視。春秋戰(zhàn)國時代是中國歷史上的一個特殊時期,獨(dú)特的時代狀況為儒、墨提供了得天獨(dú)厚的思想土壤。舊傳統(tǒng)已經(jīng)被破壞,新秩序卻并未形成,時局的混亂與人世的悲苦,使儒者與墨者深感痛心與憂慮。他們一邊審視傳統(tǒng),一邊為那個時代探尋出路,最終,儒家與墨家都將目光投向了專制主義。儒、墨兩家思想屬性不同,解決問題的途徑不同,對于理想社會的構(gòu)想也有很大差異,因而,他們通過不同的途徑走上了專制主義,儒、墨專制主義思想的表現(xiàn)、目標(biāo)及維護(hù)途徑都有很大分歧。通過比較,可以更清晰呈現(xiàn)出儒、墨走向?qū)Ｖ浦髁x的不同路徑,并且在一定程度上,揭示出百家爭鳴時期的諸子共同走向?qū)Ｖ浦髁x的趨勢。在專制主義的表現(xiàn)上,儒家與墨家都強(qiáng)調(diào),君主為天下至尊之人且獨(dú)一無二,他獨(dú)操權(quán)柄,擁有最高決斷權(quán)。而其差異是,儒家將君主與臣民的關(guān)系倫理化,以君為民之父母,強(qiáng)調(diào)君主擁有天下所有的臣民與財富;墨家強(qiáng)調(diào)君主在思想上的絕對權(quán)威,全天下臣民應(yīng)以君主的是非為是非,在思想與行為上與君主保持高度一致。儒家與墨家都賦予君主至尊的地位與最高權(quán)威,然而君主權(quán)位有一定的合法性來源,君主必須遵循一定的原則,才能維持君位的穩(wěn)固。儒家與墨家都認(rèn)為君位來自于天命,也都認(rèn)為君主應(yīng)該擁有一定的品德來匹配自己的君位。然而,儒家將君權(quán)合法性中的天命依據(jù),落實在君主的功德與民心的歸向上,弱化了天的作用;墨家將君權(quán)的合法性落腳于天的意志,將君主權(quán)位合法性的判定權(quán)交給了上天,君主是否合格,由天來判斷,君主的不義行為,由天來懲罰,從而將君權(quán)神圣化、神秘化。在維護(hù)專制主義的方式上,儒家主要采用德與禮的方式,在脈脈溫情之中完成了對專制主義的維護(hù),而墨家則主張通過賞善罰惡的的外在強(qiáng)制性手段實現(xiàn)專制主義。儒家認(rèn)為,專制主義的維護(hù),需要通過人們之間的等級區(qū)分來實現(xiàn),通過物質(zhì)滿足與道德教化的方式,使人們遵守禮的等級秩序,安于自己的位置,敬畏君主的權(quán)威。墨家則主張建立一個由賢者組成的統(tǒng)治團(tuán)體,以賞善罰惡的措施,使天下人在思想與行為上都上同于天子,最終達(dá)到維護(hù)專制主義的目的。在君臣關(guān)系上,儒家主張臣以“道”事君,強(qiáng)調(diào)君臣之間的互動性;而墨家認(rèn)為臣下要上同于君主,強(qiáng)調(diào)臣對君的絕對服從。儒家與墨家推行專制主義,目標(biāo)都指向至高無上的王權(quán),然而,儒、墨通過王權(quán)所要實現(xiàn)的政治理想?yún)s并不相同。儒家希望君主建立一種尊德崇禮、有區(qū)分有差異的等級社會秩序。墨家希望建立一個思想意識上的絕對權(quán)威,從而使全天下的人們在思想與行為上都上同于君主,最終實現(xiàn)一種同的秩序。儒、墨兩家關(guān)于專制主義的表現(xiàn)、君權(quán)合法性、專制主義的維護(hù)途徑及目標(biāo)的差異,在兩個學(xué)派創(chuàng)立之初便已經(jīng)產(chǎn)生,由于儒、墨兩家的創(chuàng)始人——孔子與墨子所處的時代背景有很大差異,思想淵源有所不同,思維方式與價值取向也有一定差異等一系列因素,儒、墨以不同的方式走向了專制主義。
[Abstract]:The academic research on Confucian despotism more fully, but study of Marxism on the Mohist autocracy is relatively insufficient, however, Confucianism and Mohism of authoritarian ideology should receive the same attention. In the Warring States period is a special period in the history of China, unique era status of Confucianism, ink provides thoughts richly endowed by nature. The old tradition has been destroyed, the new order has not formed, the world chaos and misery, the Confucian and Mohist are deeply saddened and anxiety. While they look at the traditional side of that era, explore the way out, in the end, Confucianism and Mohism are eyeing the despotism. Confucianism, Mohism thought of different attribute and different ways to solve the problem, there is a great difference for the conception of the ideal society so they embarked on the despotism, through different ways of Confucianism, ink autocracy thought, goal and dimension Support have great differences. Through the comparison, we can clearly show the different path of Confucianism, ink to despotism, and to a certain extent, reveals the various period common to the contention of a hundred schools of thought autocracy trend. In authoritarian performance, Confucianism and Mohism emphasize the monarch as the supreme person and the world the one and only, he only exercise authority has the highest resolution right. But the difference is that the relationship between Confucian ethics of the monarch and his subjects, the monarch for the parents of the people, stressed that the monarch has the world and the wealth of all subjects; Mohist emphasizes the absolute authority of monarch in mind, the whole world should be based on the monarch is not subject to that is highly consistent with the monarch in thought and behavior. Confucianism and Mohism are endowed with supreme status and the highest authority of monarch, but sovereignty a source of legitimacy of the monarchy must follow certain principles, In order to maintain the throne firmly. Confucianism and Mohism that gentleman who came from heaven, but also that the monarch should have certain character to match his throne. However, the monarchical legitimacy in Confucian destiny basis, in the implementation of the monarch and the people to merit, weakening the role of the day; the legitimacy of monarchical power based on the will of heaven, the sovereign power the legality of the right to the heaven, the monarch is qualified by the day to judge, injustice the monarchy, from the days of punishment, which will the sacred, mysterious authoritarianism. In the maintenance of way, mainly by Confucianism Germany and ritual, the completion of the maintenance of despotism in tenderness, and Mohist advocated the implementation of mandatory external rewards means despotism. According to Confucianism, maintenance of despotism, by people between grades Distinguish to achieve, through satisfying the material and moral cultivation way, make people abide by the ritual order, satisfied with their position, the fear of sovereign authority. The Mohist school is to advocate the establishment of a ruling group composed by sage, with rewards measures that the people of the world in thinking and behavior are the same as the emperor, the final to maintain the despotism. In the relation, the Confucian advocate "Tao" Chen Shijun, emphasizes the interaction between the monarch and liegeman; Mohist Thought to as monarch, Minister stressed the absolute obedience to the emperor. Confucianism and Mohism pushed for despotism, the target point is supreme kingship, however. Confucianism, ink through the Kingship to achieve political ideal is not the same. I hope to establish a statue of Confucian monarch de Chongli, distinguished different grade social order. The hope to establish the absolute authority of an ideology, from The people all over the world in thinking and behavior are the same as the monarch, and ultimately a same order. Confucianism, Mohism about despotism, monarchical legitimacy, authoritarian ways to maintain and target differences, has been produced in the two school was founded at the beginning of the Confucianism, Mohism founder: Confucius and Mo-tse's background is very different, the thought origin of different ways of thinking and value orientation have certain differences and a series of factors, Confucianism, ink in a different way to despotism.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：河南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：B222;B224

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 曹勝高;;義政說的學(xué)理建構(gòu)與學(xué)說指向[J];古代文明;2013年03期

2 王義保;;“專制主義”概念溯源[J];學(xué)術(shù)論壇;2008年06期

3 陳吉利;;先秦儒家政治哲學(xué)轉(zhuǎn)向?qū)Ｖ浦髁x的邏輯[J];中共桂林市委黨校學(xué)報;2007年03期

4 王海明;;專制主義概念辨難[J];山東大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2007年02期

5 孫天竺;從儒法學(xué)說中看導(dǎo)致專制主義的思想基礎(chǔ)[J];理論界;2005年04期

6 高建立;墨子尚同說的專制性特征解析——兼及尚同說對韓非君主專制思想的影響[J];河南師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2005年01期

7 葉劍鋒;中國專制主義的歷史學(xué)解析[J];理論學(xué)刊;2004年11期

8 葉劍鋒;論戰(zhàn)國百家爭鳴對專制主義的孵化作用及其歷史影響[J];湖北省社會主義學(xué)院學(xué)報;2004年04期

9 蘇弘毅;論中國古代專制主義的基礎(chǔ)[J];邯鄲師專學(xué)報;2001年04期

10 羅世烈;墨家的專制主義[J];四川大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);1999年05期

，

本文編號：1426798