摘要
以摩尔《伦理学原理》肇始的分析伦理学,确立了整个20世纪以来英美道德哲学的整体基调,他们以道德词语和句式的语义分析为核心乃至目标,重新界定伦理学的学科性质。此后,道德哲学不断地被分化为相互对立、不可通约的各种"主义",论证越来越精致,哲学性却越来越弱,呈现出来的恰恰是"道德"在生活世界的彻底碎片化。科学性的描述,使得道德既不通达"天理"(因为形而上学被否定了),也不脚踏实地(因为"道德"变成了对概念的词义分析,变成了单纯的"知识",而不指导生活和行动)。因此,断言它的失败是有充足理由的。哲学不能以不思的科学为榜样,伦理学作为"科学"只能秉持思想论证所要遵循的严密的逻辑必然性,它可以把语义分析作为起点,但目标却只能是哲学的:理解和思考存在的意义。对道德词语的语义分析,既不能出现社会与历史的缺席,更不能出现生活和存在的遗忘。没有对存在意义的伦理辩护,善是什么,我该如何行动,我要成为什么样的人,什么样的生活是值得过的,这些永恒的哲学问题都将得不到回答。
The trajectory of studies on moral philosophy in the UK and the US over the 20^(th) century was entirely determined by analytical ethics,which derived from George Edward Moore's Principia Ethica.Scholars in this field focus on the semantic analysis of moral terms and sentence patterns in order to redefine the nature of ethics as a discipline.Moral philosophy has since then been divided into various '-ism' that are contradictory to and incommensurable with each other.The arguments are becoming more and more trivial,yet the subject is becoming less philosophical,presenting a complete fragmentation of 'morality' in life.Descriptions in a natural science manner has made neither 'justice' accessible to morality(as metaphysics has been denied),nor morality practical(as 'ethics' has turned into a discipline focusing on concepts analyses and as pure 'knowledge,' rather than being the guideline of life and behavior).Therefore,it is safe to say that the study of ethics in the UK and the US has reached an impasse.Philosophy cannot blindly model natural sciences without any metaphysical discourse,while ethics,seen as a 'science,' can only follow the strict logic of intellectual reasoning.While using lexical analysis as the starting point,the research purpose of ethics can only be philosophical,that is,to understand and ponder over the meaning of being.The lexical analysis of moral terms can neither neglect society and history nor real life and being.Without ethical defense of the meaning of being,eternal philosophical questions like 'What is goodness?', 'How do I behave?', 'What kind of person I want to be?',and 'What kind of life is worth living?' could never be answered.
出处
《中国社会科学评价》
2015年第4期4-13,126,共11页
China Social Science Review
基金
国家哲学社会科学基金重大项目"西方道德哲学通史研究"(项目编号12&ZD122)前期研究成果
