胡應麟“格調”選擇的思想史意義

The Meaning of Hu Yinglin's Choice of "Ge Diao"

Abstract

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.

本文通過比較胡應麟爲代表的復古派與公安派文學思想核心的不同，認爲他們的本質區別在於是否“師心”，即是否受到了哲學思想的影響。胡應麟對思想性的東西並不感興趣，把學詩的重心放在對“作品”之“格調”、“風神”的學習上，而公安三袁則深受王學影簪，把學詩重心放在“作者”之“性靈”上。由此導致他們對學問的看法完全不同，胡應麟主張學問與文學交相作用，而三袁則認為學問對作者之“心”的修養並無直接關係。這種差別暗合了思想界中“尊德性”與“道問學”之爭。胡應麟提倡博學，但對“尊德性”並無興趣，代表著明代思想史中的一個動向：學術、知識研究正式從觀念化、印象化向系統化、實證化轉變。

By comparing the core thoughts of Hu Yinglin and Gong’an School, this paper pointed out that the difference between them is whether they were influenced by philosophic thinking. Hu was not interested in philosophy, so he put emphasis on the “Gediao” and “Fengshen” of text in learning poetry. While Gong'an School was deeply affected by it, so put emphasis on the “Xingling” of writer. Therefore, they hold different views on knowledge. Hu persisted in the interacting of poetry and knowledge. However, Gong’an School thought that knowledge had not direct relation with the writer’s hearts. These distinctions coincide the argument of “Esteeming the Virtuous Nature” (zun de xing) and “Following the Path of Inquiry” (dao wen xue) in intellectual history. That Hu advocated erudition and knowledge inheritance but had no interests in Virtuous Nature, indicated one direction of intellectual transition of Ming Dynasty, that is, academic research on knowledge began more and more systematic and positive.