倫理翻譯與主體化問題：王國維問題重探

Abstract

本摘要論文要討論19世紀末中文世界知識轉型之際，倫理概念如何透過翻譯與體制化的過程，引入了具有功利主義、道德進化論與國家主義的倫理學，而成為中文世界主體化工程的基礎，以及王國維在此過程中所扮演的複雜角色。討論晚清變局知識轉型之問題，論者時常局限於外部視野與內部視野之辨，或是刺激反應與內發變革之爭，本文將指出，知識譜系挪移之過程，不能夠嘆此二元論的方式討論，而必須以拓樸學的模式來理解。羅振玉創立東文學社與《教育世界》，大量透過日本翻譯而引進各種教育理念、教育體制與倫理學，進而協助推動晚清學部的新政；在早期現代化過程教育理念與倫理學譜系的轉型中，他所涉及的體制工作扮演了關鍵的時代性角色。在此過程中，經由日本的翻譯管道，以倫理學為核心概念的現代教育體制以及教育理論被引入，而逐漸建立了以國家為最高倫理關係的原則，成為了20世紀初期幾個世代的教育養成以及主體化的基礎。王國維自始至終協助羅振玉大量翻譯與書寫，在此體制化過程中舉足輕重。不過，表面上，王國維處於推動此現代倫理學的體制化位置，實際上，他卻在此時刻展開了思考上的抵制張力。這個複雜的位置是值得我們重視的問題。 本文的討論分六節：第一節檢討關於晚清知識變革的外部視野與內部視野之爭的弔詭，以及指出又須透過主體的拓樸位置才能夠充分解釋此知識譜系轉型的問題，第二節透過海德格與傳柯的（倫理）主體概念，以及拉岡的主體拓樸學概念，來說明主體所處的話語結構與世界觀的相互構成關係，以及主體作為銜接話語結構與主體工作的拓樸環節問題，第三節處理倫理話語如何透過晚清知識分子的翻譯工作而引入日本／西方的國家主義倫理學，第四節討論羅振玉的《教育世界》與王國維在此倫理學翻譯的體制性工作中所占據的功能，第五節重新詮釋王國維透過一元論的思考而展開的批判倫理觀，第六節提出倫理主體拓樸學位置的階段性結論。

Wang Guowei's translations of utilitarian ethics and education theory reveal clearly the role that he played at Education World and as a Chinese intellectual. His participation in the public discourse fit into the plans of Luo Zhenyu both at the journal and later at the Ministry of Education of the late Qing government. The impact that Wang and Luo together produced on the Chinese intellectual world was profound. Those theories of ethics and education they introduced became the main axis of Chinese ethical thought throughout the 20(superscript th) century; they defined the terms in which the subject related to society or the state, However, Wang's translations of the texts of foreign theories were practiced on another level by a second act of translation on the conceptual level. During his exploration of the limits of Western and classical Chinese ethics, he found the limitations of dualism, and attempted to return to monist models of experience/knowledge. Moving back into the fields of aesthetics and ethics, he suggested a critique of utilitarianism and life-ism (shengsheng zhuyi) that was popular at the time. As well as a critique, he also developed a response: no-life-ism (wusheng zhuyi). This response transcends considerations of self-interest or the relationship of the self with the material world, and involves the ethics of reducing one's own partial volition. This is not a negative or pessimistic account of humanity. Via the appreciation of art, people may experience an objectification of human will in an aesthetic form, and informed by that experience, they can retreat from the position of the subject in an oppositional relationship with the material world; and they can reject utilitarian politics. Thus, Wang himself maintained a level of detachment and criticism concerning the politicized ethics of his contemporaries and Luo Zhenyu.