准提共修论坛

 找回密码
 注  册

QQ登录

搜索
查看: 360|回复: 1

[佛法与科学] 缘起性空话康德--南先生论参禅弊病,姚梅龄论中医案例,康德论判断力

[复制链接]
发表于 2019-7-2 10:37:15 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
缘起性空话康德--南先生论参禅弊病,姚梅龄论中医案例,康德论判断力
南先生在谈到禅宗时指出,从指月录等书看,一千多年来,参禅真正言下大彻的,几个,通过日后磨练,有大成就的几十个到几百个。而死于句下的,如麻似粟。后来,南先生在香港教学,谈到有些人,来了之后(来到他在香港的教学地),直接上楼,打坐,不喜欢听课、读书、思考思辨,期望打坐,“蹦”的一下,就能开悟。南先生讲:你要悟了,我不白忙活了。
基本是持批评态度的。不读书,没有一定的思辨智慧,想直接开悟,恐怕有点难。
著名的中医姚梅龄(笔者认为几乎目前唯一能称为国医大师的),在谈到病时说,每个人情况都不一样,所以按照排列组合,病有几百万亿种(大概这个意思),所以,一人一方,才是真正科学的。
所以,有人批中医,说都是案例,恰恰是无脑。
康德在谈到判断力时,有类似表述。现英中对照如下。
INTRODUCTION. Of theTranscendental Faculty of judgement in General.
If understanding in general be defined as the faculty oflaws or rules,
the faculty of judgement may be termed the faculty of subsumptionunder
these rules; that is,of distinguishing whether this or that does or
does not stand under a given rule (casus datae legis).Generallogic
contains no directions or precepts for the faculty ofjudgement, nor
can it contain any such.  For as it makes abstraction of all content of
cognition,no duty is left for it, except that of exposinganalytically
the mere form of cognition in conceptions, judgements, and conclusions,
and of thereby establishing formal rules for all exerciseof the
understanding. Now if this logic wished to give somegeneral direction
how we should subsume under these rules, that is, how we should
distinguish whether this or that did or did not standunder them, this
again could not be done otherwise than by means of arule. But this
rule, preciselybecause it is a rule, requires for itself directionfrom
the faculty of judgement. Thus, it is evident that the understanding
is capable of being instructed by rules, but that the judgement is a
peculiar talent,which does not, and cannot require tuition, but
only exercise. This faculty is therefore the specificquality of the
so-called mother wit,the want of which no scholastic discipline can
compensate. For although education may furnish, and, as it were, engraft upon a
limited understanding rules borrowed from other minds, yet the power of
employing these rules correctly must belong to the pupilhimself; and no
rule which we can prescribe to him with this purpose is, in the absence
or deficiency of this gift of nature, secure from misuse. * A physician
therefore, a judge ora statesman, may have in his head many admirable
pathological,juridical, or political rules,in a degree that may enable
him to be a profound teacher in his particular science, and yet in the
application of these rules he may very possiblyblunder--either because
he is wanting in natural judgement (though not inunderstanding) and,
whilst he can comprehend the general in abstracto, cannot distinguish
whether a particular case in concreto ought to rankunder the former; or
because his faculty of judgement has not beensufficiently exercised by
examples and real practice. Indeed, the grand and only use of examples,
is to sharpen the judgement. For as regards thecorrectness and
precision of the insight of the understanding, examples are commonly
injurious rather than otherwise, because, as casus in terminis they
seldom adequately fulfill the conditions of the rule.Besides, they often
weaken the power of our understanding to apprehend rulesor laws
in their universality,independently of particular circumstances of
experience; and hence,accustom us to employ them more as formulae than
as principles. Examples are thus the go-cart of thejudgement, which
he who is naturally deficient in that faculty cannotafford to dispense
with.
导论:论一般的超验判断力
如果普通的理解力,被定义为规则的能力,那么,判断力就可被称为是在这些规则之下归摄的能力;也就是说,分辨某物是否从属于某个被给予的规则(casus datae legis)。普通逻辑根本不包含判断力的规范,而且也不可能包含。因为,既然普通逻辑抽掉了所有认识的内容,所以给它剩下的唯一工作,就只是分析地阐释概念、判断、和推理中的认识的形式,并由此建立一切理解力的操练的形式规则。如果它想普遍地指出,人们应当如何把某物纳入到这些规则之下,亦即,我们如何分辨某物是否从属于这些规则,那么,就只能通过另一条规则来进行。但这条规则,且正因为它是另一条规则,就再次要求判断力的指导。这样,显而易见,虽然理解力是可以被规则指导的,但判断力却是一种特殊的才能,根本不能被教导,而是只能去操练。因此,判断力也就是所谓天生智慧的特殊才能,其缺乏,不是学校教育所能补偿的。因为尽管教育可以提供,并移植从其他心灵那里借来的、有限的理解力的规则,但是正确的使用这些规则的能力,却只属于学生自己;如果缺少这种天赋的话,那么,任何可被给与的规则,都难免被误用。* 因此,对于一个医生、一个法官或一个政治家,在他的脑袋中,可能装有许多出色的病理学、法学或者政治学的规则,其水平,甚至足以使他本人,在这方面成为一个知识渊博的教师,但尽管如此,在这些规则的应用中,他却很可能犯愚蠢的错误,这要么是因为他缺乏自然的判断力(虽然不缺乏理解力),他虽然能够理解普遍中抽象的道理,但却不能分辨,某具体个例是否遵循这些普遍的道理;要么是因为,他的判断力,并没有通过实例和真实的实践经验,被充分地锻炼过。确实,实例唯一且重大的效用:就是使判断力变得敏锐。但对于理解力洞识的正确性和精密性来说,实例则通常会对它们有些损害,而不是其它,因为,一个完全满足规则的条件的实例casus in terminis),通常是很罕见的。另外,它们还经常弱化我们理解力的‘从特殊个例中抽取这些规则或规律的普遍性的能力’;从而最终,使人们习惯于把规则更多地当做公式,而不是当做道理来使用。所以,实例可被称为是判断力的学步车,缺乏这种自然才能的人,绝不能缺少它们。
     [*Footnote:Deficiency in judgement is properly that which
     is calledstupidity; and for such a failing we know no
     remedy. A dullor narrow-minded person, to whomnothing is
     wanting but aproper degree of understanding, may be
     improved bytuition, even so far as to deserve theepithet
     of learned.But as such persons frequently labour under a
     deficiency inthe faculty of judgement, it is notuncommon
     to find menextremely learned who in the application of
     their sciencebetray a lamentable degree this irremediable
[*脚注: 判断力的缺乏,就是人们称为愚蠢的东西,且无药可救。一个迟钝或者思想僵化的人,所缺乏的,无非是应有的理解力的程度,这或许可以通过教导来改变,甚至可以达到博学的称谓。但是由于这样的人,经常会在判断力低下的状态中工作,所以,经常会遇到一些博学之士,他们在应用其科学时,会暴露出的那种永远无法改善的缺陷来,这也就不是什么非同寻常的事情了。]


发表于 2019-7-2 15:25:40 | 显示全部楼层
正思惟。

讲得好,点赞。
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注  册

本版积分规则

联系管理员|小黑屋|手机版|Archiver|实修驿站 ( 沪ICP备19026899号-1 )

GMT+8, 2019-8-23 04:38

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

© 2001-2017 Comsenz Inc.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表