论文部分内容阅读
作为周代天命观核心理念的善恶报应论,其理论要点为德福一致。然而在个人的日常生活世界中,施报往往不一,因而在西周末期,报应论开始受到质疑。为回应上述质疑,春秋时人提出部分修正理论,如“报及后世”说、“天假助不善”说与“谴告”说。但这些修正理论不仅无法圆熟解答报应何以无征,甚至由此带来一些新的理论困境,从而使得报应论最终在战国时期为“时命论”所取代。强调德福并不必然一致的“时命论”虽然削弱了敦促世人弃恶行善的外在规制手段与终极保障机制,却能更好地解释“为恶得福,善者有殃”的社会现实。
As the concept of good and evil retribution of the core concept of the concept of supreme destiny in the Zhou dynasty, the theoretical points are the same as that of morality and happiness. However, in the daily life of individuals, the reports are often different, so in the Western Zhou Dynasty, retribution theory began to be questioned. In response to the above question, people put forward some revision theories in the Spring and Autumn Period, such as “reporting future generations”, saying that “day falsification is not good enough”, “to say and” condemn “. However, these revision theories not only failed to answer the question of why there was no sign, or even brought some new theoretical difficulties, so that the retributive theory was eventually replaced by the ”life-time theory“ in the Warring States Period. Emphasizing that morality and morality are not necessarily the same. ”Although the theory of“ life-time theory ”weakens the external regulatory mechanism and ultimate guarantee mechanism that urges the world to abandon evil practices of goodness, it can better explain that“ evil is blessed, ”Social reality.