作者於前作〈論王船山性理思想之建構與其內部轉化〉一文，曾依據船山之著作，將其性理思想之哲學性發展，大致區分為五期：即以撰作《周易外傳》之時為第一期，撰作《尚書引義》之時為第二期，撰作《讀四書大全說》之時為第三期，撰作《周易內傳》之時為第四期，撰作《張子正蒙注》之時為第五期。此五期之分法，乃由作者約三十年前所撰博士論文《王船山之道器論》中所提出之「四期」說發展而來。其所新增之一期，為船山撰作《尚書引義》之時之第二期；其餘略同。而其所以可如是區分，一因各期之思想，就其本身而言，自成段落，皆展現明確、完整之系統性；此點顯示船山之哲學建構能力。另一項原因，則是由於各期之思想間，不僅具有沿續性，且後一期之核心議題，皆由前一期之思想導引產生，因而形成具有「邏輯推演」意義之脈絡。本文即依此五期之區分，比較各期思想之結構，並予以一種「哲學性質」之說明。論述之重點，在於詳細辨析此一逐步發展之歷程，其所展現之「形態」意義，與其所賴以奠基之「哲學預設」為何。至於此一思想歷程如何導引船山，使船山於「乘利用以觀德」之一面，成功將「史學」與「經學」結合，以形成其特有之史論、史觀，甚至發展完成為一系統化之「文明論」與「歷史哲學」，則非本篇題旨所及，作者另有它文，予以完整討論。

Following the author’s previous study on Wang Fuzhi’s philosophical system and its inner transition(“A Study on the Formation of Wang Fuzhi’s Philosophical System and Its Inner Transition,”Wen yu zhe, no.17, December 2010), he now carefully compares different stages of Wang’s thought, as pointed out in his last article, and examines in detail the basic nature of these systems. In addition, he tries to disclose the basic presuppositions of each system. Since the author’ study in this aspect is genuine and well founded, and his analysis highly philosophical, the results of his interpretations, as revealed in this essay, will arouse attention and create new topics not only in the study of Wang Fuzhi, but in the study of early Qing history as well.

中國哲學史;宋明理學;清代學術思想史;王夫之

China studies; history of Chinese philosophy; Chinese Ethics; Qing studies; Song-Ming neo-Confucianism; Wang Fuzhi