继续上面的讨论

作者：慕容青草 留言时间：2019-10-14 18:34:43

这里给你几个简单的例子，让你可以感受一下黑格尔是如何站在诡辩术一方（对抗柏拉图和苏格拉底），更多的需要你自己去读：

 

一方面他非常清楚诡辩术家们毫无原则，完全是玩弄文字游戏：

 

With such reasoning men can easily get so far as to know (where they do not, it is owing to the want of education — but the Sophists were very well educated) that if arguments are relied upon, everything can be proved by argument, and arguments for and against can be found for everything…In the crime of desertion in time of war, there is, for example, the duty of self-preservation. Similarly in more modern times the greatest crimes, assassination, treachery, &c., have been justified.

 

另一方面他又用今天的人们（他那个时候的今天，比2019年的今天要保守得多）的行为来替他们辩护：

 

If sophistry is bad in the sense that it signifies a quality of which only bad men are guilty, it is at the same time much more common than this would imply; for all argumentative reasoning, adducing of arguments and counterarguments, bringing into prominence particular points of view, is sophistry. And just as utterances of the Sophists are adduced against which nothing can be said (as they are by Plato), men of our day are urged to all that is good for the very reasons that are reasons to the Sophists. Thus it is said, “do not cheat, else you lose your credit, hence your wealth,” or, “be temperate, or you will spoil your appetite and have to suffer.” Or for punishment men give the external reasons of improvement, &c.; or else an action is defended on external grounds taken from the result.。。。Sophistry thus does not lie so far from us as we think. When educated men discuss matters now-a-days, it may seem all very good, but it is in no way different from what Socrates and Plato called sophistry — although they themselves have adopted this standpoint as truly as did the Sophists.

 

---上面这段典型的是用今天的人都这么做来说明诡辩术是对的，而柏拉图和苏格拉底是过分的。。。

 

所以说，尽管黑格尔既对诡辩术师们的负面进行的讨论，又强调了他们的贡献，似乎是很持平客观（按他的话说叫做积极和适当的科学态度）他的字里行间洋溢着的是对诡辩术师这个富家子弟的赞叹羡慕，而不管他是否在欺凌邻家的穷人孩子。。。。。。