Abstract

"Good Nature" is Mencius the idea of human nature; "conscience" of the contemporary Neo-Confucian moral metaphysics of human nature interpretation. Contemporary Confucian scholars Hsu Fu-kuan , Tang Junyi , Mou , etc., are to understand Mencius' human nature is good "to" conscience. " To Mote, says that "mind body" that "sexual body." However, Mencius said of the heart, is a "no time out, Mozhi it to" , the heart of lively without direction, not a moral ontology of the "original mind" or "conscience . " Examination of contemporary Neo-Confucian Zhu Xian, generally identified Mencius' four-terminal of the Heart "is a" good "source, and this as a moral body, the name, called" conscience. " Contrast "Mencius" text, Kongfei Mencius meant, interpreted more at play; on it, Jiao Xun Confucianism in Qing Dynasty that some reflection. In fact, from the "human nature is good" to "conscience" during which there is a turning point in the course of thinking, Lu and Wang study is to carry out the greatest impact. This paper discusses the focal length, placed in the Confucian theory of human nature on this core issue, focused on comparing "Mencius" text and the contemporary neo-Confucian views and interpretations in order to make a study. Text area in three parts, one on Mencius' human nature is good "and Yun Yi, two on the contemporary neo-Confucianism," conscience "interpretation of" human nature is good, "meaning, the three analyzing" conscience "of the theory of traceability and its problems. Finally, make a conclusion. Mencius claimed that "human nature is good", the notion of a "moral heart" is the metaphysical explanation of this claim by contemporary Neo-Confucianism. Contemporary Neo-Confucianists like Xu Fuguang , Tang Junyi and Mou Zongsan all interpret the "good human nature" of Mencius as a "moral heart". But the heart that Mencius talks about has no definite direction as we would expect from a heart that has a clear moral orientation. This discrepancy of meaning shows that the contemporary Neo-Confucianist interpretation cannot be reconciled with the original text. This has already been pointed out by the Qing times scholar Jiao Xun and it is possible to trace the gradual change of meaning throughout history. This paper will directly confront the Book of Mencius with its contemporary Neo-Confucian interpreters to point out the philosophical differences between the two