這裡給你幾個簡單的例子，讓你可以感受一下黑格爾是如何站在詭辯術一方（對抗柏拉圖和蘇格拉底），更多的需要你自己去讀： 一方面他非常清楚詭辯術家們毫無原則，完全是玩弄文字遊戲： 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們（他那個時候的今天，比2019年的今天要保守得多）的行為來替他們辯護： 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. ---上面這段典型的是用今天的人都這麼做來說明詭辯術是對的，而柏拉圖和蘇格拉底是過分的。。。 所以說，儘管黑格爾既對詭辯術師們的負面進行的討論，又強調了他們的貢獻，似乎是很持平客觀（按他的話說叫做積極和適當的科學態度）他的字裡行間洋溢着的是對詭辯術師這個富家子弟的讚嘆羨慕，而不管他是否在欺凌鄰家的窮人孩子。。。。。。 |
