论哲人之事功——兼谈柏拉图《苏格拉底的申辩》中的哲学与政治

doi:10.13438/j.cnki.jdxb.2026.02.011

摘要/Abstract

摘要：哲人并非无所事事，其思辨和著述就是行动，他们求真或保卫真理，也是在维护生活共同体。所谓“无事”或“无为”本身指安分守己，而各司其职，便能天下大治。苏格拉底不参与政务看起来是逍遥避世，实际上却并非自私独善，是为了城邦的伦理事业而无私无我。这种悖论根本性地体现了哲学与政治之间的张力，哲学不能直接有益于城邦，而且讲求中道的政治生活也不会容忍哲学的过度干预。但哲人不能因此而不管城邦，哲学如何扶持城邦，以及城邦如何对待哲学，都需要高超的政治智慧。所有人的存在都是一种外向的绽出，哲人的自我成就必须以“事”为依托。沉思本身就是一种功业，它的意义在于为人世立法，乃是无为之大为。哲人远离具体的事务，是为了更好为城邦服务，以“原道”为基础立教，提升灵魂的品质，规范人伦行为。哲人上承天道，中开王道，下启人道，至少在教化方面，哲人承担着塑造和维护社会的重任，教育是古典政治哲学的第一要务。所以，与直接的政治生活相比，真正的哲学有着另外的荣耀，是一种更高的生活方式。

关键词： 哲人, 事功, 城邦, 孔子, 柏拉图, 苏格拉底, 生活方式, 《苏格拉底的申辩》

Abstract:

The philosopher is by no means idle;philosophical contemplation and writing constitute a profound form of action.In seeking and defending truth,philosophers render essential service to the ethical sustenance of the community.The notion of "non-action" (wu-wei) signifies not passivity but the proper fulfillment of one's role—when each performs their duty,harmony prevails in the world.Socrates' abstention from direct political engagement may appear as withdrawal,yet it was neither self-serving nor mere personal cultivation;rather,it embodied a selfless commitment to the city-state's moral fabric.This paradox epitomizes the fundamental tension between philosophy and politics:philosophy cannot directly serve the city's immediate interests,and the political life,grounded in the mean,resists philosophy's radical demands.Nevertheless,the philosopher cannot disengage from the city.How philosophy may support the polis—and how the polis ought to receive philosophy—requires exceptional political wisdom.Human existence is inherently ek-static,an outward projection beyond the self;thus,the philosopher's self-actualization must be rooted in worldly engagement.Contemplation itself is a supreme deed,whose significance lies in legislating for human life—the highest expression of "action through non-action." By distancing himself from mundane affairs,the philosopher better serves the city,establishing teachings grounded in the fundamental Way,elevating the soul's quality,and orienting human conduct.The philosopher links the heavenly Way above,embodies the kingly Way at the center,and nurtures human order below.At least in the domain of education—the foremost concern of classical political philosophy—the philosopher bears the weighty responsibility of shaping and preserving society.Hence,compared with direct political participation,genuine philosophy possesses a distinct dignity and represents a higher form of life.

Key words:

philosopher, deeds, city-state, Confucius, Plato, Socrates, form of life, Apology of Socrates

程志敏.

论哲人之事功——兼谈柏拉图《苏格拉底的申辩》中的哲学与政治 [J]. 吉首大学学报（社会科学版）, 2026, 47(2): 98-105.

CHENG Zhimin. On the Deeds of the Philosopher:Philosophy and Politics in Plato's Apology of Socrates[J]. Journal of Jishou University(Social Sciences Edition), 2026, 47(2): 98-105.

参考文献

[1] BODIN J.Method for the Easy Comprehension of History[M].translated by REYNOLDS B.New York:Columbia University Press,1945:30.

[2] 黄宗羲.黄宗羲全集:第7册[M].杭州：浙江古籍出版社，1985:339.

[3] MARKOVITS E.The Politics of Sincerity:Plato,Frank Speech,and Democratic Judgment[M].PA:The Pennsylvania State University Press,2008:57.

[4] 马尔科姆·斯科菲尔德.柏拉图：政治哲学[M].柳孟盛,译.北京：华夏出版社，2017：17.

[5] GOMME A W.A Historical Commentary on Thucydides Volume 1. Introduction,and Commentary on Book I[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,1945:121.

[6] LUDWIG P W.Eros and Polis:Desire and Community in Greek Political Theory[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2002:322.

[7] DE STRYCKER E,SLINGS S R.Plato's Apology of Socrates[M].Leiden:Brill,1994:349.

[8] CLIMACUS J.Philosophical Fragments[M].Trans.HONG H V,HONG H E.Princeton:Princeton University Press,1985:5.

[9] 列奥·施特劳斯.迫害与写作艺术[M].刘锋,译.北京：华夏出版社，2012：110.

[10] 赵翼.廿二史劄记校证：下[M].王树民,校证.北京：中华书局，1984：108.

[11] 赵尔巽，等.清史稿[M].北京：中华书局，1977：13118.

[12] BURNET J.Plato's Euthyphro[M]//Apology of Socrates and Crito.Oxford:Oxford University Press,1924:207.

[13] 卡尔·洛维特.雅各布·布克哈特[M].楚人,译.北京：商务印书馆，2013：142.

[14] 朱熹.朱子全书：第14册[M].上海：上海古籍出版社，合肥：安徽教育出版社，2002：469.

[15] 黄宗羲.黄宗羲全集:第8册[M].杭州：浙江古籍出版社，1985:144.

[16] 塞涅卡.道德和政治论文集[M].袁瑜琤,译.北京：北京大学出版社，2010:238.

[17] 司马迁.史记[M].北京：中华书局，1959:1943.

[18] 张沛.中说译注[M].北京：中华书局，2013:205.

[19] 维柯.大学典礼演讲集[M].张小勇,译.上海：上海人民出版社，2012:66-67.

[20] 西塞罗，等.怀疑的理性——西塞罗与学园柏拉图主义[M].魏奕昕,译.上海：华东师范大学出版社，2017:132.

[21] 尼采.不合时宜的沉思[M].李秋零,译.上海：华东师范大学出版社，2007:159.

[22] 尼采.善恶的彼岸[M].赵千帆,译.孙周兴,校.北京：商务印书馆，2015:184.

[23] 费希特.论学者的使命人的使命[M].梁志学，沈真,译.北京：商务印书馆，1984:42.

[24] WALLACH J R.The Platonic Political Art[M].PA:The Pennsylvania State University Press,2001:208-209.

[25] TYLER W S.Plato's Apology and Crito[M].New York:D.Appleton and Company,1866:141-142.