“始基本体论”批判

“始基本体论”是人类历史上最早的哲学形态，它认为世界上的事物虽然是多种多样的，但这些事物都有某种共同的“始基”。东西方在这方面有共同之处，古希腊的米利都学派、恩培多克勒，中国的“五行”说，印度的“五大”，都把水、火、气、土、风等具体的物质形态当成世界的“始基”，说明人类最早根据实践的需要而作出的哲学探索是唯物主义性质的。“始基本体论”的历史价值在于：它从人类的神话中解脱出来，用物质性的存在解释世界，标志着哲学的诞生；它把客观的物质存在与运动变化结合起来，实现了唯物主义与辩证法思想的朴素统一。“始基本体论”的历史局限性是时代造成的，对此不应苛求。

Criticism on " Ontology of Original Source"

The＂Ontology of Original Source＂ is the earliest philosophical form in human history, which states that all the existing things in the world , though they are varied from type to type , actually share the same original source. The Eastern and Western philosophers have much in common in this respect . The Miletus School in Ancient Greece, Empedocles, China＇s ＂Five Elements ＂view and India＇s ＂Five Mahabhutas＂view all hold that such specific substances as water ,fire, air, soil and wind are the original sources, which indicates that ancient people＇s philesophieal exploration to meet the practical needs is featured by materialism. Its historical value lies in the following：it saves human beings from mythical view and explains the nature with nonmythical view ,that is , a materialistic view, which marks the beginning of philosophy; in addition , it combines the objective matter with their motion and achieves the unification of materialism and dialecfieism in a plain way. Its limitations are engendered by the time where it exists, therefore, as to this, we should not overcrifieize.