伏羲六十三卦方微图是邵雍二进制的吗?澄清它与莱布尼兹的二进制算术类比的结果。

IF 0.5 4区 哲学 Q2 Arts and Humanities
Science in Context Pub Date : 2023-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-08-15 DOI:10.1017/S0269889725100665
Marie-Julie Maitre
{"title":"伏羲六十三卦方微图是邵雍二进制的吗?澄清它与莱布尼兹的二进制算术类比的结果。","authors":"Marie-Julie Maitre","doi":"10.1017/S0269889725100665","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Jesuit Joachim Bouvet established an analogy between the binary arithmetic developed by Leibniz and the diagram <i>Fuxi liushisi gua fangwei</i> (or FX64), attributed to Shao Yong, which organizes the sixty-four hexagrams according to the Fuxi/<i>Xiantian</i> order. Consequently, this diagram could be considered as binary. Some scholars argue that the diagram is not binary because of the different construction of the two systems and the \"wrong\" reading direction used by Bouvet and Leibniz-opposite to the one used in China. Nevertheless, by a superimposition of Leibniz's binary table and of the derivation table used to construct the diagram, this article shows that the diagram <i>is</i> binary, since it is constituted of two elements and the binary system can use other symbols than 0 and 1. The reverse methodology used in constructing the two systems because of their different purpose-division for the FX64 diagram and multiplication for Leibniz's dyad-allows their reading from either one direction or the reverse. This does not affect the fact that they are both binary, since it leads to the same form and structure.</p>","PeriodicalId":49562,"journal":{"name":"Science in Context","volume":"36 1","pages":"38-59"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is the <i>Fuxi liushisi gua fangwei</i> () diagram attributed to Shao Yong binary? Clarifying a consequence of its analogy with the binary arithmetic of Leibniz.\",\"authors\":\"Marie-Julie Maitre\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0269889725100665\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The Jesuit Joachim Bouvet established an analogy between the binary arithmetic developed by Leibniz and the diagram <i>Fuxi liushisi gua fangwei</i> (or FX64), attributed to Shao Yong, which organizes the sixty-four hexagrams according to the Fuxi/<i>Xiantian</i> order. Consequently, this diagram could be considered as binary. Some scholars argue that the diagram is not binary because of the different construction of the two systems and the \\\"wrong\\\" reading direction used by Bouvet and Leibniz-opposite to the one used in China. Nevertheless, by a superimposition of Leibniz's binary table and of the derivation table used to construct the diagram, this article shows that the diagram <i>is</i> binary, since it is constituted of two elements and the binary system can use other symbols than 0 and 1. The reverse methodology used in constructing the two systems because of their different purpose-division for the FX64 diagram and multiplication for Leibniz's dyad-allows their reading from either one direction or the reverse. This does not affect the fact that they are both binary, since it leads to the same form and structure.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49562,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science in Context\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"38-59\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science in Context\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269889725100665\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/8/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science in Context","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269889725100665","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

耶稣会士约阿希姆·布维在莱布尼茨发展的二进制算术和邵雍的《伏羲六十三卦方微》(或FX64)之间建立了类比,根据伏羲/仙天顺序组织六十四卦。因此,这个图可以被认为是二元图。有学者认为,由于布维和莱布尼茨对这两种体系的建构不同,以及他们所使用的“错误”解读方向与中国所使用的方向相反,这一图表并非二元。然而,通过叠加莱布尼茨的二进制表和用来构造图的推导表,本文表明图是二进制的,因为它是由两个元素组成的,二进制系统可以使用0和1以外的其他符号。由于这两个系统的目的不同,在构造它们时使用了相反的方法——FX64图的除法和莱布尼茨二元图的乘法——允许它们从一个方向或相反的方向读取。这并不影响它们都是二进制的事实,因为它导致相同的形式和结构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Is the Fuxi liushisi gua fangwei () diagram attributed to Shao Yong binary? Clarifying a consequence of its analogy with the binary arithmetic of Leibniz.

The Jesuit Joachim Bouvet established an analogy between the binary arithmetic developed by Leibniz and the diagram Fuxi liushisi gua fangwei (or FX64), attributed to Shao Yong, which organizes the sixty-four hexagrams according to the Fuxi/Xiantian order. Consequently, this diagram could be considered as binary. Some scholars argue that the diagram is not binary because of the different construction of the two systems and the "wrong" reading direction used by Bouvet and Leibniz-opposite to the one used in China. Nevertheless, by a superimposition of Leibniz's binary table and of the derivation table used to construct the diagram, this article shows that the diagram is binary, since it is constituted of two elements and the binary system can use other symbols than 0 and 1. The reverse methodology used in constructing the two systems because of their different purpose-division for the FX64 diagram and multiplication for Leibniz's dyad-allows their reading from either one direction or the reverse. This does not affect the fact that they are both binary, since it leads to the same form and structure.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Science in Context
Science in Context 综合性期刊-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Science in Context is an international journal edited at The Cohn Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Ideas, Tel Aviv University, with the support of the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute. It is devoted to the study of the sciences from the points of view of comparative epistemology and historical sociology of scientific knowledge. The journal is committed to an interdisciplinary approach to the study of science and its cultural development - it does not segregate considerations drawn from history, philosophy and sociology. Controversies within scientific knowledge and debates about methodology are presented in their contexts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信