薩特 Jean-Paul Sartre:
自我的超越性 — 一種現象學描述初探
The Transcendence of the Ego - A sketch for a phenomenological description

大多數哲學家認為“自我”是“意識”的“居士”。還有一些哲學家把“自我”在“存在”內部的形式在場確認為統一的空洞原則。另一些 — 多為心理學家 — 則想在我們心理生活的每一時刻把“自我”的物質在場發現為慾望和行為的中心。在此，我要指出“自我”既不是形式地、也非物質地存在於“意識”之中：它在世界中，是外在的；它是世界的一種存在，就像他人的“自我”一樣。 p.10

For most philosophers, the Ego is an ‘inhabitant’ of consciousness. Some of them state that it is formally present at the heart of ‘Erlebnisse’, as an empty principle of unification. Others—psychologists, for the most part—claim they can discover its material presence, as a centre of desires and acts, in every moment of our psychical life. I should like to show here that the Ego is neither formally nor materially in consciousness: it is outside, in the world; it is a being in the world, like the Ego of another. p.1


1.“我”（Je）是一個存在者。這個存在者的存在類型是具體的，無疑“我”的存在類型與數學、意義或時一空的存在類型迥然相異，但這種存在類型卻是真實的。它表現為超越物。
2.“我”投身特種類的直觀之中，直觀總是以不均等的方式在被反思的“意識”後面把握“我”。
3.“我”若沒有反思行為發生，就永遠不會顯現出來。在那種情況下，“意識”的複雜結構如下：有一種沒有“我”的反思的未被反思的行為，而這個“我”向著一種未被反思的“意識”。未被反思的“意識”變成為反思“意識”的對象，然而卻不停止肯定它自己的對象（一把椅子，一個數學的真理，等等）。同時，一個新的對象出現，這是肯定反思“意識”的機會，而且它因此既不與未被反思的“意識”在同一水平之上（因為未被反思的“意識”是不需要反思“意識”以求存在的絕對），也不與未被反思的對象（椅子等）在同一水平上。
4. 超越的“我”應該受制於現象學還原。“我思”肯定的太多。偽 “我思”的確實內容並不是“我意識”到這把椅子”，而是“有對這把椅子的“意識””。這樣的內容對構建現象學研究的無限而又絕對的領域是足夠的了。 p.20


1 The I is an existent. It has a type of concrete existence, doubtless different from that of mathematical truths, meanings, or spatio-temporal beings, but just as real. It gives itself as transcendent.
2 The I yields itself to a special kind of intuition which grasps it behind reflected consciousness, in a way that is always inadequate.
3 The I only ever appears on the occasion of a reflective act. In this case, the complex structure of consciousness is as follows: there is an unreflected act of reflection without I which is aimed at a reflected consciousness. This reflected consciousness becomes the object of the reflecting consciousness, without, however, ceasing to affirm its own object (a chair, a mathematical truth, etc). At the same time a new object appears which is the occasion for an affirmation of the reflective consciousness and is in consequence neither on the same level as unreflected consciousness (because the latter is an absolute that has no need of reflective consciousness in order to exist), nor on the same level as the object of the unreflected consciousness (chair, etc.). This transcendent object of the reflective act is the I.
4 The transcendent I must fall under the phenomenological reduction. The Cogito affirms too much. The sure and certain content of the pseudo-‘cogito’ is not ‘I am conscious of this chair’, but ‘there is consciousness of this chair’. This content is sufficient to constitute an infinite and absolute field for the investigations of phenomenology. p.27


這樣，對“世界內部”的“意識”的純心理學考察使我們得到與現象學研究同樣的結論：“我”（Moi）不應隱藏在這些未被反思的狀態的後面。“我”（Moi）只是作為反思意向的對象的相關物與反思行為一起顯現的。我們開始看見“我”（Je）和“我”（Moi）合二為一了。我試圖指出這個自我（Je和Moi只是自我的兩面）構成我們的被反思“意識”的無限系列的理想（意向對象）而間接的統一。
“我”（Je），就是作為行動統一的自我。“我”（Moi），則是作為狀態和性質統一的自我。為避免說我們在同一實在的這兩種狀態之間確立的區分是語法性的，我們說它只是功能性的。 p.23


Thus the purely psychological examination of ‘inner-worldly’ consciousness leads us to the same conclusions as our phenomenological study: the I must not be sought in unreflected states of consciousness nor behind them. The me appears only with the reflective act, as the noematic correlative45 of a reflective intention. We are starting to glimpse how the I and the me are in fact one. We are going to try and show that this Ego, of which I and me are merely two faces, constitutes the ideal (noematic) and indirect unity of the infinite series of our reflected consciousnesses.
The I is the Ego as the unity of its actions. The me is the Ego as the unity of states and qualities. The distinction drawn between these two aspects of a single reality strikes me as simply functional, not to say grammatical. p.30

二、自我的構成
自我並不直接成為被反思“意識”的統一。這些“意識”之間存在著一種內在的統一，這是自我構建成為自身統一"的“意識”之流 — 也是超越的統一：各種狀態，各種行動。自我是 — 非強制意義上的 — 性質的狀態和行動的統一。自我是各種超越的單位的統一，而且這種統一超越自身。這就像未被反思立場的對象 一 那樣成為綜合統一的超越的極(pole)。只不過這個極只在反思的世界中顯現。我們將依次考察狀態、行動和性質的構成以及作為這些超越的極的“我”(Moi)的顯現。 p.24


THE CONSTITUTION OF THE EGO
The Ego is not directly the unity of reflected consciousnesses. There exists an immanent unity of these consciousnesses, namely the stream of consciousness constituting itself as the unity of itself-and a transcendent unity: states and actions. The Ego is the unity of states and actions only optionally of qualities. It is the unity of transcendent unities, and itself transcendent. It is a transcendent pole of synthetic unity, like the object-pole of the unreflected attitude. But this pole appears only in the world of reflection. I am going to examine successively the constitution of states, actions and qualities, and the way the me appears as the pole of these transcendences. P.30



【文本來源： 自我的超越性：一种现象学描述初探/（法）萨特 （Sartre, J.P.） 著；杜小真译.一北京：商务印书馆，2010
Jean-Paul Sartre The Transcendence of the Ego A sketch for a phenomenological description, 1988】