本文對後現代學者傅瑞（Bernard Faure）與馬克瑞（John R. McRae）的兩篇論文進行探討：傅瑞的“Bodhidharma as Textual and Religious Paradigm”（1986），與馬克瑞的〈審視傳承－陳述禪宗的另一種方式〉（2000）。研究結果顯示：這兩篇論文有兩種主要的謬誤：(1)資料的錯誤解讀與援用、或概念混淆。(2)後現代框架導致的「稻草人謬誤」和「語用謬誤」。此外，若將這兩篇論文做為研究案例，則可發現：透過邏輯論證的編碼與整理，應有助於改善當代禪宗研究的困境。
This paper studies Bernard Faure’s “Bodhidharma as Textual and Religious Paradigm” (1986) and John R. McRae’s “Looking at Lineage: A Different Way of Presenting Chan Buddhism” (2000). In addition to wrong understanding/use of textual, and the confusion of concepts, there are both fallacies of “straw man” and pragmatics based on the post-modern conceptual/linguistic framework. Moreover, from a broader perspective, we can find that the logical argument research and proposition coding would be useful to improve the problems solving of contemporary Zen studies.
