近年來對動物權的探討，隨著自然環境的變遷與生命教育的興起，而有了更多深刻的研究，其主要的探討內容聚焦於兩個問題：一是動物是否具有道德性格？即動物是否能理性思考？動物能否行使道德判斷？二是人類應該如何對待動物？即人類的道德判斷中是否應將動物納入考量？人類對動物是否負有道德上的責任？本文嘗試從老子的「域中四大」與海德格爾「四方域」的觀點，希望能跳脫於西方各家倫理派別之外，為動物權的論爭找尋一個可供參考的另類思維。亦即，老子認為「域中有四大：道大、天大、地大、人亦大。」（《老子》二十五章），主張「人法地，地法天，天法道，道法自然。」（《老子》二十五章），而海德格爾提出天、地、神、人（終有一死者）四方均是在拋棄自身以反映其他三者的存在而能開顯自身的「四方域」，是為一環化的「映射遊戲」的圓舞。由此二者而知，透過棄絕人類或動物的主體意識，而了解到動物的生存權並非人類所給予或能探討，從而進入萬物本有的境界。 The Research of Animal Right is important about natural environment and life education. There are two major issues: 1. Does animal have moral behavior? Or, Can animal thinking about rationality? 2. How should human to do with animal? Or, Are animals a moral responsibility to human? Unfortunately we have no conclusion or common view from the history of animal right. Therefore, This research attempt to confer animal right from Laozi’s ‘Yuh-Chung-Syh-Dah’ and Heidegger’s ‘das Gevier’. ‘Yuh-Chung-Syh-Dah’ is a view in chapter 25 of “Tao Te Ching” (“Laozi”). The mean is ‘in the universe there are four that are great’. Therefore the Tao is great; Heaven is great; Earth is great; and the (sage) king is also great. Another, Heidegger’s ‘das Gevier’ believes that sky, earth, god, and man are closely linked. So, Human takes his law from the Earth; the Earth takes its law from Heaven; Heaven takes its law from the Tao. The natural law of the Tao is its being what it is. The rest may be deduced by analogy. We understand that we must give up subjective thought. Animal right is a inter-subjective thought for life education.
