requestId:68499ae2b5a474.66373064.
“Increase the strength, sweep the strength, and breach the strength, and see the flaws”
——Academic research and discussion by Wang Chuanshan of Dongfang
Author: Han Zhenhua (Doctor of Literature, Associate Professor of the Chinese Academy of Chinese Language and Literature in Beijing Foreign Studies)
Source: “History of Chinese Philosophy” 2019 Issue 5
Time: Confucius was in the 13th month of Jihai, Jiyou
� Jesus January 7, 2020
Abstract
The Eastern Wang Chuanshan Research and Research Experience has experienced the evolution from historical-political research to philosophy research. The research and research results have generally not been many. However, a fierce debate between Han scholars and Julian on Chuanshan Research and Development attracted widespread attention from both inside and outside the Han academic community. This debate on the differences between Chinese and Western thinking has further advanced to promote the Oriental Chuanshan Research to the theoretical view of “comparative philosophical research”, and some of the views in the debate involve the differentiation of Han scholar thinking and academic standpoint, and the subtleties of many and subtle aspects are particularly worthy of attention from the Han language community. Taking advantage of the idea of ”hiding and exploring it” in Yanchuanshan, it reminds the argument that both parties are hidden by the facts of Han history, which is a response method that the Han Chinese community can adopt.
Keywords:Process; Julian; Morality; Comparative philosophy;
In the history of modern Chinese thinking, Wang Fuzhi was a “combined” character. He had both intellectual and sacred nature and had extensive knowledge and popular knowledge in the four departments of History, History, Zi and Collection. Confucianism, Taoism and Song all had examinations and evaluations. In addition, there were many poems, lyrics, literature, rituals, scholars, and dramas. His forty years of works were never considered as a person. Over the past century, several generations of scholars in the Han Chinese community have reviewed the Chuanshan exhibition from philosophical, history, literature, politics and other dimensions. In line with the vigorous Chuanshan Research and Development in the Han Chinese community, the East also achieved some results. As early as 1938, German Han Chinese scholar Alfred Forke listed a brief introduction to Chuanshan Philosophy in his “Chinese Philosophy History Series”. Afterwards, students such as Arthur W. Hummel, Wm. Theodore de Bary, Chen Rongjie, Joseph R. Levenson, Dun Siyu, Jean François Billeter, John B. Henderson, Chen Weizhong, Liu Binglu, etc. all discussed Chuanshan thought in their own works. As far as the topic is concerned, in 1968, German Han Chinese scholar Ernst-joachim Vierheller published the book “Nationund Elite im Denkenvon Wang Fu-chih”, the first specialist in the East in Chuanshan. In the same year, Han scholar Ian McMorran also completed itHe wrote a doctoral paper in “Wang Fuzhi and His Political Thoughts”; in 1992, the doctoral paper published a book in “The PassionaIntroduction to the Life and Political Thoughts” in Drumbi Hong Kong. In 1976, Russian Han Chinese scholar Vladilen G. Burov published the book “The World View of Wang Chuanshan, a Chinese thinker in the 17th Century”.
If the above specialist shows European and American thinking in Chuanshan politics and historical thinking, then in 1989, Han scholar Alison H. Black published “Man and Nature in the Philosophical Thought of Wang Fu-chih”, and “Processor or Creation: Chinese Literary Thought of Thought of the Thought of the Chinese Literary” published by François Jullien (Procèsou Création: Uneintroduction àlapBaobao.comenséedeslettréschinois) placed Chuanshan at the forefront of the study of Chinese and Western philosophy, and Chuanshan has become a representative of the “Chinese-style” philosophy, thinking and logic. In 2005, Han scholar Jacques Gernet published his book for more than 20 years of studying Wang Fu’s philosophy, “Theory of Things: Essaisuurlaphilosophie de Wang Fuzhi”, a general book about the study of Chuanshan in Europe and the United States, and is a study of Cen Ling. In addition, american Han student Nicholas S. Brasovan completed his doctoral essay “The Philosophy of Wang Fu as an Ecological Humanism” in Hawaii. Based on this, he published the book “Neo-Confucian Ecological Humanism: An Interpretive Humanism with Wang Fuzhi” in 2017, trying to interpret Chuanshan thought from the perspective of modern ecological philosophy. This is one of the few Chuanshan ideas in the English world since the 21st century.
It is particularly worth noting that the research and development of Julian and Julian, who are famous Han scholars, launched a fierce and durable debate, which attracted widespread attention from both inside and outside the Han academic community. This is related to the differences between Chinese and Western thinkingThe way of discussion has further improved the Oriental Chuanshan Research and Development to the “Comparative Philosophical Research”. Some of the views in the debate involve the differentiation of Han scholar’s thinking and academic standpoint, and the subtleties of which are also worthy of attention from scholars in the Han language community.
The article begins with Julian’s works as an important analysis object, explores his research characteristics, and then focuses on the philosophical debate between Jonde and Julian. At the same time, he uses the thought of “hiding and exploring it” (Wang Yan’s “The Great Master’s Action”) to banish the Chuanshan discussion points of Julian and Jonde. IntegrationThe interlocking goal of this article is to use this topic as a way to critically reflect and construct the ability path for comparative philosophical research between China and the West.
1. “Process”: Julian’s positioning of Wang Chuanshan’s philosophy
Julian is a French Han scholar with a relatively philosophical style. In terms of academic thinking, he was influenced by Xie Henai; although Xie Henai’s book “Theory of Things” was released later, it was not difficult to understand that Julian had participated in the seminar of Xie Henai’s study of Chuanshan’s works in his early years. In the 1989 book “Song Wei returned home after being cut by a clerk, his relative immediately introduced her a process or creation: A Chinese Literary Thought Introduction” 1, he admitted that “it is far away to study Chuanshan’s works only for several years” (page 14). His research was based on the Chuanshan research course established by Xie He Nai at the French Western Academy from 1978 to 1990. In fact, reading the book “Process or Creation” is difficult to see in many key points about its compatibility with gratitude and patience (especially, their overall goal and theme of “reflecting on Europe from China” are also very similar). However, he had a big difference with Xie and Nai in terms of the argument. In addition to the differences in the style of the text that Zhu’s heavy text citations and Zhu’s heavy text remarks, Julian’s strategy of developing an illustrative text and speaking of the “purification” of “point” (Chuanshan) and “face” (Chinese thinking), also contrasts with Xie and the prudent structure with a sense of history.
Julian was very self-conceived about his own approach: he adopted a “Détour” strategy, that is, based on the “indifférence” between China and Europe, he regarded China as the “other” of civilization in Europe, and by observing China to circumvent Europe’s own cultivation, promote the self-changing of European thinking through a “integration” method to promote the self-changing of European thinking and the expansion of new conditions. In the book “Process or Creation”, Julian importantly refers to Chuanshan’s Yishu’s works (“Book of Changes”, “Book of Changes Insiders”, and “Zhangzi’s “Zhengmeng” Notes”; this point is also similar to Xie and Abide), and the view of “Procès” is “the basic representation of Chinese world view”2 and sets it against “other places, especially human and philosophical forms known in the East” (i.e. “Creation”, Création). Julian equates “process” with “Tao”, thinking that “process is always self-made. It takes itself as a form and is an excellent example. There is no external precaution or external specification: we are far away from the ‘creator’ that all ‘creator’ must be”3. In Julian’s view, the reason why process thinking is completely different from Eastern creative thinking is because:
If we push up in a different structure, I think the principle of opposition should be as follows: According to Wang Fuzhi’s example, through the basic and direct systematic treatment of Chinese tradition,
發佈留言