requestId:684aed7dab3b03.37124976.
Does it take to “rely” to study Eastern philosophy when writing Chinese philosophy history? ——A view of Chinese Philosophy History that also evaluates friends
Author: Yu Xuanmeng
Source: “Southern Academic Art” No. 3, 2017
Time: Confucius was in the 2568th year of Dingyou on the early November of the Wuzi
Jesus December 27, 2017
[Abstract] Since 1919, Cai Yuanpei proposed to write the history of modern Chinese philosophy that “can’t be as good as not to rely on Westerners. After href=”https://twsharestory.com/”>Taiwan Baozhuang NetworkPhilosophy History”, the writing of Chinese philosophy history has not left the way to “rely on” the Eastern philosophy. Rongyoulan is the philosopher who has put the most effort into the construction of Chinese philosophical history and has written the most. His mission clearly reflects this kind of dependence. In fact, this is also the process of Chinese students’ understanding of Oriental Philosophy from pure to deeper. In the 30th century, when Rong Youlan wrote the two-volume “History of Chinese Philosophy”, he still could not integrate the concept of Oriental Philosophy. His reliance began with the classification of Oriental Philosophy, but he did not implement the history of Chinese Philosophy in actual writing, nor could he be able to attend the meeting. In the first six volumes of “New Editing of the History of Chinese Philosophy”, he concluded based on Hegel that philosophy is a “reflection of human energy” and a “theoretical thinking” achieved by human consciousness through reflection. This brings to what he calls “the real philosophical problem of ancient and modern times, China and abroad” – “wide and special”. He tried to use this to draw the beginning of Chinese Philosophy history. In the seventh book, he accepted the term philosophy as a “conceptual game” and studied Jin Yuelin’s “The Way” and his own “new theory” on this kind of philosophy. From philosophical classification, to energetic reflection and theoretical thinking, to conceptual travel, the faces of the object that “relying” become clearer and clearer, and what they point to is the “issay” (that is, the so-called “original theory”) that is the focus of Eastern philosophy. “Yes” is a philosophical theory system composed of pure conceptual logic. The general relationship problem with special problems comes from the “Yes” of Oriental Philosophy. As long as a broad concept of separation from sensible things is a problem. In fact, whether theory can be useful in actual life. The most basic Chinese traditional philosophy has not formed such a broad concept, and it cannot produce such philosophical problems. The friends of the country took this problem as a standard of philosophical qualifications and put many unrelated thoughts in the history of Chinese philosophy into a basket with widespread and special relationships, so as not to cover up and misinterpret the original intentions of those thoughts. He continued the development of Chinese philosophy in the purpose of “issay”, which was rigid and traditional. The inappropriateness it shows is exactly what it shows is “relying”The way to go is to be unlucky. The modernization of Chinese traditional science requires the establishment of China’s own philosophical history, and “reliance” may be a stage that cannot be avoided in this project. You can wait. After this stage, the release of the true Chinese philosophy history must be a new information on the world philosophy concept.
[Keyword]Fengyoulan History of Chinese Philosophy “Rely on” Broad and special relationships
[Author Introduction]Yu Xuanmeng, who obtained a Philosophy Master’s degree in the Department of Philosophy in the Dalian Department of Science in 1982, and later served in the Shanghai Institute of Social Sciences; now he is a researcher at the Institute of Philosophy of Shanghai Institute of Social Sciences , an important part of the research on Oriental Philosophy, has representative works include “Modern Oriental beyond thinking – Heidegger’s Philosophy” and “Intrinsic Discussion”, and has translated “Instrumental Human Science” ([France] Levi-Steros), and has written “Exploring the Roots and Sources – A New Round of Comparative Discussions on Chinese and Western Philosophy” (co-edited with He Xirong).
Introduction
Since the transformation of civilized movement, there is a kind of awareness in the Chinese philosophical world that has become mainstream, which is to write the history of Chinese philosophy that should “rely on” Eastern philosophy. This statement is finally seen in the “Preface” written by Cai Yuanpei (1868-1940) for Hu Yangsheng (1891-1962) in 1919: “We will compile the history of modern Chinese philosophy today… The works of predecessors have no place to rely on, and they cannot rely on the history of philosophical people.” [1] Influenced by this, the various Chinese philosophical history works followed did not have the word “restraint”, but they were not connected. The difference was only the profound differences in Eastern philosophy that they understood. In order to change this academic environment, in recent years, some students have repeatedly proposed “rewriting Chinese philosophy”. However, there is a Taiwan Nursing Network in “Rewrite”, which means you should first understand: how did the Chinese philosophical historian rely on Oriental Philosophy? Can the results of relying on the side win? Therefore, here we try to take the works of philosopher Rong Youlan (1895-1990) as an example for the assessment.
The reason why I chose Youyoulan is that he is the person who puts the most effort into the construction of Chinese philosophical history. In his more than 60 years of academic life, he has written four “History of Chinese Philosophy”, and the two important ones are “History of Chinese Philosophy” [2] and “New Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy” (full of seven books, the following is briefly called “New Encyclopedia”). [3] Among them, Taiwan Nursing Network, the first and second books of “New Edit” were published in 1964, and the final version was revised in 1980, the third to sixth books were published in 1980, and the seventh books were published in 20th Century 80, and the seventh CenturyThe book was completed in June 1990, at the age of 95. The 1999 version of Guangdong National Library Book Club was renamed as “History of Modern Philosophy in China”. Because the writing of “New Edit” is very long and has changed by the world, his thinking has also changed, especially with the continuous depth of understanding of Eastern Philosophy, the faces reflected in his Chinese Philosophy history are also different.
1 The “reliance” of the late philosophical classification
The first chapter of “The History of Chinese Philosophy” published in 1931 was published. It said: “Philosophy is a Western noun. Now, if you want to talk about the history of Chinese Philosophy, one of its important tasks is to choose among the various academic questions in Chinese history, those who can be named by Western philosophy can be described and described.” So, what is Eastern philosophy? He felt that this problem was difficult to explain, because the definition of philosophy was not different, so he listed the content of philosophy, so his definition “had no need to be otherwise.”
Being started from the philosophy branch project is the last “reliance” of the Youth League. However, judging from the content of Oriental Philosophy he listed, this problem is still difficult to understand. Because, the classification of philosophy (content) in the history of Eastern Philosophy is not static. He said that ancient Greeks divided philosophy into three major departments: Physics, Ethics, and Logic, which is the theory of the universe, life theory, and knowledge theory as mentioned by the ancients. These three parts can be divided into two parts: the universe theory includes both “original theory” (Ontology, the element of “existence”) and the meaningful universe theory (the study of the occurrence and history of the world, and its ancestors); life theory can be divided into the study of what humans are in terms of mind, and what humans should be in terms of ethics and political philosophy; knowledge theory can be divided into the study of knowledge of the nature of knowledge and the study of (subtitular) theory of knowledge. [4]
In fact, this classification as stated by Youyoulan is not as good as a decisive argument. When talking about C. Wolff (1679-1754), the German philosopher G. W. F. Hegel (1770-1831) said: “In addition, he also made a systematic and appropriate classification for philosophy, which was considered a kind of authority by the master until modern times.” [5] This category of “authority” divides philosophy into two major departm
發佈留言