Chinese Academia. Issue 16 ((Issue 4 of 2003 · Total Issue 16))

Author: Liu Dong
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2004-01-01
Features: If we borrow Isaiah Berlin's famous metaphor, perhaps our editorial work resembles the work of a fox. That is to say, for any specific academic topic, no matter how much one has learned, one must always be uncertain and think left and right, always suspecting that one still knows too little, and always doubting that better research might still emerge. However, when it comes to adhering to a "cross-cultural" perspective, everyone would rather cling to it like a hedgehog. Because we are convinced that the true path to salvation, just like this academic field itself, must arise from the long process of cultural interaction. For this reason, the introduction in this issue begins with the review section, as it will take the form of a special feature to commemorate the late comparative philosopher David L. Hall, who was genuinely committed to Sino-Western interaction and died young.
Of course, the best way to commemorate a philosopher is to engage in intellectual debate with him as if he were alive, rather than resorting to conventional silence and excessive praise. In one article, Richard Rorty hopes, through a careful discussion of this thinker's ideas, to express his respect and remembrance for the late colleague. He also aims to clarify the similarities and differences between their viewpoints, thereby elaborating on the "limitedism" stance of his own new pragmatism. The author also agrees that Romanticism indeed challenged the grand and solemn notion of universalism; however, he feels that this trend still relies too much on the Platonic line of thought, thus still evading the confirmation of human finitude and failing to provide a reasonable restraint on the speculative impulse of "ontology-theology" in line with the standards of wisdom.
In another article, Nan Leshan traces the seven works of David L. Hall in chronological order, thereby outlining his lifelong inner pursuit and attempting to analyze the cracks and irony in his journey. Based on the cultural philosophy as a speculative system derived from Whitehead, and considering the multiplicity of great fields such as religion, science, morality, and art, Hall followed a specific path toward pluralism in cultural possibilities. Later, with a fierce critique of contemporary American society, he collaborated fruitfully with (A. C. Yu), helping to establish broad comparability between Chinese and Western traditions. However, in Nan Leshan's view, this method of pairing cultures in stark contrast may carry too strong the Aristotelian binary categories; moreover, the aesthetic order of China, as represented by him, is so value-preferential that its ultimate starting point shifts from cultural philosophy to moral philosophy.
In another article, (A. C. Yu) reflects on the source of creativity to reminisce about his innovative collaboration with David L. Hall. Unlike the "ex nihilo" model attributed to deities in Western mainstream thought, Confucian philosophy in China and American pragmatism both hold that the only creative source lies in the close cooperation between humans and the world. This pluralistic philosophy is the true non-determinism, it gives true meaning to human individuality, and it recognizes the process of change as real and intrinsic.
Finally, the author addresses David L. Hall, with whom he had "co-created," with deep affection—"The 'addition' born from appreciation truly increases the value of the world in this creative relationship. It is humanity's ability to cooperate that makes everything joyful and effortless, and this is the deeper meaning of 'appreciating the individual.'"
In another article, Joseph K. Grey writes in a dramatic style, layer by layer, describing David L. Hall's lifelong pursuit. Contrary to the general judgment of him as a cultural philosopher, the author argues that Hall still belongs to the philosophical lineage of metaphysicist Whitehead. However, if Whitehead is compared to Plato, then Hall is a Chinese-style Aristotle, because he is always vigilant—against the Western culture's reliance on abstract science and stereotypical morality, which hinders the perception of concrete things. It is this speculative reflection on the construction of systems that gives him the intrinsic motivation to "expect China"; at the same time, at the edge of this new axial age, his universal generalizations, adapted to Chinese sensibility, may promote a re-examination of the fundamental relationship between "one" and "many."
In the essays section, Chen Lai also offers a new interpretation of the philosophy of Chuang-Shan through the discovery of Wang Fuzhi's elaboration in the Annotations to the Zheng Meng. The author proposes that, unlike Zhang Zai, the fundamental characteristic of Wang Fuzhi's cosmology must ultimately be expressed in the significance of good and evil for life and death. Chuang-Shan believed that a person's good and evil would not dissipate with death but would affect their afterlife, hence one must cultivate "preserving the spirit and fulfilling the nature" to ensure a complete return to the great harmony of Taihe Yin Yun after death. This doctrine reveals a sense of responsibility for the universe, believing that humans have a fundamental role in preserving and purifying the original ecological environment of the universe. This theory already belongs to the "ultimate concern" of Chuang-Shan's late systematic philosophy, so its thought cannot be simply reduced to naturalism, nor can it be reduced to a natural dialectics unrelated to humanistic values.
By reviewing the various difficult choices Wang Guangda made amid chaos and transformation, Zhang Guangda hopes to calmly assess the achievements and limitations of this academic pioneer, particularly to appreciate his choices between Western studies and national studies and the depth of his achievements in both. The author praises his extraordinary talent while pointing out: the greatest shortcoming in Wang Guangda's study of Western philosophy lies in his neglect of its historical background since the Reformation. Additionally, although he highly praises Kant, he also fails to fully grasp the enlightenment spirit he advocated to break free from the "immaturity brought upon oneself," hence he also fails to question China's heritage of the Confucian tradition and political tradition by referring to Western "theoretical philosophy." The author further expands his perspective to the contemporary study of Chinese culture, thereby contrasting Wang Guangda's achievements and shortcomings in national studies through a preliminary comparison with Naito Konan and Edouard Chavannes.
Su Yuanxi again focuses on the cultural barriers that enclose human groups. Targeting the practice of Li Yuese and others in placing the "theory of vital energy" acoustics at the center of Chinese science, as well as the approach of Earl Miner and others in sharply distinguishing the "lyric tradition" of Chinese poetry from the "dramatic tradition" of Western poetry, the author points out that the former poetic theory such as "emotions stirring within and taking form in speech" actually originated from the earlier "emotions stirring within and taking form in sound," which in turn stemmed from ancient music that was mixed with foreign Hu music. Therefore, one should pay close attention to the various cracks in ancient texts to discover how the essentialist Chinese-ness was constructed according to the strong cultural logic of early imperial China.
Yi Ruofen traces how the concept of the "Eight Scenes of Xiangxi" in Northern Song literati painting gradually and repeatedly entered the Korean era of Goryeo through the clues of Song Di, Emperor Huizong of Song, King Myeongjong of Goryeo, Li Ning, Li Guangbi, Wang Kexun, Huihong, Li Renlao, and Chen She, thereby attempting to outline the density and complexity of the long-standing cultural exchange between China and Korea through the process of transmission, reception, and expansion of this artistic representation.
Around the axis of "social contract and personal relationships," Shi Yuankang reiterates the basic assumptions of liberalism in modern social relations, as well as the closely related specific philosophical anthropology. The author emphasizes that not only is individualism true if liberalism is true, but the reverse is also true: if liberalism is true, then individualism is also true. This means that, from the perspective of liberalism, a society based on contracts can only be an individualistic society, because contracts themselves cannot change human goals.
Following the publication of Huang Yong's related paper in the fifteenth issue, Xu Dongxing again raises objections to the principle of political neutrality in Political Liberalism. The author points out that the limitation of the universality of liberalism's justice concept, which Rawls made to accommodate pluralism, has not been fully rationally justified. Not only can political philosophy not escape its commitment to certain metaphysical assumptions about human nature, but even Rawls's own "political" liberalism has not fundamentally escaped such commitments. Therefore, while abandoning and coordinating the views of Justice, the author also attempts to develop a perfectionist liberalism along the lines of some thoughts of Aristotle.