History of Chinese Theory of Human Nature

Author: Xu Fuguan
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2002-07-01
Features: Xu Fuguan, a major representative of New Confucianism in China, is renowned for his work A History of Chinese Human Nature Theory, which is often hailed alongside Tang Junyi's On the Origin of Chinese Philosophy (Part on Nature) as the twin pillars of contemporary academic research in this field. This book, dedicated to the discussion of human nature theory, examines personality as its central focus, particularly emphasizing the use of insights derived from the life experiences of ancient philosophers to grasp the intrinsic connections within the complete life of pre-Qin thinkers. As a result, it achieves a concise yet profound understanding. In this book, the author strives to use inductive methods to determine the specific meanings of abstract terms employed by different schools and individuals, providing them with clear definitions. Additionally, it clearly identifies cases where the same abstract term is used by different schools but refers to different scopes, which may help in dispelling unnecessary historical confusion. For example, in the Analects, the terms "ming" (fate) and "tianming" (divine fate) cannot be distinguished through traditional etymology, leading to many irrelevant debates about Confucius's statement "At fifty, I understood the divine fate." However, by using inductive methods to define the distinct meanings of these terms, some clarity can be achieved. This demonstrates that supplementing traditional etymology with inductive methods is an issue that those studying the history of thought should pay attention to. Personality differs from ordinary objects. Ordinary objects are quantifiable, measurable, and divisible. Personality, however, is qualitative, unquantifiable, and indivisible. Human nature theory is a study centered on personality. The abstract terms that appear in human nature theory are not based on reasoning but on the experiences of ancient philosophers in their lives. These can be called "substantive nouns." The characteristic of "substantive nouns" lies in that the content represented by the same term often corresponds to the "hierarchical nature" of personality, thereby possessing its own "hierarchical nature." For instance, in the Analects, the term "ren" (benevolence) varies in its meaning depending on the hierarchical level of the inquirer. This is not a parallel difference but a hierarchical difference. Parallel differences may indeed involve mutual influences between them, but these are often external connections between different things. Hierarchical differences, however, involve an intrinsic connection within a three-dimensional, complete life, whether moving from the bottom up or from the top down. Some Western philosophers, as well as great literary and aesthetic figures, often organize this intrinsic connection into a philosophical system, expressing it through corresponding textual structures, making it easier for readers to follow their reasoning and gain a realistic understanding. Chinese ancient philosophers, on the other hand, often presented their insights as ready-made facts in simple statements, without consciously constructing a theoretical system. Many of these statements were made spontaneously and opportunely, so the intrinsic connection within the three-dimensional, complete life is often obscured by statements that appear in isolation. If we do not collect these scattered statements, use comparative, analytical, and "experiential tracing" methods to discover their intrinsic connections, and construct them accordingly, but instead judge based on fragments and use Western reasoning frameworks as criteria, it is like arbitrarily cutting a cross-section from a three-dimensional, complete life and concluding that the life is merely this way and never that way. The recklessness and fragmentation of such an approach are self-evident. Feng Youlan's A History of Chinese Philosophy claims to represent the orthodox school, but apart from some contributions to the school of names (bànzhě), it fails to grasp even the basics of Confucius, Laozi, Mencius, and Zhuangzi, especially the understanding of Confucius and Mencius. This is not due to his dishonesty but because he never passed this critical juncture. The author's efforts in this regard may not yet yield significant achievements, but through the discovery of intrinsic connections, scattered statements (such as "ren" in the Analects) can be given a role in constructing a complete life, occupying appropriate positions, and serving as mutual corroboration among themselves.