Chinese Academia (Issue 16)

Author: Liu Dong
Publisher:
Publishing Time: Not available
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 vacillate and ponder left and right, always suspecting that one 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 be like a hedgehog, firmly gripping it, because we have recognized the true path to salvation, just as 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, while also clarifying the similarities and differences between their viewpoints to articulate his own "limited" stance in new pragmatism. The author also agrees that Romanticism indeed challenged the grand and solemn notion of universalism, but feels that this trend still clung too closely to Plato's line of thought, thus still evading the affirmation of human finitude and failing to provide a rational restraint on the speculative impulse of "ontology-theology" that meets the standards of wisdom.
In another article, Nan Leshan traces the seven works of David L. Hall in chronological order, outlining his lifelong inner pursuit and attempting to analyze the fissures and ironies in his journey. Based on a speculative cultural philosophy that develops from Whitehead, considering the multiplicity of great fields such as religion, science, morality, and art, Hall moved along a specific path toward pluralism in cultural possibilities. Later, with a fierce critique of contemporary American society, he collaborated productively with, helping to establish broad comparability between Chinese and Western traditions. However, as Nan Leshan sees it, this method of pairing cultures in stark contrast may carry an overly strong Aristotelian binary categorical color; moreover, the aesthetic order of China, as represented in his writing, is so value-preferential that its ultimate starting point shifts from cultural philosophy to moral philosophy.
In another article, reflects on his creative collaboration with David L. Hall through a meditation on the source of creativity. Unlike the "ex nihilo" model attributed to deities in Western mainstream thought, Confucian philosophy in China and American pragmatism see the sole creative source as 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 considers the process of change to be real and intrinsic. At the end, the author addresses David L. Hall, with whom he had "co-created," with deep affection—"The 'addition' born of appreciation truly increases the value of the world in this relationship of creation. It is humanity's ability to cooperate that makes all things joyful in this way, and this is the deeper meaning of 'appreciating the individual.'"
In another article, Joseph Grinter describes David L. Hall's lifelong pursuit in a dramatic style, layer by layer. Contrary to the general judgment of viewing 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, as 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 system construction that gives him the inner drive 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 Chuanshan through the invention of Wang Fuzhi's development in the Annotations to Zhengmeng. 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. Chuanshan believed that a person's good and evil would not dissipate with death but would affect their afterlife, hence it was necessary to cultivate "preserving the spirit and fulfilling the nature" to ensure a complete return to the harmony and warmth of the universe 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 doctrine belongs to the "ultimate concern" of Chuanshan's late systematic thought, so his ideas cannot be simply reduced to naturalism, nor to dialectical materialism unrelated to humanistic values.
By reviewing the various difficult choices Wang Guowei made amid chaos and transformation, Zhang Guangda hopes to calmly assess the achievements and limitations of this academic pioneer, especially to appreciate his choices between Western learning and national studies and the depth of his achievements in both. While admiring his extraordinary talent, the author also points out: the greatest shortcoming in Wang Guowei's study of Western philosophy lies in his neglect of its historical background since the Reformation. Additionally, although he highly praised Kant, he failed to grasp the enlightenment spirit he advocated for breaking free from the "immaturity brought upon oneself," hence he also failed to question China's heritage of doctrines and political traditions by Western "theoretical philosophy." The author further expands his perspective to the contemporary study of Chinese culture, thereby contrasting Wang Guowei's achievements and shortcomings in national studies through a preliminary comparison with Naito Konan and Paul Pelliot.
Su Yuanxi again focuses on the cultural barriers that encircle human groups. Against the practice of Li Yuese and others in placing the "theory of vital energy" acoustics at the center of unique Chinese science, as well as the practice of Earl Miner and others in sharply distinguishing China's "lyric tradition" in poetry from the "dramatic tradition" of Western poetry, the author points out that the poetic theory such as "emotions stirring within and taking form in words" actually originated from earlier musical theory such as "emotions stirring within and taking form in sound," and that ancient music was originally mixed with foreign Hu music. Therefore, it is necessary to pay close attention to the various fissures in ancient texts to discover how the essentialist Chinese-ness was constructed according to the strong cultural logic of early imperial systems.
Yi Ruofen traces how the concept of the "Eight Sceneries of Xiangyang" 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 transmission, reception, and expansion process of this artistic representation.
Around the axis of "social contract and personal relationships," Shi Yuankang reiterates the basic assumptions of liberalism in modern social relationships, as well as the closely related specific philosophical anthropology. The author emphasizes that not only is individualism true if the social contract is true, but conversely, if the social contract is true, then individualism is also true. This means that, from the perspective of liberalism, a society based on the social contract can only be an individualistic society, as the contract itself cannot change human goals.
Following the publication of Huang Yong's related paper in the fifteenth issue, Xu Dongzhong again raises objections to the principle of political neutrality in Political Liberalism. The author points out that the limitation on the universal validity of liberalism's justice concept, which Rawls introduced 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 certain ideas of Aristotle.