requestId:68753bd11083f2.93021732.
“Shengsheng” and “name” – “blue” in discussing Chinese philosophy
Author: Chi Dongfeng (Associate Professor of the Chinese Modern Thought Civilization Research Institute and Department of Philosophy)
Source: Author authorized by Confucianism Network, published by the author, published in “Philosophy” Analysis》2022 Issue 6
Abstract: In the process of creating their own philosophical theories, modern Chinese philosophers have always adhered to the characteristics of Chinese philosophy, but they have no preventively used or borrowed the basic framework and main concepts of Eastern philosophy. This will not make people wonder whether they can develop Chinese philosophy from the “blue” of Oriental Philosophy. When the discussion on the “compliance with the law” of Chinese philosophy in the first ten years of the beginning of this century calmly became a practical experience in Chinese philosophy in the past decade, a trend of vocational hope to explore the inherent concepts of traditional Chinese thinking began to emerge. The concept of “spend life” has brought about a more closer grasp of the “blue” of Chinese philosophy by contemporary scholars. However, the important aspect of “successive” philosophy focuses on the problems of ancient and modern times, and the problems of Chinese and Western cultures highlighted by the development of modern “nounciation” are also the main ones. In addition, regardless of the comparison between the two philosophical forms of Chinese and Western styles, the physical proposition of modern Chinese fools on “blue” or the characteristics of Han philosophical thinking of “shape and name coupling”, “successiveness” cannot remove the problem of “name”. “Life” and “name” are not separated from each other. It is the basic form of the “blue foundation” of Chinese philosophy. Starting from the “blue book” can be seen as a way to study Chinese philosophy. However, people should also be clear that the “blue” concept has both serious value and its own limitations.
Keywords: blue book, birth, name, body theory, recognition theory
1. The emergence and boundary statement of the “blue book” problem
In May 2011, at a seminar on the “specific metaphysical learning” by Yang Guoheng Teachers, Professor Yu Xuanmeng raised a very interesting and challenging question. He pointed out that if Mr. Yang admitted that his discussion of “learning belongs to contemporary Chinese philosophy” may be a more meaningful “continuation of Chinese philosophy”, then, “Since it is Chinese philosophy, should its blue book be Chinese philosophy or Eastern philosophy? Mr. Yang Guorong took the blue book of Eastern philosophy, what I said is important The key is that he regards the focus of philosophy as a theory about existence (i.e., Being). “The implication is that if philosophy is divided into Chinese and Western, Chinese philosophy should be born on the “blue” basis in China, and Eastern philosophy should be based on the “blue” principle, otherwise it will be incorrect, so the seedlings will not be imperfect. Therefore, Teacher Yu believed: “I think the teacher of the National High School uses Oriental Traditional Philosophy as the blueprint, and tried to use the resources of Chinese philosophy to supplement and plug leaks in Oriental Philosophy.” [1]
In view of this outstanding comment, Teacher Yang’s High SchoolThe teacher carried out self-responsibility based on conditions and believed that the tradition of philosophy is of course divided into Chinese and Western styles, and philosophical thinking should be directed by oneself. He reminded: “Whether it is Chinese philosophy or Eastern philosophy, the meaning first lies in providing resources for thinking for your own solution to the philosophical problem. In this sense, I have always admired the view that “no learning Chinese and Western” proposed by King Guowei in the early 20th century. In the same sense, I neither resolutely regard Chinese philosophy as “blue”, nor do I regard Eastern philosophy as “blue”. BaobaoI always think that in the context of history that has surpassed the regionality and became world history, it simply uses a certain philosophical tradition to be a philosophical research. The book’ has been removed from the historical meaning. ”[2] It can be seen that Mr. Yang did not admit that what he was engaged in was a simple “Chinese philosophy”, but a “philosophy in China” or a broad “Chinese philosophy”, which seemed to prevent the pursuit of “blue books”.
The two sounds of Yu and Yang are similar, which one is more preferable? The key to the problem is obviously how to understand the “blue book” mentioned here. As the author sees, the philosophical “blue book” comes from Teacher Yu Xuanmeng, and its earliest application is the speeches in the above seminar and the formal essays later. What does “blue book” mean? Yu believed that: “The blue version is a philosophical tradition of a common race. It is inherited in history. For those who grew up in tradition, it cannot be chosen at will. The blue version determines the form of philosophy and is also the basic symbol of different Chinese and Western philosophy.” [3] From this we can see that the “blue version” is used to describe the philosophical history of a common race or civilization. If a philosophical tradition of the civilian race is regarded as a tree, the “blue” is the root of this big tree. In fact, philosophical history is originally accumulated from layers, and the “blue” can be regarded as the foundation of this structure, so the development situation and future trends of that philosophical tradition are determined from a certain level. Judging from the philosophical tradition as a civilized life, Teacher Yu’s statement about “blue books” undoubtedly has the main meaning. As a reference, “Blueben” is comparable to the “ancient” discussion (“prototype” discussion) proposed by japan (Japanese) scholar Masao Maruyama in his study of the “ancient layer” (“prototype” discussion) when japan (Japanese) thinking history. Maru believed that there was an “ancient layer” in the history of japan (Japanese) thinking. It was precisely because of this “ancient layer” that the japan (Japanese) civilization reformed it to “japan (Japanese) style” rather than being completely differentiated in the process of accepting foreign Confucianism, education and Western science. [4] Combined with Maru’s “Ancient Layout”, the “Blue” of Zhongdong Philosophy can understand the “Ancient Layout” of the two philosophysics from a certain level. This “Ancient Layout” determines that in the process of development, whether it encounters the request for reform or suffers from external Philosophy, they can maintain a certain self-nature of their respective philosophy traditions without being changed or swallowed up.
However, the “ancient layer” of thinking history and the “blue” of philosophical history have differentiated. The former needs to implement a serious historical reality, [5] The latter is importantly expressed as a major concept and a related thinking method. In the eyes of Master Yu Xuanmeng, at most, the “blue book” of Oriental Philosophy is very clear, that is, the concept of being (existence). This conclusion is based on the characteristics of the Eastern philosophical form. This assessment has three aspects: “The characteristics of language, the purpose and expression methods of philosophical problems closely related to language, and the branches or doors of philosophy that are generated by the disputes surrounding philosophical problems.” [6] In summary, the focus of Eastern philosophical philosophy is ontIntegration softwareology (original theory), ontology is the theory of being, which is the “blue book” of Oriental philosophy, which is very clear. The problem is, what if you find the “blue book”? There are actually two ways to do it, one is to “speak according to it” and the other is to “speak next”. The former will use “blue books” as a guide to sort out the history of philosophy from the beginning and then use it to ask for writing books of future philosophy; the latter will follow the internal structure of “blue books” to build a new philosophy along the internal structure of “blue books”. From this we can see that “bluebook” does not only need to be used in the emotional sense as a follower of a certain language, but also can be transformed from the content as a creative change of a certain focus.
From this point of view, the views between Yu and Yang are not completely opposite. Although the Yang Guoheng-Cheng’s teacher said that it is “staying a distance” from the trend of “singlely using a certain philosophical tradition as the ‘blue book’ for philosophy research”, this does not seem to mean that his philosophical thinking does not need to rely on any philosophical tradition. In fact, th TC: