requestId:68499ac301cfd6.50497433.
Break, or myth? ——The cross-civilization assessment and criticism structure of Confucianism’s “inner beyond words”
Author: Han Zhenhua (Doctor of Literature, Associate Professor of the Chinese Academy of Chinese Language and Literature in Beijing Foreign Languages)
Source: “Restoration News. Social Science Edition”, 2019 Issue 2
Time: Confucius was in the 2570s and was Bingxu on March 15th, Jihai
Jesus April 19, 2019
Abstract
Confucianism “inner transcendence” is the intercivilization theory emphasis of modern neo-Confucianism in the field of comparison between China and the West. However, since the last century, it has been questioned that it has changed its practical subject and analyzing philosophy. By analyzing the perverse nature of “immanencinvested pipelinee(inside)”” and “transcendence(outside)” on the academic level, students such as Anlezhe, Rong Yaoming, and Zheng Jiaqi realized the uncertainty of “inside of the price pttin beyond” on the basis of their academic level. Compared to “extra-sex”, they emphasize the “intrinsic nature” of Confucianism, believing that “extra-sex” words “no vitality” are gone. Although the concepts of “all things” and “benevolence” actually refer to as “inner beyond words” are real existences in the concepts of traditional Confucianism, the “modernity” encounters (knowledge type) common to contemporary doubters make them unable to combine the gap between “existence” and “value”, and tend to solve the usefulness of “inner beyond words”. Under the condition that “inner beyond words” has been problematic, the idea of ”critical philosophy” is to fully explore and uncover the potential of civilized criticism of “inner superior words” and to strengthen the Internet. This is an ability path for breaking the single religious/spiritual understanding of forms and realizing the emphasis on philosophy. Confucianism “inner beyond words” is a philosophical topic of civilization “mixed blood”. This mark shows that contemporary remarks of Chinese classical philosophy/ethics including Confucianism have become a “inter-civilization” business. In the classical interpretation process, how to move from a critical modern emphasis to a truly “fertile” cross-civilization standpoint from a critical modern emphasis, beyond the form of absolute contrast and research, and then to make the comparison and research of Chinese and foreign civilizations no longer stay in a rigid and rigid, static analysis that prevents “conception” and takes their own positions, still needs to be carefully considered.
1. Guidance: Theoretical Counterattacks and Cross-Civilization Problems
Since the Middle Ages, a group of Chinese students have learned the energy characteristics of comprehensive Confucianism and even the entire Chinese civilization by “immanent transcendence”. The emergence of the term “inner beyond” has strong responsiveness. In a different sentence, it starts with Chinese scholars who are circulating and circulating in Chinese and Western civilizations. Facing the impact of Western Chinese concepts, they make theoretical self-reflection, response and response.
To evaluate the “history” of this problem, we must focus on Europe 200 years ago. At the beginning of the 19th century, a large number of Chinese knowledge passed on to Europe by the priests of God, dominated by Jesus, finally promoted the “Cultural Hanxue” to the “Cultural Hanxue” and at the end of 1814, the French Western Academy established the “Chaire de Languesetlittératures Chinoisesettératures Chinoisesettés-Mandchoues”. It is particularly worth noting that the students of the school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-school-scho 1. If it is said that the late Jesus clergyman emerged from the establishment of a standard natural divine theory (or theoretical divine theory, Deism), and discovered a full “natural sensibility” in Confucianism, and then called Confucius the “Chinese philosopher Confucius”; 2. Then, in the early 19th century, the Philosophy Department of European universities no longer built on the universal adaptability of religion (Christianity), but on the general nature of philosophical sensibilityBaobao.com, the result is that Confucius’s learning is no longer “philosophical” for Hegel and others, but only some “kind, experienced, and moral teachings” said by a “real world wise man”. 3 Hegel believed that Confucius’s academic perfection of transcendence and religion was not needed by Chinese people under the “master-master-general regime” of “the chief of the government” of China. Therefore, Chinese religion is only a low-level “natural religion” in Hegel and has not entered the door of “unrestricted religion”. 4Hergel’s above views are definitely not the absolute reverence of the lonely bird, but is actually a representative of the classic European thinking. Therefore, as soon as these views were proposed, they had a wide response in the East, and their impacts continued until tomorrow.
“Inner beyond words” is often tangled with religious problems. Confucianism and Chinese civilization have always been regarded as a secular civilization. For example, Liang Shuming believes that Chinese people are “most indifferent to religion” and are ethical. 5 In the East, Max Veber’s view can be used as a representative. In the book “Confucianism and Taoism” (1916), Viber believes that there is no ethics in Chinese civilization that exceeds the dependence of the world, no tightness between the mission entrusted by God in the world and the body of the world, and no pursuit after deathThe orientation of the earthly zodiac sign does not have the original sin and the roots of evil. In other words, Confucianism and Chinese civilization are secular, and in this regard it is very different from the transcendent tradition of the Oriental Platonic tradition-Christian civilization.
By the 20th century, the views of Hegel, Veber and others received a reactionary response from Chinese scholars. In 1958, the “Declaration on the Responsibility for Chinese Civilization to the World” jointly issued by Tang Junyi, Tang Junyi, Mou Zongsan, Xu Zheng and Zhang Junyi, denounced Hegel’s views. This declaration points out that although Chinese civilization does not have an Oriental institutionalized religion, it does not fail to explain that Chinese civilization only emphasizes ethical morality and lacks transcendent religious energy; in fact, the religious energy exceeded in Chinese civilization is integrated with the internal ethical morality, so Chinese civilization is divided by the “inner beyond” of Eastern religion, but is “both beyond and within”. Later, Mou Zongsan and Tang Junyi retorted this meaning in their works such as “The Characteristics of Chinese Philosophy” (1963), “The Existence of Life and the Realm of Spirit” (1976), “The Nineteen Lectures of Chinese Philosophy” (1983), and “The Discussion of the Round” (1984), thus making “inner beyond words” a classical statement about Confucianism and the characteristics of Chinese civilization in modern neo-Confucianism. In addition to Mou and Tang, the modern neo-Confucianisms of the majority (especially Liang Shuming, Xiong Shili, Liu Shuxian, Du Weiming, and Li Mingxiu) all discussed “inner beyond” and advocated that Zhang Confucianism was divided on the “inner beyond” of the East, but focused on inner beyond. Some historians who are close to Confucianism also hold similar views. For example, in 2014, historian Yu Yingjun published a book called “On the International between Heaven and Man: A Trial of the Source of Modern Thought in China” 6. From a relatively civilized perspective, it proposed that after the axial mind is broken, Chinese civilization and thinking form a direction of “inward transcendence” and seeking the highest state of “unity between the mind and the Tao”. It is not difficult to see that the term “inner-to-out” and “inner-to-out” have the same family similarity.
Coincidentally, the German philosopher Karl Jaspers proposed the “Achsenzeit; the AxialAge” theory in his book “The Origin and Target of History” in 1949, believing that the human world (Greece, Central,
c3814023-ffd1-4461-8994-41d945534fbd.jpg)
8e1aa36a-f12e-4a7b-b5cc-50958b34d477.jpg)
湖南懷化：油菜花開滿地黃
北京：玉蘭花開 春意盎然
四川布拖：年夜山峽谷中正在扶植的通村公路
四川金
尼日利亞拉各斯油氣管道爆炸至多15人逝世亡
法國巴黎處于防疫任務最高階段 凱旋門對外封閉
新冠肺炎疫情下的2020年法國市政選舉
美股暴跌勢態中的華爾街 消息排行榜 
前往頂部 數字報 出色推舉 轉動消息廣州廣東中國文娛安康體育IT財富car 房產美食圖集生涯食安科技教導軍事 特別時代顯本質，急難險重看擔負！廣州荔灣5名抗疫同道前方進黨金羊網 作者：李煥坤 荔宣 2020-03-16 3月16日，廣州市荔灣區疫情防控第一線成長黨員進黨宣誓典禮在荔灣中間病院舉辦。 [
