Jana Rošker

The article examines conceptions of ecological humanism that approach the world as an integrated whole, drawing on prevailing strands of Chinese intellectual traditions in which human life is understood as inseparable from the dynamic patterns of the natural world. The Zhuangzi offers valuable resources for contemporary efforts to develop a more relational and integrative ecological philosophy that also accommodates free subjectivity. These starting points illuminate how Zhuangzi’s philosophical thought is connected to a distinct form of Chinese humanism and to discourses that conceive the human—nature relationship as holistic, but not irreductively fused. The article points to the possibility of an alternative worldview that can help us, in our limited time and space, find the possibility of living some kind of sustainable yet here-and-now moment.

This paper aims to provide a comparative analysis of the philosophies of Li Zehou and Modern New Confucianism in terms of their perspectives on the history and modernity of China. Li Zehou’s philosophy is widely recognized for its significant contribution to contemporary global philosophy and ethics. However, his ideas also reveal some unique characteristics of his Chinese modernization theory that are not very well known in the Western world. Similarly, the philosophy of Modern New Confucianism cannot be overlooked when discussing the Sinophone philosophy of the latter half of the 20th century. By comparing the theories and approaches of these two prominent Chinese discourses, this paper seeks to identify the similarities and differences between their respective perspectives on the history and modernity of China. This comparative analysis will shed light on the distinctive features of these two important Chinese philosophical systems and offer insights into the development of Chinese thought in the contemporary global context.

This article offers a critical analysis of Li Chenyang’s Reshaping Confucianism: A Progressive Inquiry, situating it within the broader discourse of progressive Confucianism. It explores how Li reinterprets classical Confucian concepts to address contemporary social, ethical, and political challenges through both historical and philosophical methodologies. The essay highlights Li Chenyang’s principle of “progressive humanity,” which integrates traditional moral insights with modern values. It further examines Li’s intercultural and comparative strategies, exposing his dynamic reading of harmony (he 和) and gender equity through Confucian ethics. The author also engages with tensions between sentiment-based ethics and rational autonomy, especially in relation to feminist care ethics, drawing on Li Zehou’s 李澤厚 critiques. The analysis underscores the relevance of progressive Confucianism in shaping a globally inclusive ethical discourse and emphasizes its potential as a critical framework for addressing modern human and societal development.

Li Zehou’s claim that “harmony is higher than justice” (和諧高於正義) has aroused much discussion. This paper examines Li’s claim, treating it as a critique of liberal individualism, and explores some difficulties with his argument. In particular, following traditional Confucian thought, certain emotions are attached to specific relationships, creating relatively fixed patterns of emotional response. This suggests problems of oppression and anachronism. Seeking to avoid these difficulties, the paper explores how Li’s notion of harmony might be further developed by bringing together two prominent themes in Li’s work. These are guanxi or relational attachment, which Li elevates to the level of guiding doctrine or “ism” (guanxi-zhuyi 關係主義), and aesthetic value and experience. Placing guanxi networks at the center of practical reason can promote the generation of aesthetic goods in everyday social interaction, and the steady daily accumulation of such goods constitutes a plausible conception of the good life. This honors Li’s interest in guanxi or relationality, and offers another way to substantiate the ideal of harmony, one which can be placed alongside individualism and its requisite justice.

In this book, Jana S. Ros̆ker offers the first comprehensive overview and exegesis of the work of Li Zehou, who is one of the most significant and influential Chinese philosophers of our time. Ros̆ker shows us how Li's complex system of thought seeks to revive various Chinese traditions, and at the same time attempts to harmonize or reconcile this cultural heritage with the demands of the dominant economic, political, and axiological structures of our globalized world. Variously characterized as 'neo-traditional,' 'neo-Kantian,' 'post-Marxist,' 'Marxist-Confucian,' 'pragmatist,' 'instrumentalist,' 'romantic,' and more, Li's work was central to the period known as the Chinese Enlightenment in the 1980s and has helped modify and transform antiquated patterns of Chinese intellectual discourse. He is one of the rare Chinese thinkers whose work has had not only had a deep and lasting impact on Chinese intellectuals, but has acquired a broad readership outside of China as well. Seen from a broader intercultural perspective, Li's unique and imaginative approach to a wide range of basic theoretical problems has created new styles of intellectual investigation, while reminding us of our belonging to a common humanity, regardless of differences in our individual cultures, languages, preferences, and traditions.

Our understanding of time, including the future, is grounded in a universal perception shared across cultures. However, the ways in which this universal perception is comprehended differ significantly, shaped by the linguistic structures of various languages and the broader culturally conditioned frameworks of reference they are part of. These differences in comprehension give rise to diverse models of the future, offering unique insights into alternative perspectives on the metaphysics of time and its relation to the philosophy of action. This paper explores these alternative perspectives through a comparative analysis of the Later Mohist view from ancient Chinese thought and St Augustine’s introspective framework, influential in Western philosophy. By employing the method of transcultural comparative sublation, the study uncovers the strengths and limitations of each perspective, showing how diverse approaches to time deepen our understanding of the future as both a realm of possibility and a structural feature of reality. This dialogue encourages critical reflection on human agency, ethics, and the role of time in shaping existence, potentially revealing new perspectives on their interconnections and implications.

We may describe Li Zehou and Henry Rosemont as examples of philosophers whose not just “compare.” Yet, there is a specific sense in which Li ‘s texts may still appear as “Chinese philosophy” and Rosemont’s as “American.” This causes difficulties which Jana Rošker’s paper meditates on. The thinkers discussed in this volume might be “beyond comparison,” but distinctive cultural elements remain. Many “comparative” interpretations of Li Zehou, Rošker argues, are methodologically Western, but are still informed by traditional Chinese ideas. Specifically, she describes how Li Zehou interacts with Kant. Li’s work as a “process of transforming the empirical into the transcendental can be seen as a kind of synthesis of empiricism and rationalism.” This is, of course, problematic. Rošker summarizes: “Kant’s system is completely incompatible with Li Zehou’s philosophy.” However, the latter still engages productively with the former through what Rošker calls the process of “the sublation of philosophy.” If we respect differences and understand comparisons in this way, we better understand both Li’s thought and comparative philosophy.

In this paper, I will elucidate the basic structure of the correlative and complementary relationship between dao and qi in the Yijing. This relationship not only causes misinterpretations of the term “metaphysics” in the Sinophone world, but also has important—and very topical—implications for contemporary interpretations of the philosophical paradigms of technology in Chinese culture. In environmental studies, technology (including the basic human attitude toward it) is pivotal. In this article, I will focus on questions concerning cosmotechnology in China. In this context, I present a theory by the Hong Kong scholar Yuk Hui whose book on “Chinese cosmotechnics” has been immensely influential in Western academia working on philosophy of technology. In the conclusion, I will show how and why the structure of the relation between dao and qi is different from the relation between technê and arête in the ancient Greek philosophy, and why it can be seen as a different kind of an ecological standpoint.

_Deepens our understanding of this contemporary Chinese thinker's philosophy and its significance._ Li Zehou (1930–2021) was one of China's most prominent contemporary philosophers, transforming Confucian philosophy into a resource for positive change. From a critical rereading of the _Analects_ to a formulation of his own aesthetic theory, Li reinterpreted the tradition from earliest times down to the present day. In this effort, he was inspired by Marx and Kant but was neither a Marxist nor a Kantian. Nor was he a Confucian. He was, and remains, an original: the philosopher Li Zehou. In this volume, Chinese, European, and US scholars explore Li's contributions to Chinese philosophy and culture, deepening our understanding of his philosophy and its significance while also celebrating the intellectual diversity and richness of Chinese philosophical thought. In a passionate and dedicated endeavor to ensure that Li's philosophy endures and continues to inspire scholars, particularly the younger generation of academics, both in China and around the world, the volume aims to serve as a catalyst for ongoing scholarship and discourse on the work of the philosopher Li Zehou.

Teaching Chinese philosophy requires moving beyond the perception of Confucianism as a singular ideological entity. It should instead direct students to understand its dual aspects: philosophical and political. Only through a profound internalization of these distinctions can we accurately assess what is often hastily labeled by many sociologists as a “meta-Confucian pattern”—a term that frequently overlooks the historical complexities underlying Confucian political and philosophical currents. This article demonstrates how the nuanced divide between political and philosophical Confucianism unveils fresh perspectives on both the ancient and contemporary Chinese context. Employing the transcultural sublation dialectic, it provides a more informed and integrative approach to these two facets of Confucianism. By sublating these two streams, the study proposes a re-evaluation of the traditional Chinese dichotomy between the transcendental and empirical self (neisheng waiwang), thereby encouraging a more culturally sensitive engagement with Chinese historical heritage, and contributing to the establishment of a global philosophical dialogue.

I will first describe the core principles that underpin the traditional Chinese perspective on temporality and future, focusing particularly on the Later Moist view. Then I will introduce the concept of time as developed by St. Augustine, whose work is central to Western philosophy because of its introspective examination of time as an inner, psychological experience, distinct from the more empirical approaches of his predecessors. This foundation in Augustine’s thought provides a critical contrast to the Moist view and enriches our exploration of the subjective and objective dimensions of time. Through a comparative analysis of these two perspectives and the application of the method of transcultural comparative sublation, I aim to illuminate how different approaches to understanding future can shape human perceptions of realities.

This essay performs a detailed contrastive analysis of two differing concepts of anxiety: Heidegger’s Angst and Xu Fuguan’s youhuan yishi, employing the method of transcultural philosophical sublation. This dialectical approach, deeply rooted in the traditional Chinese philosophy of mutual complementarity between opposing ideas, thoughtfully integrates Heidegger’s notion of Sorge (care) with the Confucian principle of ren (humaneness) as complementary rather than contradictory elements. This conceptual framework highlights the critical importance of balancing personal authenticity with social responsibility, offering a unified and nuanced perspective on both individual and collective ethics, and proposes innovative strategies to effectively address the complexities of modern life.