Jana Rošker

In Taiwan, the Confucian revival was always defined by the search for a synthesis between Western and traditional Confucian thought. Taiwanese Modern Confucians aimed to create a system of ideas and values capable of resolving modern, globalised societies’ social and political problems. Mou Zongsan, the best-known member of the second generation of Modern New Confucianism, aimed to revive the Chinese philosophical tradition through a dialogue with Modern European philosophy, especially with the works of Immanuel Kant. His follower Lee Ming-huei is arguably the most renowned expert on Kantian philosophy in the entire Sinitic region. The present paper aims to compare their respective approaches and evaluate them in a broader context of modern Chinese thought. I will first introduce Mou Zongsan’s elaborations on Kant. In the following, I will present the main aspects of Lee Ming-huei’s development of Mou’s theories and provide in later sections a critical assessment of Lee’s philosophical innovation, focusing upon the evaluation of his conceptualisation of immanent transcendence and Confucian deontology

In this article, I aim to explore and demonstrate a specific mode of transcultural philosophical comparison by introducing an innovative theoretical model that I tentatively call the “method of sublation.” Through an illuminating case study centered around L i Zehou 李澤厚, a prominent figure credited with pioneering this method, its profound potential for generating creative innovation comes to light. L i Zehou skillfully combined Kant’s transcendental philosophy and Marx’s historical materialism, creating a unique synthesis that sublated traditional divides. This sublation elevates the empirical, seamlessly integrating it into the transcendental domain. The foundation of this paper lies in providing a concise yet comprehensive overview of the method’s theoretical underpinnings, closely followed by a meticulous dissection of its operational structure. A tangible application of the method is then vividly demonstrated through L i Zehou’s adept process of seamlessly sublating static Kantian _a priori_ forms with the dynamic principles of Marxist social development theory, exemplifying the potency of this transformative approach in the realm of philosophy.

The present article introduces the theory of knowledge of the modern Chinese philosopher Feng Qi (1915–95), who is known as both an explorer of old, and a creator of new systems of comprehension. Although he was a versatile theorist and thinker, he saw epistemology as both the core and mainspring of all his theoretical endeavours. Already before the establishment of the P.R. China, he published his first epistemological thesis under the title On Wisdom and consequently, he never completely abandoned this topic, even though he explored it through the lens of his manifold other interests that were connected with both, traditional Chinese, as well as with Western (including Marxist and neo-Marxist) philosophy. This paper will center its focus on his dialectical exploration of the conversion of knowledge into wisdom, a concept he formulated within the boundaries of his coined “expanded epistemology.” The article expounds on the reasons and methods through which this theory not only addressed epistemological concerns but also entailed ontological and metaphysical dimensions.

This paper addresses the question of whether it is possible to develop theoretical methods to reconcile absolute principles on the one hand and relative tenets on the other. I will look at this question through the lens of classical Chinese logic and, more concretely, through the elaborations of the Chinese logician Hui Shi on this relationship. The examination of this problem proceeds from a general introduction of the basic framework of semantically determined classical Chinese logic, through an illumination of Hui Shi’s specific contributions to the field, to a tentative explanation of his conception of the nature of the relation between absoluteness and relativity, embedded in more general structures of his thought and illustrated by his interpretation of the possibility of unifying identity and difference.

Specific Chinese models for theories of knowledge were premised upon a structurally ordered external reality; since natural (or cosmic) order is organic, it naturally follows the 'flow' of structural patterns and operates in accordance with structural principles that regulate every existence. In this worldview, our mind is also structured in accordance with this all-embracing, but open, organic system. The axioms of our recognition and thought are therefore not arbitrary, but follow this rationally designed structure. The compatibility of both the cosmic and mental structures is the basic precondition that enables humans to perceive and recognize external reality. The present study shows that this paradigm of structural epistemology can already be found in the earliest Chinese theories of knowledge. The introduction of Chinese models and their incorporation into Western discourses fills an important theoretical gap in the Western model of structuralism. This book offers an insight into epistemological systems that arose outside the discourses of the Euro-American tradition. It can thus help us to eliminate and supersede certain culturally conditioned prejudices as to the superiority and omnipresence of Western theoretical models, while demonstrating incontrovertibly that the results of Western discourses are by no means the only force driving theoretical innovation at the present time.

ABSTRACT This paper introduces the philosophical theory of Feng Qi, an important modern Chinese philosopher, who is practically unknown in the West. I argue that his theory of knowledge is not limited to epistemology in the strict and narrow sense, but also refers to ontological and metaphysical issues. The paper shows how Feng Qi integrated ontological and ethical suppositions into the framework of what he called ‘expanded epistemology’. In this way, he offers an innovative solution to several problems, linked to the dichotomous relations of substance and phenomena. The article analyses and interprets his theoretical system in order to highlight that it represents an important contribution to comparative epistemology and its underlying methodology.

Contemporary theoretical streams in sinology and modern Chinese philosophy have devoted increasing attention to investigating and comparing the substantial and methodological assumptions of the so-called 'Eastern' and 'Western' traditions. In spite of the complexity of these problems, the most important methodological condition for arriving at some reasonably valid conclusions will undoubtedly be satisfied if we consciously endeavor to preserve the characteristic structural blocks and observe the specific categorical laws of the cultural contexts being discussed. Whenever sinologists speak of Chinese philosophy, they must inevitably consider the appropriateness of this term. Due to the fact, that the general theory and genuine philosophical aspects of Chinese thought have only rarely been treated by Western scholars, they namely continue to remain quite obscure for the majority of them. Therefore, we must examine the fundamental question (or dilemma) of whether it is possible to speak of traditional Chinese thought as philosophy at all

When dealing with the study of diverse Confucian traditions in eastern Asia, we are often confronted by the issue of the religious dimension of Confucianism and how can it be compared to the Western connotations of the term. Proceeding from the basic question as to how Confucianism sees itself, the paper focuses on the approaches of two representatives of the Modern Confucian intellectual movement, namely Mou Zongsan and Xu Fuguan. In addition, we shall also take into consideration the various contemporary Confucian interpretations of the previously delineated problems, for instance Liu Shu-hsien’s or Chen Lai’s. Based on these discourses, the paper clarifies the reasons for Modern Confucian interpretations, according to which Confucianism is not a religion in the Western sense but a discourse that represents both a practical moral teaching and an abstract philosophy of immanent transcendence.

Xiong was the originator and founder of Modern Confucianism (xin ruxue ) as well as one of the first Chinese philosophers, who developed his own system of thought, which was based upon classical Confucian concepts and, at the same time, adjusted to the conditions of the New Era. His contribution to the development of modern Chinese philosophy can also be demonstrated in a much broader, general sense. Xiong Shili, namely, also represents one of the first theoretically qualified intellectuals of his age, who didn’t advocate the conservative elitist nationalism, but at the same time opposed the prevailing trends of iconoclastic negation of tradition. Even later on, during the predomination of the so-called communist ideologies, Xiong rather consequently persisted in his—for that time completely unacceptable— standpoints.Thus Xiong Shili, remaining a real Confucian scholar at a time, when Confucianism was everything else but the prevailing state doctrine, doubtless represents a real traditional sage. For him, Confucianism was not solely the predominating system of thought, to which he should formally conform in order to achieve the realization of some privileges and private interests. He was a Confucian scholar by following his own inner conviction, or, with other words, he was a Confucian “inner sage.” Hereby,we encounter an extremely rare kind of Confucian scholars, namely of those, who did not remain limited to a paper-wrapped reproduction of idealistic principles of Confucian thought, but who also tried to perform them in their own life. Xiong’s personal moral was the ethics of a Confucian scholar, who can be a gentle, subtle thinker and a steadfast, consequent rebel at the same time.

In Modern Confucian philosophy the notion of the moral Self which is expressed through the natural moral substance represents both the foundation of each individual and the core of the universal reason. The indivisibility of the moral Self from its concrete activities within the social sphere differs in many various aspects from prevailing Western political and philosophical theories that are based on the separation of the empirical and transcendent subject. Hence, this holistic special feature of the moral Self is closely related to one of the basic paradigms of Chinese intellectual history, i.e. the paradigm of immanent transcendence, which is also known as the paradigm of ‘radical’ or ‘pure’ transcendence. The present article introduces and analyses both above-mentioned, mutually intertwined traditional notions through the lens of modern interpretations, focusing upon the philosophical work written by the representatives of the second generation of Taiwanese Modern Confucians

The present article aims to expose some aspects of the specific features of classical Chinese analogisms. First, it exposes the supposition that this type of analogism did not focus exclusively on forms without considering their content, that is, that it was linguistically and semantically determined. Second, it also aims to show that classical Chinese analogies are based on structural relations between the objects in question, which constitute the similarity of two types of things that share certain attributes. This article additionally sheds light on the question of how and why the structure underlying these relations represents a semantic and axiological referential framework that functions as the...

New Treatise on the Uniqueness of Consciousness is an annotated translation by John Makeham of Xiong Shili's major philosophical work Xin weishi lun 新唯識論, one of the most difficult and least understood of the crucial Chinese theoretical works of the twentieth century. In this work Xiong has integrated central concepts, problems, and themes from traditional Chinese philosophy with those representative of Sinitic Buddhist philosophy in order to create an ambitious philosophical syncretism.On the one hand, the book is a modern Confucian critique of the Buddhist theory of consciousness introduced to China by the pilgrim Xuanzang in the Tang dynasty. Xiong criticizes the original Yogācāra pioneers of this...

The present paper compares three models of modernized Confucian Ontology. The philosophers under debate belong to the most important, well-known and influential theoreticians in modern Taiwan and mainland China respectively. Through a contrastive analysis, the paper aims to critically introduce three alternative models of ontology, which have been developed from the Chinese philosophical tradition by the most well-known Taiwanese philosopher Mou Zongsan and by two most influential mainland Chinese theoreticians, Li Zehou and Chen Lai respectively. In this paper, I will analyze and critically introduce Li Zehou’s and Chen Lai’s respective critiques of Mou Zongsan’s basic assumptions that have been reflected in his methodological paradigms, while also exposing some major differences within their own lines of thought.

Li Zehou stands among the most influential Chinese philosophers in the post-Mao era. His notion of subjectality is of paramount importance for current developments in contemporary Chinese philosophy. It belongs to the central concepts in Li's theoretical framework, around which his entire philosophical system is constructed. With his elaboration of this concept, Li expanded the problem of the self in post-revolutionary modernism. The present article analyzes the theoretical bases of this concept, exposes its importance in the scope of contemporary Chinese theory and shows why and how it represents a call for a new humanism. Through a multidimensional comparative perspective, the author also explains why the human subject, which is based upon Li's notion of subjectality, has the potential not only to transform modern alienation into a real “human condition,” that is, into spiritually fulfilled society of autonomous individuals but also to fill up the prevailing “vacuum of values.”

As a major source of social values, Modern Confucian theory assumes essential significance amidst the proliferation of instrumental rationality in contemporary China. This current is distinguished by a multifaceted attempt to revitalize traditional thought by means of new influences borrowed or derived from Western systems. It defines itself with a search for a synthesis between “Western” and traditional Chinese thought, aiming to elaborate a new system of ideas and values, suitable for the modern, globalized society. Modern Confucian discourses are based on the supposition that Confucian thought could be amalgamated with capitalistic development. Its proponents also believe that a renewed form of this traditional Chinese system of philosophical and moral thought could serve as a basis for endowing modern life with ethical meaning and as a “spiritual salve” for the alienation which appeared as an undesirable side-effect of capitalist competition and profit-seeking. The present contribution examines the ways in which Modern Confucian philosophers changed the framework within which traditional Chinese philosophical inquiry has been carried out. The article investigates the ontological approaches that have led to this paradigm shift which became axiomatic for the further development of intercultural theoretical syntheses between Europe and China.

During the last decades of the previous century, the rebirth and the modernization of classical Confucianism gained increasing relevance. These tendencies have manifested themselves in a clearest and most influential way in the current of Modern New Confucianism. The representatives of this stream of thought aimed to elaborate upon a new ethical model of specifically Chinese modernity based upon traditional values that could in a renewed form meet the requirements of the new era. They aimed to preserve Chinese cultural identity while at the same time making their own original contributions to the development of a philosophical and theoretical dialogue between Euro-American and Chinese cultures. In this context, it is important to ask the question whether a model of modernization that is rooted in traditional Confucianism is truly capable of generating a non-individualistic version of modernity. Following this supposition, and focusing upon the works of the so-called “Second Generation” of Modern New Confucianism, this article aims to demonstrate that the alleged relation between modernity and individualism, which was almost exclusively seen as self-evident and undeniable by the Western modernization theories, is actually a result of Western historical paradigms.

Li Zehou belongs to the most important contemporary Chinese philosophers. This paper presents a critical introduction of his theory regarding the consolidation of the specific Confucian system of kinship relations, which for him forms a crucial foundation of traditional Chinese social order. In Confucianism, the inter-familial relations form a basis of the social system, in which interpersonal relations are of utmost importance and which Li therefore denotes as ‘relationalism’. Shamanistic ceremonies were enhancing and strengthening the awareness of such social unities. These early collective rites, especially those that include music and dance, had a powerful effect on early humans, creating intense feelings of respect, love and loyalty, and thus forming a basis for the Confucian social order. Li’s theory of the shamanist origins of Confucian relationalism will be illuminated through the lens of current historical and anthropological scholarship on shamanist rituality and their function within the corresponding cultural orders.

Culturally conditioned differences between women must be seen and theorized about in order to avoid essentialist generalizations about “women’s issues.” In this context, the idea of a universal patriarchal order is questioned, as is the idea of a general, universally equivalent type of feminism. Through analysis of the political philosophy of He Zhen (1884–circa 1920), this paper aims to present a Chinese alternative to liberal feminism based on the assumption that the Western feminist movement might not be a suitable means of abolishing women’s oppression in China, because it is culturally conditioned and rooted in the particulars of Western social history.

Since COVID-19 is a global-scale pandemic, it can only be solved on the global level. In this context, intercultural dialogues are of utmost importance. Indeed, different models of traditional ethics might be of assistance in constructing a new, global ethics that could help us confront the present predicament and prepare for other possible global crises that might await us in the future. The explosive, pandemic spread of COVID-19 in 2020 clearly demonstrated that in general, one of the most effective tools for containment of the epidemics is precisely human and interpersonal solidarity, which must also be accompanied by a certain degree of autonomous self-discipline. The present paper follows the presumption that these types of personal and interpersonal attitudes are—inter alia— culturally conditioned and hence influenced by different traditional models of social ethics. In light of the fact that East-Asian or Sinic societies were more successful and effective in the process of containing and eliminating the virus compared to the strategies of the Euro-American regions, I will first question the widespread assumption that this effectiveness is linked to the authoritarian political traditions of the Sinic East and Southeast Asian areas. Then, I will critically introduce the Confucian ethics of relations, which in various ways has influenced the social structures of these regions, and clarify the question of whether and in which way the relics of this ethics had an actual effect on the crisis resolution measurements. The crucial aim of this paper is to contribute to the construction of theoretical groundworks for a new, transculturally grounded global ethics, which is more needed today than ever before.

The essay deals with problems encountered by Western researchers working in the field of Chinese philosophy. It begins with a discussion of intercultural and transcultural methodologies and illuminates some of the most common issues inherent in traditional intercultural comparisons in the field of philosophy. Taking into account the current state of the so-called postcomparative discourses in the field of transcultural philosophy and starting from the notion of culturally divergent frames of reference, it focuses upon semantic aspects of the Chinese philosophical tradition and exposes the need for discursive translations. On this basis, a new postcomparative approach in transcultural philosophical studies of Chinese philosophy is suggested. In this context, the author proposes the application of an innovative principle, based upon what can preliminary be denoted as the method of sublation.