Jana Rošker

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.

The theoretical work of European and American structuralism has produced a number of important elements which have resulted in (especially with respect to certain new, fundamental approaches in semantics, philosophy and methodology) essential shifts in the modes of thinking in the humanities, and in the cultural and social sciences. Despite these shifts, Western discourses have still not produced any integral, coherent structural model of epistemology. The present article intends to show that such a model can be found in the pan-structural epistemology of the modern Chinese philosopher Zhang Dongsun (1886?1973), and that the crucial, theoretical underpinnings of such models were developed much earlier in the history of Chinese thought, given that the bases of a structural approach to comprehension had already been established in ancient Chinese philosophy. This paradigmatic foundation (the concept li) was further developed and elaborated by various Chinese philosophers in later centuries as a crucial feature of the classical Chinese logic of binary analogies. The article also points out that the central binary concept of the Neo-Confucian tradition (i.e. the concept of structure and creativity; li and qi) has generally been interpreted as a dualism of idea and matter by Euro-American sinologists. However, such interpretations have overlooked an important feature of traditional, structurally determined Chinese onto-epistemology

Understanding Chinese philosophy requires knowledge of the referential framework prevailing in Chinese intellectual traditions. But Chinese philosophical texts are frequently approached through the lens of Western paradigms. Analysing the most common misconceptions surrounding Western Sinology, Jana Rošker alerts us to unseen dangers and introduces us to a new more effective way of reading Chinese philosophy. Acknowledging that different cultures produce different reference points, Rošker explains what happens we use rational analysis, a major feature of the European intellectual tradition, to read Chinese philosophy. We rely on impossible comparisons, arrive at prejudiced assumptions and fail to arrive at the truth, the consequence of applying a different methodology to the process of perceiving, understanding and interpreting reality. Instead of transferring concepts and categories from Western sinology onto socio-cultural Chinese contexts, Rošker constructs a new methodology of reading, understanding and interpreting Chinese philosophy. She opens our eyes to the basic problems of Western paradigms, encourages intercultural approaches and allows us to master a more autochthonous understanding of Chinese philosophy.

The Confucian revival, which manifests itself in the modern Confucian current, belongs to the most influential and important streams of thought in contemporary Chinese philosophy and represents a crucial part of the new prevailing ideologies in P. R. China. Although many books and articles on this topic are available in Chinese, academic studies in Western languages are still few and far between. The present article aims to introduce this stream of thought which is grounded in the conviction that traditional Confucianism, understood as a specifically Chinese social, political, and moral system of thought can, if renewed and adapted to meet the conditions of the modern era, serve as the foundation for an ethically meaningful modern life. Simultaneously, modern Confucian philosophers also aim to provide a spiritual antidote to the alienation which is seen by them as a collateral effect of the capitalistic glorification of competition and the single-minded pursuit of profit. The scholars belonging to this stream sought to reconcile ‘Western’ and ‘traditional Chinese’ values, in order to create a theoretical model of modernization that would not be confused or equated with ‘Westernization’

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Cognition and Practice: Li Zehou's Philosophical Aesthetics by Rafal BankaJana S. Rošker (bio)Cognition and Practice: Li Zehou's Philosophical Aesthetics. By Rafal Banka. Albany, New York: SUNY, 2022. Pp. vii+ 230. Hardcover $95,00, isbn 978-1-4384-8923-4. In his book Cognition and Practice: Li Zehou's Philosophical Aesthetics, Rafal Banka delves into the cognitive philosophy of Li Zehou, one of the most significant and influential Chinese philosophers of our time. Banka not only provides a deeper understanding of Li's work, but he also places his studies on beauty and aesthetic experience in close proximity to current international research in philosophical aesthetics that places great importance on the embodiment and embeddedness of the subject. By delving into Banka's analysis of the cognitive dimensions of Li Zehou's aesthetics, readers can gain a deeper understanding of how this philosopher approaches the intersection of aesthetics and cognition. Through Banka's interpretation, Li's specific view on the intricate relationship between sensory perception and mental processes is highlighted, offering readers the potential for a more nuanced conception of his philosophical perspective. Banka's contribution to our understanding of Li's theories of cognition is deeply intertwined with the methodological framework and theoretical approach used in his work. The former is based upon an analytical perspective that enables him to identify key themes and concepts in Li's cognition theory, as well as to critically evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of his approach. By employing this framework, Banka provides a comprehensive and nuanced analysis of Li's cognitive dimensions that is grounded in rigorous examination. In addition to the methodological framework, the comprehensive theoretical approach that Banka applies in his study is also integral to understanding Li Zehou's contribution to the theory of perception on an international level. The book is divided into three distinct parts, each of which explores a different aspect of Li's philosophy. In the first part, Banka examines Li's main sources of inspiration, specifically the philosophers and philosophies that have significantly influenced and contributed to his own work. This section primarily focuses on classical Confucianism, Marxist historical materialism, and Li's unique reinterpretations of Immanuel Kant's philosophies, particularly those presented in his second and third critiques. [End Page 1]In the first three chapters that constitute this first part, Banka offers a clear and comprehensive analysis of how Li Zehou has viewed Kant's apriorism through the lens of Confucianism and integrated it with Marxist materialist foundations, revealing the coherence with his theory of anthropological ontology. By highlighting the interconnectedness of these diverse influences, Banka illuminates the unique synthesis of ideas that form the foundation of Li's philosophy. Through his detailed analysis, Banka shows how Li Zehou managed to create a synthesis between the dynamic elements of historical materialism on the one hand, and Kant's transcendentalism on the other. In Li's system, the concepts of the empirical and the transcendental are interacting in a dynamic, correlative and mutually complementary way. They are both parts of a processual philosophy in which movement is always followed by a standstill. In such a worldview, they always appear as essentially interrelated and interdependent realms of life. Banka provides a comprehensive explanation of the theoretical foundations that underpin the interactive and complementary nature of these two systems. This has culminated in the development of Li's groundbreaking new theory on the transformation of the empirical into the transcendental. In the second part of the book, the author delves into Li's own philosophical system, specifically focusing on his concepts of "subjectality" and beauty. These concepts are not axiologically theorized but instead arise from subjective interactions between human beings and the external world. Through a detailed and logically consistent analysis, the author demonstrates how Li's aesthetics is compatible with contemporary experience-oriented theories that are redefining the discipline on an international level. In chapters 4 and 5, the much-discussed concept of subjectality is viewed from a highly productive perspective, starting from the very center of the notion itself, where a subject actively interacts with the external reality, which in turn shapes its inwardness. The author convincingly demonstrates...

Li Zehou belongs to the most well-known and influential contemporary Chinese philosophers of our time. Since he is one of the exiled intellectuals, his work has also acquired a wide readership outside China. Working mostly in the fields of classical Chinese philosophy and Chinese aesthetics, he dedicated himself to the task of finding a suitable and sensible way of harmonizing past and present, tradition and modernity, China and the West. Hence, he attempted to create a synthesis between early Marxist and classical Confucian discourses. The present article offers a critical analysis of these attempts, focusing upon some significant methodological problems underlying such approaches. The author aims to explain them in the framework of the methodology of intercultural research. Because in China, the problem of connecting Confucian and Marxist thought is presently a much discussed and very topical issue, the article also represents a contribution to the clarification of this relevant question.

In Western discourse the dominant theme of the natural theory of knowledge but understanding of the subject is largely independent of the external world . Chinese traditional theory of knowledge can be called the theory of knowledge relationship, because they concerned the theme of relationships. This applies not only to negate the concept of an entity's overall theory of knowledge, but also for many advocates in understanding the subject and make a strict distinction between the object to understand the modern theory. In this regard, traditional Chinese and Western knowledge to make a comparative analysis of the theory may be regarded as a solution to the nature of human understanding and perception of reality useful way certain fundamental questions. The complementary relation between reality and comprehension, between the given and recognition, as manifested in the context of elaborating fundamental epistemological paradigms, obliges us to address a humor of additional problems in connection with specific aspects of traditional organization and disciplinary functions, the semantic structures of texts, and, above all, their implicit axinlogical systems. The subject of the naturalistic epistemologies that prevailed in Western discourses was the external world , which was to a great extent independent from the subject of comprehension. Traditional Chinese theories of knowledge can be called relational epistemologies, because the subjects they refer to are relations. This applies not only to radical holistic epistemologies, which denied the notion of substance, but also to a number of contemporary theories which advocate a strict division between the subject and object of comprehension: In this respect, a comparative analysis of traditional Chinese and Western epistemological theories might, despite the general problematic of such cultural comparisons, prove to be a useful tool for resolving certain elementary questions about the nature of human comprehension and recognition of reality

Zhang Dongsun je bio jedan od najutjecajnijih mislitelja u Republici Kini, čiji je ugled djelomično počivao i na njegovoj iznimnoj sposobnosti predstavljanja zapadne misli na način kompatibilan sa specifičnom metodologijom tradicionalne kineske misli. Jedno od njegovih najvećih postignuća svakako je stvaranje i razvoj moderne teorije znanja, temeljene na klasičnoj kineskoj i chan-buddhističkoj epistemologiji, što umnogome predstavlja prikladnu sintezu moderne znanosti i tradicionalne kineske misli. Stoga se ovaj rad prvenstveno usmjerava na Zhangovu teoriju znanja. Zhang Dongsun je nazivao svoju teoriju »pluralističnom«, s obzirom na pretpostavku da su različiti elementi koji omogućuju shvaćanje i zaključivanje uzajamno isključivi i nesvodljivi. Iz toga ćemo razloga kritički razmotriti elemente koje Zhang predlaže u svojoj glavnoj epistemološkoj raspravi Plural Epistemology koja predstavlja najpotpuniju, sistematičnu i koherentnu obradu njegove teorije

The present volume is dedicated to the Wei Jin and Southern and Northern Dynasties (220â "589 AD), which is generally regarded as one of the most fascinating phases in Chinese history. The collection opens new theoretical and methodological pathways in sinological studies, bringing to the forefront a new idea of intercultural encounters based upon a culture of recognition. It highlights the significance of transition in the making of Chinese culture and history, revises prevailing historical approaches in the study and research of China and develops and enhances existing theories or methodologies in this specific area of research. The wide diversity of contributions to the present volume reflects the multifaceted potential for creativity and renewal of this period. The focus is upon the interaction of ideas, researches and perspectives concerning a broad scope of relevant and significant issues in contemporary sinology. In order to understand this diversity, a wide range of cultural, theoretical and historical aspects are considered. The book reveals a new image of the period, thereby undermining the absolute authority and putative objectivity of common historical sources and interpretations. It shows that this was a period rich with political, economic, cultural and theoretical achievements that would prove decisive for the future development of Chinese culture and society.

The search for knowledge has been the driving force behind mankind's existence since the dawn of civilization, and different cultures have developed their own theories of knowledge. _Searching for the Way: Theory of Knowledge in Premodern and Modern China_ deals with the analyses and interpretations of modern Chinese philosophical discourses, especially those concerning theories of knowledge. The author looks at how contemporary Chinese philosophy is awakening from a long slumber and substantiates the hypothesis that this new awakening is fully prepared for fruitful confrontations with the new challenges presented by a globalized world. The study of 20th-century Chinese philosophy has not been the subject of any extensive and systematic discussion in neither the West in general nor in Western Sinology in particular. Hence, this book will be of immense interest to those who are interested in the emerging fields of comparative philosophy, Chinese studies and theology.

The purpose of this chapter is to demonstrate a new approach to transcultural postcomparative philosophy, which may be tentatively called “the method of sublation,” using the example of Adorno and Gong Sunlong’s respective views on the relationship between concepts and objects. The term sublation is a neologism commonly used to translate Hegel’s idea of Aufhebung. It is derived from the Latin term sublatio, for its original meaning covered all three crucial connotations of Hegel’s Aufhebung – to lift up, to preserve and to eliminate. The method thus encompasses all three of these three notions that are crucial to any process of creating something new from the interactions between two or more distinct discourses. In this philosophical sense, it has the three meanings of producing, eliminating, and preserving arguments, propositions, or ideas. Moreover, unlike “synthesis” the term “sublation” refers to a process rather than a stage. The sublation method aims to develop new forms of transcultural philosophizing and to overcome the impasses of traditional comparative approaches through procedures of “conceptual comparison” rather than relying only on the “comparison of concepts”. It starts from similarities and differences identified in the basic paradigms of different culturally and semantically defined frames of reference, and uses the method of discursive translation to transfer meanings across different languages and ideational traditions. Through a contrastive analysis of the similarities and differences between Adorno’s and Gongsun Longs conceptions of concepts and objects (or names and realities, respectively), the paper demonstrates the importance of considering different culturally conditioned paradigms and frames of reference in order to gain new, more complex, and more pluralistic philosophical insights.