Chengbing Wang

What is the future of Philosophy of education? Or as many of scholars and thinkers in this final ‘future-focused’ collective piece from the philosophy of education in a new key Series put it, what are the futures—plural and multiple—of the intersections of ‘philosophy’ and ‘education?’ What is ‘Philosophy’; and what is ‘Education’, and what role may ‘enquiry’ play? Is the future of education and philosophy embracing—or at least taking seriously—and thinking with Indigenous ethicoontoepistemologies? And, perhaps most importantly, what is that ‘Future’? These debates have been located in the work of diverse scholars: from the West, from Global South, from indigenous thinkers. In this collective piece, we purposefully juxtapose diverse takes on the future of these intersections. We have given up the urge to organise, place together, separate with subheadings or connect the paragraphs that follow. Instead, we let these philosophers of education and thinkers who use philosophical texts and ideas to sit together in one long read as potentially ‘strange and unusual bedfellows’. This text urges us to understand how these scholars and thinkers perceive our educational philosophical futures, and how the work and thinking they have done on thinking about what the future of that new key in philosophy of education may look like is embedded in a much deeper and richer literature, and personal experience.

The study of dialectical logic has a history of nearly one hundred years in China. It is significant for understanding both the growth of Chinese logic and the Sinicization of Marxism to review dialectical logic in the context of introducing the study of Marxism in China. Debates about dialectical logic in Chinese academic circles involve not only the problems of logic itself, but more importantly the understanding of Marxist philosophy. In the 1920s and 1930s, some Marxist researchers in China were influenced by the philosophers and logicians of the former Soviet Union, and they came very close to equating dialectical logic with Marxist dialectics. They also identified the formal logic originating from ancient Greece as metaphysics, praising the former and criticizing the latter. In the upsurge of Marxist philosophy in the 1950s and 1960s, Chinese logicians carried out normal and formal academic research on dialectical logic. During the period from the end of 1970s to the end of 1990s, the research and teaching of dialectical logic in China reached its heyday, and logicians performed comprehensive and detailed research on some critical issues, including the basic laws of dialectical logic, which they tried to formalize. Since the beginning of the 21st century, dialectical logic has ceased to prosper and has faded from the core field of the discipline of logic, although some honorable scholars still persist in studying it.

Moral education is a core component of ideological and political courses in primary and secondary schools and universities in China, and also an important part of contemporary Chinese Marxist educational theory and practice. In Chinese senior high schools, the main curriculum and platform for moral education is ideological and political courses. The Ideological and Political Curriculum Standards for General Senior High Schools (2017 Edition, 2020 Revised) issued by the Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China explicitly includes a course on logical thinking in the ideological and political curriculum in general senior high schools, strengthening the importance of logic in moral education there. In this paper, the authors explain the necessity of intensifying logic training for contemporary Chinese teenagers, introduce and interpret the relevant contents in the Ideological and Political Curriculum Standards for General Senior High Schools (2017 Edition, 2020 Revised), and put forward some theoretical suggestions on how to conduct teaching on the subject of logic.

This paper reflects mainly on three ideas of “political Ruism” in modern China. We first review Mou Zongsan’s idea of “selfnegation of innate moral consciousness良知坎陷,” which embraces universal values and tries to bridge them with Chinese culture. We then re-examine Jiang Qing’s “political Confucianism,” which, while criticizing universal values, attempts to establish a political system based on the Kingly Way. Finally, we discuss the “Kang Youwei-ism康有为主义”, which calls on us to return to Kang Youwei’s idea of state construction and national construction. The three ideas offer some new perspectives into Confucianism, but all turn out unrealistic and unpragmatic. We believe that Confucianism in modern China can still work in both the private sphere and the public sphere, and examine politics from a human, cultural or moral perspective.