David Bartosch

The mirror metaphor has been an essential asset especially during the pre-modern history of philosophy. The present article is concerned with its use in the philosophy of the German thinker Nicolas of Cusa (1401-1464). Being rooted in the intellectual traditions of Greek antiquity and Medieval Christian philosophy, Nicolas of Cusa has also been hailed as one of the first modern European philosophers. Long before other occidental thinkers, Nicolas of Cusa used the mirror metaphor to describe the foundational logic of self-consciousness on his own terms and in the context of his time and his cultural environment. This article presents the most important passages where Nicolas of Cusa uses the images of the mirror and of mirroring to explain the creative self-relation of consciousness as well as to hint at a way of a transformation of the common forms of reflexivity of the epistemological functions of the mind into its complete form of existence as absolute self-consciousness. In this context, Nicolas of Cusa’s use of the mirror metaphor is also concerned with the question of an all-encompassing humanistic self-perfection, practice as well as with basic anthropological considerations.

Concerning Nicolaus Cusanus’ (Nicholas of Cusa, 1401–1464) mysticism of the intellect, his approach to the problem of ineffability deserves the special attention of researchers. Preceded by a general exposition on the topic of the inconceivability of the experience of the foundational autopoietic self-reference of thinking and speaking, this article shows how Nicolaus Cusanus has developed a complex approach to the problem of an “ineffable way of speaking” (ineffable fari). Cusanus developed a set of approaches to non-negatable cataphatic “pointing rods” (Max Scheler) and apophatic ways of thinking about what is to be understood as ineffable in the sense of a philosophical form of mysticism. Both are still inspiring and highly relevant for the discussion today. In terms of the overall interior development of his philosophical way of “eloquent silence” (German: beredtes Schweigen), it is notable that Cusanus eventually referred to both ways of affirmative and negative theology in their dialectic interdependence. Eventually, he found increasingly simple ways to point the way towards the “likeness of the path along which the seeker must walk.” In his later works, Cusanus developed a unique understanding of the problem of ineffability about philosophical mysticism, the potential of which remains to be explored further in the future.

[143 pages] This special edition of International Communication of Chinese Culture bears the title “Spectra of Cultural Understanding”. Just as the spectral decomposition of light produces seven pure unmixed colours, the theme of cultural understanding has been reflected here from seven different and genuine angles. The edition contains seven articles by distinguished international scholars from the perspective of divergent cultural backgrounds and different academic subjects and respective subtopics. Another closer look at each contribution reveals that each essay represents a certain genuine micro-spectrum in the reflection of cultural understanding in itself. For this reason, the plural “spectra” is used here to indicate a family resemblance of all seven perspectives on one hand but also their respective partial thematic autonomy in the totality of a collection of texts which is supposed to transcend habitual limits of outdated perspectives.

In this article, the foundations of a new principle of international relations are discussed. They are traced back to the idea of the human being as a culturally living being (homo culturalis). The new principle of harmonic power is conceptualized in the first segment by way of contrasting it with the original meaning of the concept of ‘soft power’ by Joseph S. Nye Jr. In the next part, a portion of the intension of a new concept of culture is established. It serves as a conceptual background and context for the idea of harmonic power. This foundation for a new and more comprehensive concept of culture is inspired by ancient Chinese elements of thought but also by comparable elements of Indian and Graeco-Roman philosophy. In the following step, a conceptual extension of culture in four major areas, respec-tively, mutually permeable “focus fields” is outlined. The accompanying discussion in view of ancient Chinese philosophy and elements of other traditions then leads to a completion of the intension of the concept of culture. This is achieved in view of the aspect of morality in relation to the Golden Rule. In a final step, further reflec-tions are provided regarding the interrelation of the advanced concepts of harmonic power and culture discussed in the this article. Harmonic power means the essential prerequisite for the shift away from the conflict-ridden desire for monopolar world hegemony—a yearning that has revealed itself as an impasse over and over again—towards a peace-bearing, transformative future of multipolar world participation. Harmonic power is the foundation of the cultivation of a mutually beneficial socio-cultural co-evolution on a global scale.

The basic question of this article is: “What is understanding?” The objective is to initiate a process and a state of self-reflexivity which might best be defined as an understanding of understanding. In this self-referential philosophical setting, it cannot be our aim to attempt to produce any (alleged) final answers, because cognitive self-referentiality, taken as a source principle of mind, is without beginning and end. However, it is feasible to explore possibilities of a continuously increasing convergence and insight regarding the objective. In addition, the basic question of an understanding of understanding is taken into consideration from a transcultural angle here. Direct samples of ancient Greek, later German as well as pre-modern Chinese philosophies are included in one systematic context here. The topic is developed in four basic steps. At first, a semantic and philosophical analysis of the English word “understanding” is developed in perspective of philo- sophical-anthropological thoughts by J. G. Herder, Aristotle, and the anthropo-cosmic foundations of the ancient Confucian classic Liji . In a second step, the meaning of “understanding” is analysed in the extended sense of a philosophical metaphor. Selective references are made to Kongzi , Martin Heidegger, Plato, and Zhuangzi . In a third step, the discussion of the semantics of the German philosophical terms “Verstehen” and “Verstand” is explored on the basis of the preceding reflections. In the fourth segment of this contribution, further references are made to the Daodejing and to a model of the structure of consciousness and understanding in the context of Wang Yangming’s philosophy. From various angles of different times and places, the problem of an understanding of understanding points to the most basic layers of human existence, personal experience, human cultures, and civilisations.

The following essay contains a more general philosophical reflection on the significance and some main elements of pre-modern Confucian learning. The topic is developed by presenting some essential elements in the whole range from explicit (linguistically expressible) knowledge to symbolic aspects as well as the (philosophical) problem of ineffable knowing. The essay starts with the general conception of man which underlies the mainstream of Confucian learning. On that basis, the more explicit contents and easily explicable subjects or branches of classical Confucian learning are mapped out. This becomes the starting point to move on to reflect on a more symbolic layer of Confucian learning. Finally, the core level of Confucian learning is addressed. This presents us with the problem of ineffability. The reference points of the present essay are restricted to some important classical passages as well as the thought of Wang Yangming 王陽明 (1472–1529).