Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Philosophy in China

ISSN 1673-3436

ISSN 1673-355X(Online)

CN 11-5743/B

Postal Subscription Code 80-983

Front Phil Chin    2013, Vol. 8 Issue (2) : 183-198    https://doi.org/10.3868/s030-002-013-0014-0
research-article
The Battle over Confucius and Classical Chinese Philosophy in European Early Enlightenment Thought (1670-1730)
Jonathan Israel()
School of Historical Studies, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, NJ 08540, USA
 Download: PDF(276 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

A profound split is evident during the period 1670–1730 in the way European scholars and commentators attempted to understand and describe classical Chinese thought. For some, Confucianism acknowledged divine creation and divine governance of the world, immortality of the soul and other elements of Natural Theology. The Radical Enlightenment thinkers, however, and also some Christian scholars denied that Confucianism was based on Natural Theology or pervaded by belief in divine providence, characterizing it rather as monist, naturalist and Spinozist. The disagreement proved fundamental in several respects and proved divisive for the Church, as well as European thought more generally, producing a series of lively disputes that continued over several decades.

Keywords Radical Enlightenment      Confucianism      atheism      naturalism      Spinozism      monism      Jesuits      creation      divine providence      Natural Theology     
Corresponding Author(s): Jonathan Israel,Email:jisrael@ias.edu   
Issue Date: 05 June 2013
 Cite this article:   
Jonathan Israel. The Battle over Confucius and Classical Chinese Philosophy in European Early Enlightenment Thought (1670-1730)[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2013, 8(2): 183-198.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fpc/EN/10.3868/s030-002-013-0014-0
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fpc/EN/Y2013/V8/I2/183
[1] TENG Fei. Joining the Transformation of Nature—The Post-Natural and Confucian Perspective on Earth Stewardship in the Anthropocene[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2020, 15(1): 53-72.
[2] NI Peimin. How Is the Kantian or Confucian Metaphysics Applicable to Human Dignity—Response to Wang Xiaowei[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2020, 15(1): 29-35.
[3] WANG Xiaowei. Toward a Confucian Notion of Human Dignity[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2020, 15(1): 7-28.
[4] Henrique Schneider. Tricking or Benefitting the People? Guanzi on Objective Government and Subjective Preferences[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(3): 363-383.
[5] HUANG Zhipeng. Encounter between Soul and Human Nature: An Examination of Xia Dachang’s “Xingshuo”[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(2): 264-283.
[6] Michele Ferrero. Motivation to Act in Confucianism and Christianity: In Matteo Ricci’s The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven (Tianzhu Shiyi 天主實義)[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(2): 226-247.
[7] Yoshimi Orii. The Limits of a Confrontational Approach: Fabian Fukansai’s Critiques of Neo-Confucianism and Christianity[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(2): 181-200.
[8] XU Keqian. A Contemporary Re-Examination of Confucian Li 禮 and Human Dignity[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(3): 449-464.
[9] NI Peimin. Toward a Gongfu Reconstruction of Confucianism —Responses to Comments by Huang Yong, Fan Ruiping, and Wang Qingjie[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(2): 240-253.
[10] PENG Guoxiang. Contemporary Chinese Philosophy in the Chinese-Speaking World: An Overview[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(1): 91-119.
[11] Ady Van Den Stock. The Semantics of Wisdom in the Philosophy of Tang Junyi: Between Transformative Knowledge and Transcendental Reflexivity[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(1): 39-54.
[12] CHEN Yajun. Between Darwin and Hegel: On Dewey’s Concept of Experience[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(1): 104-119.
[13] Mircea Dumitru. On Toleration, Charity, and Epistemic Fallibilism[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2016, 11(4): 671-679.
[14] Alicia Hennig. Three Different Approaches to Virtue in Business- Aristotle, Confucius, and Lao Zi[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2016, 11(4): 556-586.
[15] GAO Kun. A Naturalistic Look into Maddy’s Naturalistic Philosophy of Mathematics[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2016, 11(1): 137-151.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed