Since the 20th century, Chinese philosophy has not only exhibited worldwide significance but also, in a certain sense, participated in the worldwide contention of various schools of thought. The polemics over science and metaphysics of the 1920s, in particular, reflected the ongoing debate between modern Western scientism and humanism. The emergence of systematic philosophical frameworks during this period further exemplified these tendencies from an internal perspective. These philosophical systems not only presented themselves in a modern form but also offered critical perspectives on Western civilization and Western philosophy from various angles, embodying a wide-ranging worldwide significance and providing unique responses to philosophical debates worldwide. From the polemics over science and metaphysics to the personalized philosophical construction of philosophers, from the dominance of Marxism to the dialogue between Chinese philosophy, Western philosophy, and Marxist philosophy, from diverse and relative approaches to the integration of unity and multiplicity, modern Chinese philosophy has surpassed its regional confines and gained worldwide significance. Furthermore, for a more profound engagement in the worldwide contention of various schools of thought, it is crucial to concretely embrace the rejection of abstraction and dogmatism, as well as the fusion of diversity and relativism with unity and multiplicity. By undertaking practical and constructive work that enables systematic contemplation of relevant issues, Chinese philosophy offers a tangible means of participating in this discourse.

Harmony without uniformity is the wisdom of Chinese civilization. Its connotation remains not only an ethical virtue, a state of being, or a capacity for inclusiveness, but also a methodology of profound philosophical significance. Harmony without uniformity provides us with a Confucian perspective to observe everything, the necessary tools to deal with various complex situations, and a practical path to making moral choices in various situations. Harmony without uniformity contains the cultural genetic code concerning why and how the shared values of humanity are possible, which is one of the significant reasons for the shared values to be actually realized. Harmony without uniformity recognizes inherent differences in the world, diverse demands of cultural forms, and different styles of individuals and communities in beliefs and practices. However, the recognition of differences serves only as one part of the process. Under no circumstances is harmony without uniformity limited to the recognition of “differences” or “diversity.” It also seeks common ground while reserving differences, pursues coexistence and common growth, and contributes to the flourishing of all cultures through coordination, negotiation, and cooperation, thus providing a practical and feasible path for the reconstruction of the shared values of humanity in the new era.

Chinese philosophical studies, in the last hundred years, have gone through three main periods: the Republican period, the period from 1949 to the late 1980s, and the period from 1990 to date. During the Republican period, Chinese philosophical studies remained within the self-conscious scope of “philosophy,” characterized by the works of the history of Chinese philosophy. The period from 1949 to the late 1980s signified the ideologization phase of Chinese philosophical studies, consisting of two parts in succession, the former belonging to Zhdanov’s model and the latter to Lenin’s model. The ideological openness of Leninism and the political environment of reform and opening up jointly contribute to the pluralism of Chinese philosophical studies in the 1980s. From a more macroscopic view, Chinese philosophical studies before the late 1980s were of the “prototype-imitation” type in general, an imitation of the so-called general “philosophical” ideas using Western philosophy as the reference frame. The “prototype-imitation” type of Chinese philosophical writing and research features blind application and mechanical construction, lacking independence of thought and autonomy of action. However, Chinese philosophical studies have changed dramatically since 1990. To be more specific, by seeking and recognizing its particularity, Chinese philosophy has established its subjectivity. Because of the “craze” for Chinese culture and ancient civilization and the “enthusiasm” for the study of Confucian classics and excavated literature, the subjectivity of Chinese philosophy has been constantly enhanced. Its subjectivity construct, on is mainly manifested in the following aspects: proposing a methodology from particularity to subjectivity; conducting self-affirmation in the mind-nature theory, value theory, and way of thinking, establishing a selfconsistent, self-supporting, and selfgenerating discourse system; basing Chinese philosophical studies on its problems, concepts, propositions, and classics; the rise of philosophical study of Confucian classics; the re-construction on the pre-Qin philosophy; the further research on SongMing philosophy; and the establishment of fundamental threshold for the studies of Chinese philosophy. The establishment of Chinese philosophical subjectivity makes The Search for Subjectivity: Chinese Philosophical Studies in the Last Hundred Years and Its Contemporary Orientation* DING Sixina https://doi.org/10.3868/s030-012-023-0009-2 * Translated from 天津社会科学 (Tianjin Social Sciences), 2023 (1): 71-83. a School of Humanities, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, ChinaJune 2023 Volume 18 Number 2 149 both Chinese philosophy and Western philosophy truly adding word philosophies. Contemporary Chinese philosophical research should go beyond the overreliance and emphasis on particularity, thus breaking through its exclusiveness, developing an active dialogue on the universality of philosophy, and further improving its subjectivity.

Since modern times, the comparison of Chinese and Western philosophy has been a fundamental context for all philosophical research in China. Currently, the construction of a contemporary form of Chinese philosophy is currently an urgent task facing the field of Chinese philosophy. Rather than solely focusing on a narrow or direct comparative study of Chinese and Western philosophy, it is important to consider the systematic introduction of Western philosophy and the adaptation of Marxist philosophy to the Chinese context, alongside the extensive study of the history of Chinese philosophy over a century. This historical experience merits further attention and examination. The comparative study of Chinese and Western philosophies has been expanding in-depth, but it is facing a growing predicament. The goal of constructing a contemporary form of Chinese philosophy, incorporating three traditions of Chinese, Western, and Marxist philosophies, has at times appeared to move further away rather than closer. Furthermore, at the turn of the 21st century, it faced the challenge of establishing the “legitimacy” of Chinese philosophy. The crux of the problem lies in questioning the “Chinese characteristics” of the historiography of Chinese philosophy, as well as questioning the “philosophical nature” of Chinese philosophical traditions. To promote meaningful progress in comparison of Chinese and Western philosophies, it is imperative to overcome the dual obsessions of “China-non-philosophy” and “philosophy-non-China,” based on truly grasping the essence of the Western philosophical tradition. Additionally, it is equally important to realize the contemporary development of Marxist philosophical interpretation while engaging in critical dialogue with the latest developments in contemporary Western philosophy and reenact the true spirit of ancient Chinese philosophical traditions in a modern discourse style on the basis of maintaining an appropriate awareness of “distance” between “we” and cultural traditions. This requires looking at and organizing the historical changes in Chinese social life and philosophical trends since modern times, with a future China that has achieved a state of modernization as the reference framework. The development of contemporary Chinese philosophy cannot be accomplished by relying upon a single academic school alone. Rather, it requires a holistic renewal of the academic ecosystem, an inevitable unfolding of the spirit of the new era in all cultural and intellectual domains.

China’s choice of Marxism can be attributed to both historical inevitability and cultural factors. It is crucial to examine the cultural reasons, as Marxism exhibits certain ideological correspondence with Confucianism, a cornerstone of traditional Chinese culture. One notable aspect is the alignment of historical perspectives between Marxism and Confucianism, along with their deep convergence on the concept of freedom. These similarities offer potential cultural possibilities for adapting Marxism to the Chinese context

The new development of contemporary Chinese philosophy research falls into six categories. The first is the restoration of Chinese philosophical research in an academic sense. The second is that identification with Chinese culture promotes a sympathetic understanding of Chinese philosophy. The third is the wealth of knowledge that has been gained on early Chinese philosophy from the abundance of excavated literature. The fourth is the reflection on the pursuit of methodology intrinsic to Chinese philosophy. The fifth concerns the convergence of the studies of classics and masters and the “turn to classics studies.” The sixth involves probing into historical research to explore and develop new principles and reasons for Chinese philosophy. Chinese philosophy is forming a more virtuous cycle of interpretation through the interaction between academic and political, tradition and modernity, commensurability and difference, studies of classics passed down through the ages and excavated literature, studies of classics and masters, as well as philosophy and its history.

Abstracts

Bibliography

Academci News

Book Excerpt

Book Description