【秦際明】歷史政治學視野下中國思一包養惟史研討路徑的省思

Keywords: History of Chinese Thoughts  History Politics Modernity Time Governance Discussion

*This article is the result of the National Social Science Youth Project Integration pipeline “The dilemma of modern Chinese philosophy and the transition to academic transition” (Project Consent No. 17CZX030).

China’s modernization has been underway for more than a hundred years and has achieved great results. However, the modernization path China has taken is unique, and it is different from countries that have developed first in the East and other countries that have developed later in life. As Oriental Path became a widespread word in the world, China was under the pressure of a particular kind. How to understand China and how to understand the relationship between Chinese civilization and the modern world? This is a question that must be answered in the study of Chinese thinking history. The overall framework of the Twentieth Century Chinese Thought History Research is to conduct self-examination and reform itself on the basis of Eastern order in order to integrate the world historical events guided by Eastern languages. In this self-examination, “What is China” became obscure. In the future of the order of living worlds and competition in all directions, it is particularly necessary to reflect on the perspective and method of studying the history of modern China.

1. Modernization orientation of Chinese thinking history research

Since modern times, Chinese society has seen the conflict between Chinese and Western civilizations. Its origin is that China, as a grand civilization, suffered failure in modern times, and where it went in comparison with Eastern civilization has always become a problem. As Su Guohuo said: “China’s society is now at the intersection of tradition and modernity, and the intersection of Eastern and Eastern civilizations. The economic marketization and the historical challenges brought by globalization are full of attention. The side really makes people feel a sense of time and space reduction.” 1 China’s modernization has gone through hundreds of years of journey in the East in decades. Who can be confused?

Scholars in the late Qing Dynasty also had those who took the initiative to learn from the East before the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895. Their bodies took “Chinese and Western use” as their basis and did not lose China’s self-bearing of civilization. After the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895, the discussion changed, and the self-check of the people expanded to the self-suppression of civilization and ethical energy. By this day, China is expected to recover, and the preservation of the people is greatly resolved, but the problem a hundred years ago is still unclear, that is, why did China move from its world-leading position to its failure in modern times? As the form of a civilization, what is the relationship between traditional China and modern civilization? What should be the relationship?

Perhaps these problems are too huge. Serious learners can argue that any overall cat that looks clean and should not be a wandering cat, probably a running judgment from home. The problem is that our philosophical and social science language structure for more than a hundred years is obviously based on a specific basis. The relationship between multiple elements in a society forms a specific social result, and the integration of social elements in the East in China forms a more complicated relationship. Modern Chinese society has chosen the linear causal relationship between civilization and system impacting economics and technology. Simplified thinking is of course conducive to understanding and spreading, but it may not be a real reaction of Chinese and Western societies. The theory based on this has logical shortcomings, and the actual consequences are that China has been constantly trying to make mistakes in the modernization process of the 20th century.

It is based on the linear relationship between civilization, system, economy and technology, and it forms the overall framework of Chinese thinking history research. The key point is that for traditional Chinese thinking, we must first conduct review and selection. Those who are contrary to modern value concepts must be criticized and reformed; those who are close to modern value concepts can be preserved after being transformed from head to creative transformation, and serve as the connection and transition between Chinese traditional society and modern society. The value concepts of Chinese tradition itself are no longer used as evaluation standards. Modern acceptable concepts must be expired after being criticized, thus forming a modern tradition of Chinese thinking. Such a remark has a non-historical tendency and does not pay much attention to the natural historical qualities of China’s thinking. Its evaluation does not focus on the conditions of historical situations, but on what is conducive to the modernization of contemporary China.

In this way, the history of Chinese thinkingThis presents a general request from modern to modern. Before turning to modern times, it was called the feudal era of specialization, the stupid era of the previous era of invasion; modern China has entered modern society from the modern era of invasion. All evaluations for modern China depend on modern needs. Can this modern picture be established based on a key concept, that is, what is modern? If the concept of modernity is unclear, then what is the value of Chinese thinking history research?

Max Werber has a common social science paradigm meaning for the modern and traditional divisions, and the key variable between ancient and modern times is sensibility. The sentiment that Veber understands is expressed in various fields such as economy, politics, society, and civilization. The traditional society of the premodern era is characterized by the worship of gods and their esotericism. Modernization is the “disenchantment” of the premodern era. This “does not necessarily mean that people’s ordinary knowledge of preservation conditions also add to it. But there is another meaning, namely, such knowledge or confidence: as long as people want to understand, they can understand it at any time; from the principle, there is no more esotericism. Don’t check that the energy that cannot be calculated is influencing. People can grasp everything through calculation. “2 In Veber’s view, sensibility as an important feature of modern society originates from the religious and philosophical civilizations of the East. Although Confucianism in China is also a sensibility, “the sensualism of the Puritanism means to arrange the world sensibly; the sensualism of Confucianism means to adapt to the world sensibly”3. The result is that Eastern religions have the effect of criticizing and arranging the world because of their sacred and secular powers. Confucianism only shapes the old-fashioned nature of China, and this sensuality in China is actually responsible for its own assets.

Verbo’s statement has a clear direction of results. Is modern society true or false? Do you regard it as a stone for the purpose of the knowledge competition? What happened from the East, so the soil of Oriental civilization has positive justice, and China failed to produce this modernity, so there must be some shortcomings in China’s religion and civilization. Modern scholars already have their own understanding of China by using the paradigm of Eastern social civilization. 4 But no matter how profound we understand the limitations of Vibe tomorrow, we cannot change a fact. Over the past century, the civilizational understanding of Chinese people is Weibe-like. From the fruit of modern times, the failure of modern China is due to the contradiction between Chinese civilization and modernity. The main problem is how do we understand modernity and