scholarly journals 中國傳統的整體觀的思維模式對意義與神聖價值的拯救

Author(s):  
Yu CAI

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract in English only.The failure to reform the modern Western model of medicine stems from the reductionist mode of thinking, as demonstrated by Prof. Jeffrey Bishop. Since the Enlightenment, the popular mode of thinking in Western medicine has been a kind of mechanical materialist reductionism, which is characteristic of instrumental rationality. It is also a spatial pattern of thinking—the body becomes separable from the mind. The thinking underlying Chinese medicine and Confucian bioethics based on Chinese philosophy, in contrast, is holistic in nature. Meaning and sacred values appears only in the mindset of the whole. From the Confucian bioethical perspective, a reasonable medical model is one based on the patient’s overall biological, social, psychological, and spiritual existence, rather than on any one of these as a discrete factor. Confucian bioethics is a mix of uncompromising realism and reasonable belief in the Dao of Heaven and the virtue of ren (humanity). It is rooted in traditional Chinese culture, and remains what the Chinese need today.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 33 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.

Author(s):  
Shui Chuen LEE

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.西方醫學界近年有學者提出新的「生物心理社會精神」醫藥模式以回應西方現代醫藥模式的問題。本文首先指出西方傳統之以醫藥為針對身體的正常功能之失效為主,而此一失能是身體之物理生理的表現,因而其他心理或精神的病狀或病態都必須能化約為身體的物理生理情狀,才被認可為疾病。此自然排除了心理或精神,以及由社會宗教價值失調而來的疾病。雖然此模式需要修訂,但此缺失不足以重新引入宗教教義作為診治疾病的判準。本文同時檢討了西方醫學以物種正常功能作為疾病的判準,以及近年流行的「實證醫學」政策診治模式所延續與隱含的仍然是以物理生理為主的醫藥模式,並不真能包含源自文化與價值的心理與心靈的疾病或病態。由於文化與價值的不同,中醫的醫藥模式與西方醫學不同。中國哲學以人為與天地萬物同出一源,人的生命與宇宙相對應,因此,疾病被理解為人身之小宇宙失調,而治療則以順大自然的運行法則而行。這是建立在中國傳統的儒與陰陽五行的哲學而來。儒家哲學以仁心貫通天人,因而中醫自始即不限於氣化流行的現象,而有深入了解天道運行的意義,視人為與宇宙一體的生命,身體官能之運作與宇宙之陰陽五行之氣化相應,而其中以仁心之天道貫通疾病與醫病之關係,構成中醫之儒醫理念與「醫乃仁術」的模式。心靈與心理的疾病有不同的病源和對治的方式,不能化約為物理生理的情況。在此模式中,社會文化與價值失調的疾病和病態可以被正視和治療,這亦反映了醫藥乃是文化的一環。A new conception of medicine has been proposed in response to some of the problems of the modern Western model of medicine. In this paper, I posit the view that modern Western medicine takes disease to be a bodily deviation from normal species functioning. Such malfunctioning is regarded as of the physical and physiological kind. Other types of deviations such as psychological or spiritual deviations must be reducible to symptoms before they are regarded as a disease in medical terms. Hence, psychological or mental disorders resulting from social or religious values are not catalogued as diseases, and are thus left untreated. I argue, however, that although this situation needs correction, there is no justification for introducing religious doctrine as a category of disease. This paper examines the presuppositions of the normal species functioning criterion and recent trends in evidence-based medicine, and reaches the conclusion that the present Western medical model does not readily admit some of the diseases of the human psyche caused by disorders in culture and values.Chinese medicine, which is grounded in a different culture and different values, takes a different approach to medicine. Chinese philosophy takes human beings to have the same source as the universe, and thus to represent the cosmos writ small. Disease is regarded as a disorientation of the bodily cosmos, and treatment is basically a restoration of the body and mind as a whole in harmony with natural cosmological operations. Chinese philosophy draws on Confucianism, Daoism, and the Yin-Yang School. Confucianism views empathy as unifying human beings with Heaven. Thus, in Chinese medicine the evolutionary process of the cosmos bears deeply humane and transcendental values. The correspondence between body and universe results in a conception of medicine as the operation of the principle of ren, or humanity. Accordingly, the physician is honored as a Confucian doctor, and medicine is seen as an art or humanity. Mental and psychological diseases can have independent sources, and should never be reduced to the physical and physiological. In the Chinese model, social, cultural, and value disorders are regarded as proper diseases, and can be treated as such. It allows full realization of the cultural factors at play in medicine.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 895 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.


2007 ◽  
Vol 7 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 27-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ning Yu

AbstractFollowing the theory of conceptual metaphor in cognitive linguistics, this paper studies a predominant conceptual metaphor in the understanding of the heart in ancient Chinese philosophy: THE HEART IS THE RULER OF THE BODY. The most important conceptual mapping of this metaphor consists in the perceived correspondence between the mental power of the heart and the political power of the ruler. The Chinese heart is traditionally regarded as the organ of thinking and reasoning, as well as feeling. As such, it is conceptualized as the central faculty of cognition. This cultural conceptualization differs fundamentally from the Western dualism that upholds the reason-emotion dichotomy, as represented by the binary contrast between mind and heart in particular, and mind and body in general. It is found that the HEART AS RULER metaphor has a mirror image, namely THE RULER IS THE HEART OF THE COUNTRY. The ruler as the "heart" of the country leads his nation while guided by his own heart as the "ruler" of his body. It is argued that the two-way metaphorical mappings are based on the overarching beliefs of ancient Chinese philosophy in the unity and correspondence between the microcosm of man and the macrocosm of universe. It is suggested that the conceptualization of the heart in ancient Chinese philosophy, which is basically metaphorical in nature, is still spread widely across Chinese culture today.


Author(s):  
Vladimir Yurievich Yurinov ◽  
Artur Ravilevich Karimov

The paper discusses the role of the principle of the number six in the Vedic corps of ancient Indian phi-losophy and in the philosophy of ancient China. It is shown that number, counting, numerology in the culture of Ancient India and Ancient China played an important, metaphysical role. It justifies why in an-cient Indian philosophy there could be exactly six darshanas, since they exhausted the body of Vedic philosophy (astics). The rest of the schools of an-cient Indian philosophy, therefore, could not claim the status of darshan. The special significance of the number six for Chinese philosophy is also asso-ciated with the presence of six schools and with the Yin symbolism. Since the link «yin» – «yang» is im-portant for the ancient Chinese culture, the number «nine» (the symbol «yang») also acquires special significance for the ancient Chinese culture. It is assumed that together the numbers «nine» and «six» in Chinese culture mean «the number of the Sage».


Author(s):  
Yanghui ZHANG

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.在中國文化中,保留個人軀體的完整性具有重要意義,這導致醫學教學和科研中的屍源短缺現象成為制約醫學發展的一大問題。中國傳統文化一直被各界認為是阻礙遺體捐獻的根源,但本文基於訪談和文獻分析,發現導致這一現象的原因遠較傳統文化的影響更為複雜,其核心問題在於子女與父母在看待身體、死亡和“孝”上存在的多元價值觀衝突。價值觀衝突的文化根源不僅是多數研究指認的儒家傳統文化,而是一個包含著傳統文化、現代文化、精英文化與世俗文化相互交融和衝突的複雜問題。同時,兩者雖然在觀念上存在矛盾衝突,但所追求的終極目標具有高度一致性,即實現人的“尊嚴”。In Chinese culture, the preservation of the integrity of the body is greatly significant, which has led to a shortage of corpses in medical teaching and research and become a major problem restricting the development of medical research and treatment in China. Accordingly, it is generally believed that traditional Chinese culture has been a barrier to body donation in China. However, based on interviews and literature analyses, this paper shows that the factors leading to the body donation shortage in China are much more complicated than this simple “cultural” belief. The core problem, as our investigation finds, is that children and parents are in conflict over the value of the body and death and the virtue of filial piety. The cultural root of this conflict is not merely the nature or content of the traditional Confucian culture as identified by most researchers. Rather, it is a result of the complex interplay between modern scientific, revolutionary and traditional ethical views on the role of the body, the function of the Chinese patriarchal clan system and the blending of elastic spirit and modern secular culture. Finally, the paper argues that although donators and their children may have different understandings and value conflicts, their ultimate goal is highly consistent, that is, to achieve human dignity as expressed in modern Chinese society.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 6231 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.


Author(s):  
Junrong LIU

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract in English only.Sun Muyi’s article provides illuminating views and arguments regarding the proper model of medicine. From Sun’s perspective, the bio-psycho-social model of medicine retains traces of body-mind dualism. It differs from Michel Foucault’s view of the body, which is one of phenomenological holism. That view, as Sun sees it, constitutes a comprehensive philosophical reflection on the modern bio-psycho-social medical model, providing an objective understanding of the unity of body and mind. Sun argues that a religious dimension is inevitably embedded in this objective understanding when establishing a body ethics model of contemporary medicine. This commentary agrees that Sun’s view provides useful reflections on the construction of a proper model of medicine. It is right that we should go beyond the bio-psycho-social medical model to pay more attention to the sick individual him or herself and to strengthen doctor-patient communication regarding the body and human dignity. However, it is also contended that the body ethics model of medicine should constitute a criticism of religious medical models and resist any religious zeal being applied to the study of medical ethics.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 77 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.


2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 132-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. I. Kriman

The article discusses the modern philosophical concepts of transhumanism and posthumanism. The central issue of these concepts is “What is the posthuman?” The 21st century is marked by a contradictory understanding of the role and status of the human. On the one hand, there comes the realization of human hegemony over the whole world around: in the 20th century mankind not only began to conquer outer space, invented nuclear weapons, made many amazing discoveries but also shifted its attention to itself or rather to the modification of itself. Transhumanist projects aim to strengthen human influence by transforming human beings into other, more powerful and viable forms of being. Such projects continues the project of human “deification.” On the other hand, acknowledging the onset of the new geological epoch of the Anthropocene, there comes the rejection of classical interpretations of the human. The categories of historicity, sociality and subjectivity are no longer so anthropocentric. In the opinion of the posthumanists, the project of the Vitruvian man has proven to be untenable in the present-day environment and is increasingly criticized. The reflection on the phenomenon of the human and his future refers to the concepts that explore not only human but also non-human. Very often we can find a synonymous understanding of transhumanism and posthumanism. Although these movements work with the same modern constructs and concepts but interpret them in a fundamentally different way. The discourse of transhumanism refers to the Cartesian opposition of the body and the mind. Despite the sacralization of technology and the desire to purify the posthuman from such seemingly permanent attributes of the living as aging and death, transhumanism in many ways continues the ideas of the Enlightenment. For posthumanists, the subject is nomadic and a kind of assembly of human, animal, digital, chimerical. Thus, in posthumanism the main maxim of humanism about the human as the highest value is rejected – the human ceases to be “the measure of all things.”


Author(s):  
Wei XIAO

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract in English only.Medicine is a value construction. As the combination of a variety of values and methodologies, a medical model can be used to observe and handle medical problems in the field of medicine. Indeed, human understandings of medicine have undergone a long process of historical development. Sun’s “body ethics model of medicine” can be taken as a new medical model in the post-modern context. It is achieved through the combination of the Chinese and Western ethical cultures. In my view, this new model is shaped by three key elements: human nature, the body, and ethical relationships. At the same time, the model points toward an inevitable fact of life: “Politics is nothing but medicine at a larger scale.”DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 39 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.


Author(s):  
Xudong FANG

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract in English only.Professor Lee Shui Chuen’s paper puts forth a grand plan to construct a Confucian model of medicine that differs from the Western model. However, it is a pity that Lee fails to offer sufficient Confucian resources to pursue that goal. It seems that Lee’s attention is focused largely on traditional Chinese medical theories whose origins do not lie in Confucianism alone. Lee also discusses the Confucian doctrine of humanity (ren), which essentially belongs to the realm of medical ethics. His emphasis on synesthesia (gantong) is instructive. In fact, a characteristic of any genuine Confucian model of medicine, neo-Confucian models in particular, is an understanding of those patients who have lost their synesthesia. For example, neo-Confucian master Zhu Xi called concentrating on success in the imperial examination a severe illness of the mind, and suggested that the illness could be cured through self-cultivation efforts.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 46 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 535-550
Author(s):  
Zhong Chen ◽  
Tingting Yao

AbstractAt present, semiotic studies at home and abroad generally attach importance to the interpretation of symbols themselves, while the efforts in researching on the cognitive subject of symbols needs to be intensified and more attention should be paid to the process of symbolic activities. Cultural semiotics of jingshen attempts to construct a brand-new cognitive paradigm, not only to interpret the meaning of symbols, but also to develop the study of the relationship between the subject and the object in symbolic activities. In fact, the process of symbolic activities has been constantly emphasized in traditional Chinese culture. Although for an individual “the known” is infinite and “the knowable” is finite, the limitation of “the knowable” can be overcome through “self-cultivation.” The Chinese sages raised the concept of the “unity of three-tiered self-cultivation,” namely “unity of the mind and the body,” “unity of the mind and the objective world,” and “unity of apriorism and empiricism.” From the perspective of the cognitive paradigm, this concept gives due attention to the process of symbolic activities by emphasizing the effect of the cultivation of the cognitive subject on symbolic cognition and interpretation. The unity of the “three-tiered self-cultivation” of the cognitive subject can promote the development of a cultural semiotics of jingshen to construct an ideal cognitive paradigm in pursuing jingshen freedom and liberating symbolic meaning.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document