Kant, Confucianism, and “Global Rooted Philosophy” in Taiwan. From Mou Zongsan to Lee Ming-huei

Konfucijsku je obnovu u Tajvanu odredila potraga za sintezom između zapadne i tradicionalne konfucijske misli. Tajvanski moderni konfucijanci smjerali su stvoriti sustav ideja i vrijednosti sposoban razriješiti socijalne i političke probleme suvremenog globalnog društva. Zongsan Mou, najpoznatiji član druge generacije suvremenog novog konfucijanizma, smjerao je oživjeti kinesku filozofijsku tradiciju kroz dijalog s modernom europskom filozofijom, naročito s radovima Immanuela Kanta. Njegov sljedbenik, Ming-huei Lee, diskutabilno je najuvaženiji stručnjak za Kantovu filozofiju u čitavoj sinitičkoj regiji. Ovaj rad smjera usporediti njihove pristupe i ocijeniti ih u širem kontekstu suvremene kineske misli. Najprije ću predstaviti Zongsanovu elaboraciju o Kantu. Zatim, predstavit ću glavne aspekte Leejeva razvoja Mouovih teorija te u kasnijim sekcijama dati kritičku ocjenu Leejevih filozofijskih inovacija, usmjeravajući se na evaluaciju njegove konceptualizacije imanentne transcendencije i konfucijske deontologije.

Mencius, Xunzi, and the Third Stage of Confucianism

According to Karl Jaspers’s theory of the Axial age, many important cultures in the world experienced a “transcendental breakthrough” between 800 and 200 BCE; no more transformations occurred until Martin Luther’s Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century, which eventually ushered in the modern era. The implication of this theory is that only the West had a second cultural breakthrough, thus rendering moot the discussion of a third Confucian epoch. But, in reality, Confucianism had a second breakthrough during the Song—Ming period (tenth to seventeenth centuries) and spread from China to East Asia; this new form of Confucianism is called “neo-Confucianism” by Western scholars. The third Confucian epoch is a forward-looking concept that uses the lexicon of Western science and democracy to trace Confucianism’s philosophical transformation from a Chinese tradition into a part of world culture, and the integration of Mencian and Xunzian thought has to be treated in this light. Faced with Western cultural challenges, modern Confucianism has broken new ground in many ways. Mou Zongsan 牟宗三 is Mencian (as represented by Lu Xiangshan 陸象山, Wang Yangming 王陽明, and Liu Jishan 劉蕺山) in spirit and Xunzian (as represented by Zhu Xi 朱熹) in practice. Li Zehou 李澤厚, by contrast, exhorts us to talk the Mencian talk but walk the Xunzian walk; this contradictory stratagem, which he thinks will lead to a brighter and healthier future, only accentuates the power of Mencius 孟子 as a philosopher of the mind. Mencius and Xunzi 荀子 are very important in a modern deconstruction of Confucianism and the integration of their thought may very well become the impetus for another transcendental breakthrough. Is integration possible? How should they be integrated? We await the results of Confucian scholars’ open-minded explorations.

Dissemination and Reterritorialization

Confucianism as a mode of life was brought to Taiwan as early as Chinese settlement. Regarding Confucian philosophy, however, it must be traced back to the founding of modern institutions. Even though the historical background of the Chinese diaspora after 1949 is rather complex, it seems possible to examine how it has contributed to the development of academic disciplines in Taiwan, especially with regard to Confucianism. The present paper investigates the corresponding contributions of two philosophers, Tang Junyi (1909–1978) and Mou Zongsan (1909–1995). Both are important scholars, who are indispensable for the development of contemporary intellectual history in Taiwan. In order to describe the creativity in their way of dealing with ruptures, of transforming the separation into the renovation of tradition, the author analyses their efforts in terms of geo-philosophy, through the lens of two concepts, dissemination and reterritorialization, that are borrowed from Jacques Derrida, Gilles Deleuze, and Felix Guattari.

Review and Prospects of Taiwanese Philosophy Scholarship in South Korea

This study examined how Taiwanese philosophy has been received and researched in South Korea since its start to the present day. It takes the form of a survey, classifying the articles about Taiwanese philosophy which were published in South Korea over the years from 1994 to 2018 by the theme. It selected nine philosophers whose influence was profound in Taiwanese philosophy and observed the currents in the scholarship on each philosopher. The names of the selected philosophers are: Fang Thomé H., Hu Shi, Huang Chun-chieh, Lin Yutang, Liu Shuxian (Liu Shu-hsien), Mou Zongsan, Tang Junyi (Tang Chun-I), Xu Fuguan, Yu Yingshi (Yu Ying-shih). Sixty-one related papers were summarized and reviewed, and each of them was classified by the publication date, author, language, publisher and keywords. The survey revealed the limitations in Asian philosophy scholarship with regard to Taiwanese philosophy in South Korea, in terms of both quantity and quality. The survey also suggested a possible solution to these limitations and directions for scholars in the future. The study thus serves as a foundation that can boost discussion and the balanced development of South Korean philosophy studies, as well as of Asian philosophy in general.

The “Learning of Life”

While the twentieth-century Confucian thinker Mou Zongsan (1909–1995) has left behind one of the most thought-provoking and intensively studied bodies of philosophical writings in modern Chinese intellectual history, his own life and its relation to his philosophy (or “learning”), a theme at the centre of his Autobiography at Fifty from the mid-1950s, has so far remained largely unexamined. After some introductory remarks on the context and outlook of the Autobiography, my paper turns to the close relation between Mou’s conception of life and his approach to the “cultural life” of China as a nation. In doing so, I examine the notion of a distinctly Chinese (more precisely, Confucian) “learning of life” in his writing and explore the motif of “life in itself” running through the ­Autobiography. I argue that this motif is crucial for gaining a better understanding of Mou’s relation to his teacher Xiong Shili (1885–1968), his own father, the social conditions of his childhood in rural Shandong, as well as his overall approach to subjectivity as a space for articulating socio-political concerns.

Qinghua School of Logic and the Origins of Taiwanese Studies in Modern Logic

The article investigates the early thought of Mou Zongsan and Yin Haiguang, two important founding fathers of Taiwanese philosophy, who contributed significantly to its formation as an academic discipline in the two decades following 1949. The article reveals how their ideas related to modern logic originated from the so-called “Qinghua School of (Mathematical) Logic”. Herewith, the article tries to provide a platform that can be used to answer the questions of continuity and succession between the studies of modern logic as conducted at the most progressive (modernised) universities in late Republican China (especially Qinghua University) on the one side, and the formation and development of studies in logic in post-1949 Taiwan, on the other.