requestId:68499ac3106ce0.28784233.
Why is Tu a man Yu?—Reassessment of Xunzi’s “group” thinking under the field of Zuzi’s academic field
Author: Fang Da (Assistant Intermediary of Chinese Department of Huadong Teacher Fan and Pre-Qin Xuanzi Research Institute)
Source: “Humanities and Cities” Issue 04, 2019
Time: Confucius 25Baobao WebsiteJi Hai April 16th Dingsi
� In the late Qing Dynasty, Xunzi’s “group” was first introduced as a broad social thinking. Later, Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao used this to give the “group” that rose up in the late Qing Dynasty to the Eastern Political Party. From the perspective of Xunxue’s research, the above practices certainly opened up the “political science” and “social science” approaches discussed in modern Xunzi, but at the same time it also concealed the overall characteristics of the thinking in the pre-Qin period where Xunzi was. According to the combination of “The National People’s Republic of China” and “The Six Schools of Discussion”, “the nation” and “governance” are the ideological guidance of the cooperation between the pre-Qin sects. In contrast, “painting people to become saints” is a specific manifestation of Xunzi’s thoughts on this problem. When assessing the theoretical problem of “Tu Ren becomes a saint”, “gratitude” is undoubtedly the most important source of communication between “Tu Ren” and “saints”. At the same time, in this field, the specific directions of “people can group” and “people have meaning” have become closely related to the connotation of “gifts” because they are also the main borders of “human and birds”. In fact, it is precisely the meaning of “group” and “group division” and the specific content of “gift” that focus on each other, which can solve the key theoretical problem of “Why is Tu Ren Yu?”, and thus show Xunzi’s inheritance of Confucius’ “gift” and “benevolence” and his response to the focus problems of the Zi era.
Xunzi’s thinking on “group” has received a key point, which is related to recent events in Xunzi’s research and discussion. In the late Qing Dynasty, facing the East’s ships and gunshots, Chinese elites began to pay attention to and reflect on China’s civilization and system, so corresponding academic concepts and social mechanisms were greatly introduced. In this context, the serious understanding and introduction of Oriental society, as well as the extreme trials of Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao on the oriental political system, all need to find the Chinese soil that can take root. As a result, the three of them chose the concept of “group” together and conjunction. Xunzi’s statement on “group” not only became the key to Eastern Thought at that time, but also laterA new way to continue the research and development of Xunzi. Since then, Xunzi Siwei’s research has added two theoretical models of political science and social science. From an objective perspective, under the observation of the two, Xunzi’s thoughts have shown many theoretical issues with extremely modern meanings, but the main concepts and issues of original nature such as “sage” and “sage” have gradually been concealed. Therefore, when returning to the native language of Zuzi, that is, what Sima said about “Shanghai Governance” (“The Essay of the Six Schools”) and “National Taoism” as described in “Zhangzi·National”, “Qun” has no main effect in the classic Confucian theory of “pao people become saints” that Xunzi was very concerned about. How to exert influence is very worthy of deep discussion.
1. People and Society: Xunzi’s “group” thinking is understood at the moment
From the historical perspective of Xunzi’s discussion on modern times, he has made a generalized statement on “group” from the very beginning The “social science” interpretation of the above, of course, the content of this interpretation is extremely unscrupulous in the end; while Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao have a lot of borrowing the words of strict retribution, gradually making the “group science” that emerged in the late Qing Dynasty have a theoretical dimension of political science, and this perspective has also become one of the hot spots of Xunxue’s current research. From a practical point of view, through the above-mentioned special remarks on the meaning of “group”, the “people” in Chinese traditional thinking breaks the control of the original social form, and is able to complete the connection with the “personal and rights” form in the modern social system, and achieve a modern transformation of Chinese social theory, providing the basis for exploring corresponding theoretical issues. But what is unexpected is that, following the continuous depth of the above discussion, the study of Xunzi’s thinking of the original language and conducts a trial of the discussion from the beginning, and gradually reveals it. Judging from the initial aspirations behind this effort, the problem-exploration method in the form of “school learning” may become a new purpose under the modern academic system.
Specifically, from the perspective of existing research faces, the interpretation of “group” in Xunzi has two major characteristics: one is that related research has been concentrated in more than a hundred years since the late Qing Dynasty and the present. The second is that the research and development path is nothing more than two major areas: “social science” and “politics”. In fact, these two characteristics are integrated and are both derived from this special historical stage in the late Qing Dynasty. The society in the late Qing Dynasty had been ill for a long time and was in a state of turmoil. Many people with knowledge were eager to change the scattered situation of the common people. Therefore, after the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895, they strongly advocated the “solidarity” and actively organized various academic meetings.Among them, Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao have the greatest influence. However, in detail, the two people’s understanding of “group learning” is often unclear, which is the important touch and borrowing of strict thinking, as well as the two people’s own theoretical accusations. According to the text Liang Qichao in “The Seminar Association” and Kang Youwei in “Preface to the Seminar Association of Shanghai”, Kang and Liang’s understanding of “group learning” actually pointed to the political party and congress system in the East, and thus discovered the most basic location of the East’s strength in the political field. In the above-mentioned relevant textual evidence, the two of them mostly use the “social science” that they have been introduced seriously. For example, in the article “The Meaning of Xunzi’s Group Learning”, Kang You quoted the social meaning of “group learning” in general, but actually developed the real political request of the societal association. In this regard, Teacher Yao Tang An said: The content of the full text is absolutely irrelevant to social science. The center of his focus is politics, which is to have a strong political color. [1] Of course, it is understandable that Kang Liang is not aware of his own research, but he has actually formed a dispute over the two-person academic statements by later researchers. The country has clearly determined that Kang Youxi’s group learning “should be an Oriental social learning.” Yang Yabin also believes that although it is “incomplete, equally strict and accurate social learning, it has indeed grasped the focus of social learning.” [2] At the same time, Chen Shudeyi believed that: “The group learning mentioned by Jun Kang and Liang was not the real-life oriental society, but the combination of a half-baked social common sense and the traditional Chinese ‘group’ conception, and formed a kind of’ The so-called “new learning” of neither Chinese nor Western, neither Chinese nor Western, has been curbed, and it is far from the prototype of Eastern society. “[3] What’s more, Wang Hongbin clearly explained that at that time, the new school of widely used groups was established, that is, the study of the asset-level political group. (4)[4]
The argument of the above article is, on the one hand, Kang Liang’s approach has indeed laid the foundation for the purpose of political science for Xunzi’s interpretation, and on the other hand, it also shows that the two of them are not serious about the theory that they use to strictly regain social science. The assessment was carefully replicated from the study of Sociology by British scholar Herbert Spencer, which has many confusions between the “cultivation and peace” thinking of Oriental Society and China’s traditional Chinese thinking. [5] In fact, except that the overall framework of this book adheres to the original text, the strict translati
發佈留言