requestId:68499ab3d48bc9.37182280.
Reevaluating the late Qing Dynasty Thought: Another ability to write the history of modern Chinese thinking
Author: Tang Wenming, Xu Bianlin, Chen Zhengguo, Chen Ming, Jiang Mei, Huang Kewu, Sakamoto Hongzi, Guan Qing, Ru Yin, Chen Bisheng
Source: “Thoughts” Issue 34, edited by Money Yongxiang, pages 289-321, Taiwan Library Book Company 2017 Edition
Time: Confucius was in the 2568th year of Dingyou October 28th Bingzi
Jesus December 15, 2017
Editor’s Note: From December 10 to 11, 2016, a seminar on the theme of “The New Controversy between China and the West in the Thought of the Late Qing Dynasty” was held at the Qing Dynasty. The content of this article is the summary speech of the seminar. The text was compiled by He Qinghan, and the draft was compiled by Tang Wenming, the person in charge of the lecture.
Tang Wenming (Teachered by the Department of Philosophy in the Qing Dynasty):
Why do our meeting theme apply “Chinese and Western New” instead of “ancient and modern Chinese and Western” applied by the current thinking world? This is a question raised by someone later. First of all, the term “Chinese and Western New” is definitely the method of vocabulary in the late Qing Dynasty. Secondly, in my understanding, the term “Chinese and Western New” expresses the original order of the late Qing Dynasty thinking, that is, the problems between Chinese and Western were placed in an important position, and the problems of new and old – that is, the problems of ancient and modernity mentioned later – are from a very large level to Chinese and Western problems. The importance of the problems between China and the West was expressed. In the minds of people at that time, “China” and “Western” meant a civilization. It is obvious that if countries are compared, the East is not the same country. In addition, the proposing of Chinese and Western problems means that the interesting understanding of Chinese and Western civilizations has been developed. “Western” as a civilization is being gradually recognized. In response to this, “China” as a civilization is being evaluated from the beginning. The process of reevaluating this civilization naturally includes reflection, doubt and even criticism. This reflects the original problem consciousness of the late Qing Dynasty’s intellectual level. Once it is said to be “ancient and modern Chinese and Western”, it means to put “ancient and modern Chinese and Western Chinese” behind, and I feel that the basic thinking framework has been put into the thinking framework since the movement of the new civilization. That is to say, at this time, the problems of ancient and modern Chinese and Western Chinese have become important problems, and the problems of Chinese and Western Chinese are from a very large level to the problems of ancient and modern Chinese and modern times. I once wrote an article to write this transformation and engraving “the problems of ancient and modern times have suppressed Chinese and Western problems.” I think this is a major difference in problem structure methods between our understanding of the late Qing Dynasty thinking and the new civilization movement.
This is related to an idea of our organization of this meeting, that is, we hope to ask a question. Here I will revise what I wrote in the invitation letter to cause discussion by the master:
The old conflict between China and the West is a serious problem in the history of modern thinking in China. In recent years, it has been paid attention to the Chinese thinking community due to the rapid changes in international situations after the Cold War and the rapid development of China. With in-depth reflection on the movement of the new civilization, the focus of the Chinese thinking community on the history of modern thinking in modern China seems to have emerged a new trend, that is, the new civilization movement is shifting to the late Qing Dynasty. Can the late Qing Dynasty thinking replace the thinking in the new civilization movement and become a model for understanding and reflecting on China’s modernity process, or can it still be treated as a transitional period, like the mainstream past?
In general, the question we are looking forward to is whether the matters about modern China should be based on late Qing thinking, rather than on new civilization movements as they did in the past? In a sentence, Bao Haimei said that from the perspective of thinking about history, the late Qing Dynasty was a more classic modern era for China. If this understanding is established, then the new civilization movement should be justified as the development and extension of late Qing thought, rather than as various past events, treating late Qing thought as a transition to new civilization movement thinking. Although we can only say that we are asking this question now, I found that many of the scholars’ comments in this meeting helped to think about this question in a step. For example, Wang Yingshi taught that the criticism of the late Qing scholars of the East was almost synchronized with their perception of the East, which shows that the thinking of the late Qing Dynasty was more reckless than the thinking since the movement of the new civilization. Jiang Meihe taught that in the late Qing Dynasty, we were seeking resources from the East rather than seeking truth from the East. When the new civilization movement came, it turned out to be the most important thing was to seek truth from the East. Although our meetings were still far from the original framework of the incident, it had already shown a change of purpose. At most, after a new exploration of the thinking of the late Qing Dynasty, we began to notice a place that was very different from the framework of the incident in the past. Next, let’s ask the three spokespersons for a comment, and then the master will discuss it without restraint.
Xu Bianlin (Teacher from the Department of History, Huadong Teacher Fan):
The theme of this meeting was profound, because in the past, when we were in the history of modern Chinese thinking, we used the May Fourth Movement as the center, and the May Fourth Movement as the starting point of China’s modernity, and the late Qing Dynasty was just the predecessor of the May Fourth Movement. If the late Qing Dynasty had a lot of interest, it was just because it was a bridge leading to the May Fourth Movement. Wang Dewei taught: “Without the late Qing Dynasty, how could the May Fourth Movement be there?” Tang Wenming taught the theme of this conference set up, for fear of overturning this explanation. The late Qing Dynasty was not just a transitional beam leading to the May Fourth Movement, butThe late Qing Dynasty and the May Fourth Movement represent two different ideas and paths. The 20th century is the May Fourth Movement, but there are problems with this path, so we need to reflect on it, go back to the late Qing Dynasty, and seek another way of ability.
I don’t want to make any judgment on whether it is right or wrong. I think there is no difference between history, as long as it is good or bad, or even better. If the late Qing Dynasty and the May Fourth Movement were two different thinking orientations, what exactly did it mean? The mainstream thinking of the May Fourth Movement is like “New Youth” and “New Trend” that match the ancient and modern times with the Chinese and Western countries, but the late Qing Dynasty 平台官网 happened to be different; the late Qing Dynasty adjusted the ancient and modern times, and even did not only adjust and discuss, but also absorbed the new Western learning with Chinese civilization as its own body. There is no dung place between China and the West, between ancient and modern times, between the new and old, between them, between them. You can even say that late Qing geniuses were very confused about the understanding of new learning, and there was no differentiation in all kinds, but this chaos just kept it open. This is very different from the late Qing Dynasty’s thinking and the May Fourth Movement. That is to say, Teacher Wang Yuanhua from Shanghai said a sentence before his death, and he said, “I am the son of the 19th century.” Later, I used this sentence as the topic of his article published in the magazine “Reading”. Of course, his words have many meanings. In one sense, he inherited the tradition of Russian thought in the nineteenth century; in the other, he specifically emphasized the Chinese thought in the early 19th century, which integrates the new Chinese and Western. Teacher Wang and Chief Secretary Wang very much agree with Du Yaquan. Although he is a “May 4th” thinking figure, he was an extension of the late Qing Dynasty. Third, Mr. Wang was a student of the Qing Dynasty. Since childhood, he has been in the Qing Dynasty. The mainstream of the Qing Dynasty school is not to doubt the past, but to confront the past, and not to regard ancient and modern Chinese and Western cultures as aligned. We understand the late Qing Dynasty, and we can also understand it from this meaning.
Secondly, we can see that the May Fourth Movement is based on Western learning, but in the late Qing Dynasty, did the middle school students still absorb it back? “Nasi studies. From a certain meaning, the thinking of the l
發佈留言