The controversy between "ancient and modern, Chinese and Western" and the contemporaneity of Chinese philosophy

Liu Liangjian

True philosophy is always concerned with the issues of the times, and then expresses the spirit of the times in a theoretical way. In the 90s of the 20th century, Feng Qi believed that the central issue of the times "manifested itself in the ideological and cultural field as a dispute between 'ancient and modern China and the West', that is, how to analytically study the advanced culture of the West, criticize and inherit one's own national traditions, so as to understand China and the West, correctly answer China's current practical problems, and enable the Chinese nation to embark on the road of freedom, liberation, prosperity, prosperity and strength." In the 21st century, the central issue of the times has changed to how to build the modern civilization of the Chinese nation. Moreover, the changes of the times have touched the very foundations of human civilization, which forces us to consider "where humanity is going" at the same time. Nevertheless, in the field of ideology and culture, the controversy between "ancient and modern, Chinese and Western" is still our basic situation, and the interaction between "ancient", "modern", "Chinese" and "Western" elements is more complex, which needs to be further pondered.

01

"Pearls of all times": the interplay structure of "ancient and modern China and the West".

Looking at the rough lines, "ancient", "modern", "middle" and "western" show a development trend from isolation to system, from separation and independence to mutual development. In the middle of the 19th century, Wei Yuan and other thinkers were the first to set their sights on the West, get rid of the shroud of the prevailing Huazun Yi and humble view, and see the "long skills" of "Yi", that is, the strong ships and sharp cannons of the West, and then put forward the bold proposition of "mastering the long skills of Yi to control Yi". However, according to their understanding, the long skills such as strong ships and cannons are like isolated entities that can be used by us, or they can be extracted from the West alone and imitated and learned. After that, the Westernists represented by Zhang Zhidong and others advocated "middle school as the body, Western learning as the use". "Body" is China's ethical and political system and ideological concept, which cannot and does not need to change; "Use" is the achievement of Western civilization at the level of instrumentality, and at the same time, it can be used by us. This shows that the Westernists have noticed that strong ships and cannons belong to the elements of the modern instrument system. However, they have not yet seen, or do not recognize, that modern instrumental systems belong to larger systems. After the First Sino-Japanese Naval War, Yan Fu was shocked by the urgency of the changes in the world, and fiercely criticized the "use of Chinese style and Western style", emphasizing that Chinese civilization has its own use, and Western civilization also has its use. Yan Fu's systematic understanding of Western civilization is undoubtedly more comprehensive: not only in artifacts, but also in ethical and political systems and ideological culture. So, is it possible to form a larger system between Western civilization and Chinese civilization? If we ask Yan Fu this question, his answer is obviously no. In his view, the use of body is in the case of "one thing": what kind of body a thing has, it has a corresponding use. The body of the object is different, and its purpose is also different: just as the horse has the purpose of reaching far, and the ox has the purpose of carrying weight. It is impossible to put the body of one thing together with the purpose of another. "Middle school has the body of middle school, and Western learning has the body of Western learning. If they are divided, they will stand together, and if they are combined, they will die. During the May Fourth New Culture Movement, Liang Shuming, on the one hand, identified China, the West, and India as three civilizations with different directions of desire, and on the other hand, he advocated that according to the development of world civilization, we need to achieve a deep harmony between Chinese and Western civilizations in the direction of desire at this stage, so as to give birth to a new direction of desire (the spirit of Confucius's "gang"). Although this idea seems to be crude and simplistic, it actually advocates the creation of a new "body" by merging the "Chinese style" and the "Western style" from the perspective of intent to reconcile. This is undoubtedly a profound breakthrough insight. According to this view, although middle schools have the body of middle school, and Western learning has the body of Western learning, Chinese and Western learning may still generate a new learning in the interaction, and this new learning may not be Chinese or Western, but it is also Chinese and Western, but as a "thing", it also has its body and has its use, even if its body is not Chinese and Western, and it is also Chinese and Western, and its use is not Chinese and Western, and it is also Chinese and Western. Since then, thinkers with contemporary spiritual temperament have generally advocated that we should adopt a bisecting attitude towards modern Western culture and ancient Chinese culture, discarding the dross and taking the essence. The fundamental foothold of the trade-off is the contemporary practice of China's reality; The fundamental goal of the trade-off is to develop China's new culture. The "newness" of this culture is undoubtedly a positive result of the interplay of "ancient", "modern", "Chinese" and "Western".

It is worth noting that with the development of the interaction between "ancient", "modern", "Chinese" and "Western", the universal dimension has been gradually revealed. The central issue of the times is, first of all, how to realize national self-help. But even in the case of "the slightest disappointment, i.e., the elimination and defeat", visionary Chinese thinkers have always been thinking about China's problems while planning for the future of the world. For example, in the 30s of the 20th century, Xiong Shili proposed: "We must wait for the reconciliation of Chinese, Indian and Western thoughts, and plant its roots for the new culture of the future world", in order to realize that "all different beings are suitable for the sea of sex, and human beings are enough to share their wishes". The manifestation of the cosmopolitan dimension is the result of the internal logic of the interaction between "ancient", "modern", "Chinese" and "Western". The structure as a whole is greater than the elements that are the parts. The interaction between "ancient", "modern", "Chinese" and "Western" inevitably emerges with global characteristics that surpass "ancient", "modern", "Chinese" and "Western". In this interaction, the ancient Chinese concept of "tianxia" "becomes not only applicable to awakening nationalism, but also potentially transforms into a sense of global citizenship." In order to solve the Chinese problem, it is necessary to take the world into perspective, and the solution and outcome of the Chinese problem will inevitably affect the future of the world and the future of human civilization. Although we call the positive results of the interaction between "ancient", "modern", "Chinese" and "Western" "Chinese new culture" or "Chinese modern civilization", its significance is actually beyond China.

It should be added that Western philosophers with contemporary consciousness also saw a cosmopolitan dimension from Europe. For example, the contemporary German philosopher Rombach argued, "Break away from the epoch of European history as a whole and enter a new era of human commonality." What is at stake here is not a European age, but a human age". This also shows from one side that the prominence of the cosmopolitan dimension in objective and subjective is itself a world phenomenon.

The cosmopolitan characteristics of "ancient", "modern", "Chinese" and "Western" are not only manifested in the spatial dimension of China's overflow to the world, but also in the dimension of time as the world-historical significance of China's new culture. Taking the world into perspective also means taking world history into the field of vision and thinking about the significance of China's modern civilization in the context of the development of world civilization. The vision of world history is not only the requirement of the universal characteristics that emerge from the interplay of "ancient", "modern", "Chinese" and "Western" on the spiritual subject, but also a part of the cosmopolitan characteristics that emerge from the interplay of "ancient", "modern", "Chinese" and "Western", that is, the part of the spiritual subject. From the 5th century BC to the middle of the 19th century AD, there was relatively little interaction between the different civilizations of the East and the West, and they were basically in a state of independent development. In the West, the two Greek civilizations (Greek civilization and Hebrew civilization) gradually merged with each other from their independence, and eventually formed a more universal Christian tradition, which became the dominant form of medieval European civilization. In the East, Buddhism was introduced to China, and Chinese civilization was absorbed and digested, gradually forming the Chinese medieval civilization represented by Chinese Buddhism and Song and Ming Dynasty science. There was naturally contact between the European and Chinese civilizations, but this contact basically did not affect their independent development. After the middle of the 19th century, modern European civilization had an oppressive influence on Chinese civilization. However, we have seen that in the process of learning from the modern civilization of the West, Chinese civilization has gradually shown new civilizational characteristics, and these new civilizational characteristics have global significance that is not limited to China. It is in this sense that Feng Qi pointed out that Chinese and Western civilizations "have begun to converge on Chinese soil and need to be further promoted, which is also a major event of world significance."

The encounter between Chinese and Western civilizations on the land of China has launched a large-scale blending and interactive practice of human civilization. During the period of the May Fourth New Culture Movement, the interplay of "ancient", "modern", "Chinese" and "Western" gradually took shape, and the characteristics of the world gradually emerged, and the "contemporary" signs that were different from ancient and modern began to appear. From the perspective of world history and the history of human civilization, contemporary times are of revolutionary significance. In On the Origin and Purpose of History, Jaspers asks about the possibility of a "second axial age": "The spiritual wealth created by Europe between 1500 and 1800...... Dwarfing science and technology, it demands a parallel with the Axial Age two thousand and a half hundred years ago. Will there really be a Second Axis Age in the centuries that followed? His answer was cautious: in the last two hundred years, science and technology have changed the world, and all mankind has been embroiled in a common destiny; Nevertheless, a "permanent age of spiritual creation" comparable to the times of Confucius, Lao Tzu, Buddha, and Socrates has yet arrived. If we pay attention to the interplay of "ancient", "modern", "Chinese" and "Western" on the land of China and its cosmopolitan character, perhaps we have more reason than Jaspers to believe that the second axial age of mankind has begun, and the "permanent spiritual creation" has dawned. Human civilization is facing great changes unseen in 3,000 years, and is experiencing an "intergenerational leap" from "modern" to "contemporary", just as human society jumped from the former Axial Age to the Axial Age. If this is the case, the contemporary has a zeitgeist quality that distinguishes it from the ancient and modern times, that is, contemporaneity.

What is "contemporaneity" as a characteristic of the zeitgeist? Objectively speaking, we are still at the turning point from the modern to the contemporary, and the rich connotation of contemporaneity itself has yet to be unfolded in the reality of history itself. However, our most basic feeling of the times is, first and foremost, our sense of time and history. Contemporaneity, therefore, means, first and foremost, a unique experience of the times and a view of history. The view of history in the classical period was mainly expressed in the theory of historical degradation or the theory of historical cycles. For Plato, human history began with the ideal Golden Age, passed through the Silver Age and the Bronze Age, and continued to decline to the Black Iron Age. The Book of Rites and Rites also places the most ideal world of Datong in the distant past, and the Spring and Autumn Ram family describes history as a process of decline from the peaceful era to the peaceful era and then to the troubled era. In modern China, Yan Fu used the method of "translation and interpretation" to translate and introduce the Theory of Heavenly Evolution. "Heavenly Evolution" elevates evolution to the status of Heavenly Dao, and evolution is understood in the sense of evolution. In Huxley's view, historical evolution includes not only upward evolution, but also the aspects of degradation, circulation, and even the complex aspects of the simultaneous evolution of different aspects such as bitterness, happiness, good and evil. For these aspects, Yan Fu simplified them in the process of "translation and interpretation", and the process of historical evolution was purified as a linear evolutionary process from "ancient" to "modern". Yan Fu once said: "The people of China are so ancient and sudden, and the people of the West are better than the ancients." Here, the difference between China and the West is first and foremost a difference in the view of history. Thus, moving from antiquity to modernity requires a shift from degeneration to evolution in the view of history. The change in the view of history and the transformation of history itself is a process of one and two, two and one. This applies to the contemporary at the same time: from the modern to the contemporary, and at the same time requires a shift from a naïve linear view of history to a contemporary view of history.

So, what is this contemporary view of history, which is different from a linear view of history? As mentioned above, the cosmopolitan characteristics of "ancient", "modern", "Chinese" and "Western" are not only manifested in the spatial dimension of China's overflow to the world, but also in the dimension of time as the world-historical significance of China's new culture. At this time, we seem to first see "ancient", "modern", "middle" and "west" as a whole structure, and then observe its place in the larger space and time (world and world history) from the outside. Now, if we look at the inside of this overall structure, the relationship between the ancient and the modern is not a simple linear relationship from the ancient to the present, but a relationship between the ancient and the modern. There is the present in the past, and there is the ancient in the present. The present has been conceived in the past, and the past can be transformed into the elements of the present. When we say that the critical acceptance of ancient Chinese culture is conducive to the promotion of China's new culture, it means that the "ancient" of Chinese culture can and should participate in the generation of the "present" of China's new culture. We might as well use the image of "always the pearl" to understand the relationship between the ancient and the modern. "All the time", this expression is derived from "word beads", and its imagery is derived from the story of the Fazang. According to legend, in order to explain to Wu Zetian the abstract truth of "endless origin", Fazang "learned from the ten sides, arranged in eight directions, one up and down, more than one zhang apart, face to face, a Buddha statue in Zhong'an, a torch to illuminate it, and the light of each other's shadows". All the time, every moment in the "ancient and modern" is a pearl, the beads reflect each other, a pearl appears all the beads (one shot more), all the beads appear in a pearl (many times one), heavy reflections, one more is not hindered, the mist is all over the photo, and the interplay is used. In other words, in addition to the past and the present, there is also a future (future); The present looks at the past and the present looks at the present, and the past and the present take each other, then the present and the future are also mutually photographed; The ancient and modern take each other, and the present take each other, and the ancient and modern are also mutually photographed.

In other words, the "jewel" in "Jewel of Time" means that every moment is precious. A naïve linear view of history conceives of a golden world as the ideal state of history, and places it as the end point in the future. As a result, there may be two tendencies: on the one hand, the golden world is understood rigidly, so as to close history to a fixed end, and sometimes even to derive a certain historical conclusion, that is, to naively believe that the historical ideal has been fully realized in reality; On the other hand, every moment of the past and present is only instrumental for the golden world of the future. As a possibility, people are always inseparable from future-oriented planning, and historical ideals are one of the indispensable dimensions. However, the journey of the avenue is endless. As long as time does not stop, history will be in the process of continuous generation, and the golden world, as the ideal of history, will continue to update its specific content in the process of continuous generation. In other words, human beings are not only the existence of possibility, but also the existence of history and the present, and the review of the past, the investment in the present, and the planning for the future are equally important. Moreover, the three dimensions of the past, the present, and the future have formed a "pearl of all time" structure that reflects and entangles each other. Therefore, each moment has its own irreplaceable value, and although each moment has important value for the future, its value does not lie in the fact that it is only a tool or transition to achieve the "coming" of the ideal. The constantly generated present is itself. In this sense, it is possible to say that "the present is the moment". The present is not just itself, because it contains the past and the future.

Furthermore, the "time" of "Jewel of Time" is not limited to time, but also includes space. Time, the historical time and civilization space in which people are active. As far as historical time is concerned, "always the pearl" means that the past and the present come and go together. Similarly, in terms of the space of civilizations, "always the pearl" means that different civilizations such as China, the West, and India are re-intertwined, and there is no hindrance to the abundance of them. In addition, time and space are not separated from each other, and "ancient and modern Chinese and Western" is not the same as "Chinese and Western" plus "ancient and modern". "Ancient" has "Chinese and Western"; The "middle" of "China and the West" has "ancient and modern", and the "west" of "China and West" also has "ancient and modern"; In this way, "China", "West", "Ancient" and "Modern" are intertwined. Therefore, in terms of time and space, "always the pearl" can mean that "ancient and modern China and the West" are all over the world, and they are used in each other. In other words, with the help of "Pearls of Time", we understand "ancient and modern China and the West" from the original "struggle" to the "space-time generation structure" of "ancient and modern China and the West". The "time" here is the intertwining and interweaving of each moment in the past, present, and future in the "pearl of time", which is different from the upward trajectory of modern historical consciousness oriented to the future. The "emptiness" here is the symbiosis of multiple civilizations, including China, the West, India and other civilizations, which is different from the life-and-death battlefield of the clash of civilizations as understood by modern dualistic thinking. In addition, the "time" composed of the past, present, and future and the "space" as a symbiotic space of multiple civilizations are also intertwined, bringing us into a more complex experience of time and space.

In a word, the imagery of "Jewel of Time" helps us to understand the interplay structure of "ancient and modern, Chinese and Western", and to experience the clash of civilizations with a new experience of time and space.

02

"Chinese philosophy" experience and intersecting structure

Chinese philosophy has existed since ancient times, but the name "Chinese philosophy" is the product of the controversy between "ancient and modern China and the West". As mentioned above, during the May Fourth New Culture Movement, "ancient", "modern", "Chinese" and "Western" were used in tandem, and cosmopolitan characteristics emerged, which was different from the ancient and modern "contemporary" and emerged. It was during this period that Hu Shi published Outline of the History of Chinese Philosophy. From the very beginning, this work, which laid the paradigm for "Chinese philosophy", took the world into its field of vision, and reflected the positioning of Chinese philosophy in the general trend of the development of world philosophy, reflecting a distinct contemporaneity. Hu Shi wrote in the Outline of the History of Chinese Philosophy: Introduction: "Philosophy in the world can be roughly divided into two branches: East and West. The eastern branch is divided into two lines: Indian and Chinese. The western branch is also divided into two lines: Greek and Jewish. In the beginning, these four lines can be counted as occurring independently. After the Han Dynasty, the Jewish department joined the Greek department and became the philosophy of the Middle Ages in Europe. The Indian department joined the Chinese department and became the philosophy of the Middle Ages. In modern times, the power of the Indian system gradually declined, and Confucianism revived, which gave rise to the philosophy of modern China, which lasted from the Song, Yuan, Ming and Qing dynasties to the present day. European thought gradually broke away from the power of the Jewish system, and the modern philosophy of Europe was born. Today, these two philosophies come into contact with each other and influence each other. Fifty years from now, a hundred years from now, it is not known whether a philosophy of the world will occur. Hu Shih's grand narrative of the history of world philosophy is simply the evolution from "philosophy in the world" to "philosophy in the world": the two systems of the East and the West develop independently, go through the internal integration of the two systems, and finally achieve the integration between the East and the West, forming the "philosophy of the world". The "world" in "Philosophy of the World" only identifies an external space. The true cosmopolitan nature has not yet been formed, and it is only the different regions of the world that are substantially related to their respective philosophies. In contrast, the "philosophy of the world" not only encompasses the original modern European philosophy and modern Chinese philosophy, but also forms something that does not exist in either, that is, a cosmopolitan nature that transcends the "East" and "West". The "world" in "Philosophy of the World" signifies cosmopolitanism. Hu Shi understands his time from the perspective of "philosophy of the world", which is what we call "contemporary": "Our academic thought today has two major sources: on the one hand, the ancient books handed down to us by sinologists; On the one hand, there are the old and new doctrines of the West. After the convergence of these two currents, if China cannot produce a new Chinese philosophy, it will really miss this good opportunity. This kind of "new philosophy" that has been developed through the interplay of "ancient and modern China and the West" is not only the philosophy of contemporary China, but also the philosophy of the world. Judging from the practice of Chinese philosophy after Hu Shih, China has not failed to live up to the good opportunities given by the times.

In addition to Hu Shi's "Outline of the History of Chinese Philosophy", the foundation work of the "Chinese philosophy" paradigm is also the two-volume "History of Chinese Philosophy" written by Feng Youlan in the 30s of the 20th century. "The History of Chinese Philosophy" begins with the words: "Philosophy is a Western term. One of his main tasks in the history of Chinese philosophy is to select and describe the names of the so-called philosophies in the West among the various studies in Chinese history. Judging from this oft-quoted sentence, Feng Youlan relied on Western "philosophy" to establish Chinese "philosophy". "Philosophy" not only exists before "philosophy" in time, but it also precedes "philosophy" logically because it provides standards and paradigms for "philosophy". Why, then, does "philosophy" have such a priority? From the standpoint of Feng Youlan's new realism, "philosophy" is universal, and the "philosophy" established with reference to "philosophy" is also universal; Chinese philosophy is the philosophy found in and found in China, and there is no Chinese philosophy that is different from Western philosophy. In other words, "philosophy" and "philosophy" have different names but are the same thing, they are different names formed in interlinguistic contexts, but their referents are the same. The universality of philosophy or philosophy is reflected both in content and in specific forms. In terms of content, philosophy consists of three parts: cosmology, life, and knowledge. To talk about the history of Chinese philosophy is to select the above three parts of various studies in Chinese history and narrate them. In terms of form, Feng Youlan emphasizes conceptual analysis and logical argumentation. The History of Chinese Philosophy is an exemplary and detailed analysis of the traditional Chinese philosophical concept of "heaven". Philosophy is the product of reason, and the use of concepts to reason requires the corresponding argument (the basis or premise of the case) in addition to giving an argument (deciding a case). Moreover, there is a coherent system of doctrine between the many arguments, which is unified in the "vision" of the philosopher. "All true philosophical systems are like a tree of branches and leaves, and all the parts of them are carried out from end to end and are united."

Feng Youlan's view of establishing Chinese "philosophy" in accordance with Western "philosophy" has profoundly influenced the basic paradigm of the study of the history of Chinese philosophy and the study of Chinese philosophy. However, what has long been overlooked is that in Feng Youlan's view, Chinese "philosophy" has an aspect that escapes from Western "philosophy". Feng Youlan said that China's "study of righteousness" is research and the way of heaven. The part of the study of the Heavenly Dao is roughly equivalent to the cosmology in Western philosophy. The part of the study of life is roughly equivalent to the theory of life in Western philosophy. In the midst of the Essir interpretation, there was already a sense of reluctance in this. Furthermore, there is a great deal of methodological difference between Western philosophy and Chinese philosophy. The methodology of Western philosophy is epistemology and logic, and only the pre-Qin famous science in Chinese philosophy is barely comparable to it. In the chapter "Hui Shi, Gongsun Long and Other Debaters" in the History of Chinese Philosophy, it is said that there are very few materials handed down by Hui Shi and other debaters, but they still need to be talked about, because "there are very few theories in the history of Chinese philosophy that are only of pure theoretical interest, and if they are not talked about again, the history of Chinese philosophy will feel even more deformed." Hui Shi and other debaters did not only have purely theoretical interests, such as Gongsun Long's debate on "white horses and non-horses", and they really wanted to correct their names and become the world ("Gongsun Longzi Traces of Mansion"). Nevertheless, the unique position of Mingxue in the history of Chinese philosophy cannot be ignored. On the other hand, the Song and Ming Dynasty in Chinese philosophy attaches great importance to methodology, but this methodology is not the method of Western philosophy. The methodology emphasized by Song Ming Theory is intended for self-cultivation, and in the words of science, it is the theory of work. The theory of work is oriented towards the pursuit of goodness, which is different from the theory of knowledge and logic oriented by seeking truth. If Chinese philosophy is established strictly in accordance with Western philosophy, then the history of Chinese philosophy can be completely free of labor. But Feng Youlan didn't actually do that. For example, Feng Youlan explained Zhuangzi's statement that "heaven and earth are born together with me, and all things are one with me", Mencius's statement that "all things are prepared for me", and Song Confucian's statement that "where people want to end, heavenly principles are popular", etc., as a kind of mysticism. The method of mysticism is either self-forgetfulness through pure experience, or selfishness through forgiveness and benevolence. Whether it is "forgetting" or "going", the common denominator is a negative approach. The negative method is obviously not a method in the sense of epistemology and logic, but a work in the sense of self-cultivation. The History of Chinese Philosophy undoubtedly emphasizes the fundamental importance of the logical method of analysis, but it has not completely forgotten mysticism, and thus has consciously or unconsciously allowed Chinese philosophy to escape from the scope framed by Western philosophy. The History of Chinese Philosophy once used the metaphor of "new wine in old bottles" to illustrate that the old framework of Chinese classics in modern times was finally broken because it could not accommodate Western studies. In this way, "philosophy" and "philosophy" are not the same bottle makeover, but a new bottle created to be compatible with old local sake and foreign liquor.

It can be seen that the relationship between "philosophy" and "philosophy" is quite complex for Feng Youlan. On the one hand, Feng Youlan emphasized the universality of philosophy and advocated the establishment of Chinese philosophy modeled on Western philosophy. In this sense, "Chinese philosophy" is really "Chinese philosophy": in terms of the relationship between "China" and "philosophy", "China" does not affect "philosophy"; "China" is the external space in which "philosophy" is placed, not the inner field in which "philosophy" can be born. On the other hand, Feng Youlan does not blindly emphasize the universality of Western philosophy. The History of Chinese Philosophy escapes from the scope of Western philosophy and celebrates a certain kind of mysticism, and in fact acknowledges to a considerable extent the special aspects of Chinese philosophy that are different from Western philosophy. Chinese philosophy is both dependent on and escaping from Western philosophy. In this way, "Chinese philosophy" is actually a structure in which "ancient and modern Chinese and Western" (traditional Chinese ideological resources and Western modern philosophy) are used interchangeably. Such a structure requires us, on the one hand, to overcome the violent suppression of Chinese philosophy by Western philosophy; On the other hand, avoid simply rejecting Western philosophy in the name of China. More positively, such a structure requires us to define a philosophical stance on the world that transcends China and the West. The "world" is the structural whole, and the "middle" and "west" are the structural elements. World philosophy is a new achievement that emerges after the mutual agitation and application of philosophy and philosophy. On the one hand, world philosophy is both in philosophy and philosophy, but it is not the abstract universal co-existence of philosophy and philosophy; On the other hand, world philosophy is neither representative nor exhaustive by philosophy.

Feng Youlan is not only a historian of philosophy, but also an original philosopher. The new science he created has become a model for "Chinese philosophy". The new science advocates "extreme wisdom and moderation", marking the realization of the realm of heaven and earth in the human world. This proposition is clearly heavily influenced by traditional Chinese philosophy. Feng Youlan believes that the new science is the most philosophical philosophy, and the methods used are the most philosophical metaphysical methods, including positive methods and negative methods. The positive method, that is, the method of logical analysis, is taken from Western philosophies such as Plato, Spinoza, Kant, the Vienna School, etc. In Feng Youlan's view, "the permanent contribution of Western philosophy to Chinese philosophy is the logical analysis method". The negative approach would require a shift from the West to Chinese Zen Buddhism. The realm of heaven and earth as mentioned in the new theory can only be experienced through negative methods. If it is said that Chinese and Western philosophies have their own shortcomings and strengths in positive and negative methods, and only the combination of positive and negative methods can produce the philosophy of the future, then Xinli is a philosophy of the future that combines positive and negative methods, a world philosophy that can be used in Chinese and Western philosophy.

Feng Qi, who studied under Jin Yuelin, Feng Youlan and others, is also a historian of philosophy and philosophy. After completing the two types of "History of Philosophy", namely "The Logical Development of Ancient Chinese Philosophy" and "The Revolutionary Process of Modern Chinese Philosophy", he created his own theoretical system, "Wisdom Theory". On this basis, he reviewed his own life and thought process, and made a systematic reflection on the relationship between the controversy between "ancient and modern China and the West" and contemporary Chinese philosophy.

The controversy between "ancient and modern China and the West" has put forward basic problems that need to be solved in contemporary Chinese philosophical thinking. In order for philosophy to answer the controversy between "ancient and modern China and the West", it must first solve the problems of historical outlook and epistemology. "In order to solve the dispute between 'ancient and modern China and the West', it is necessary to understand the regularity of how human history and Chinese history have evolved from the past to the present and how to develop into the future. At the same time, in order to answer the controversy between 'ancient and modern China and the West', it is necessary to integrate the advanced theories learned from the West with China's specific reality, so that they can be put into practice, and a very important epistemological issue is involved here, that is, the relationship between knowledge and action, subjectivity and objectivity. "In connection with the historical outlook and epistemological problems, people are faced with great changes in their ways of thinking and values, so the problems of logic and methodology, the doctrine of freedom and the theory of value have also become the basic problems that philosophy urgently needs to solve.

The controversy between "ancient and modern China and the West" has also brought contemporary Chinese philosophical thinking into the context of a hundred schools of thought in the world. From a global perspective, today we are in an era of mutual influence between Eastern and Western cultures. "Chinese and Western cultures, Chinese and Western philosophies have begun to converge on the land of China, and need to be further promoted, which is also a major event of world significance." To further promote the convergence of Chinese and Western philosophies on Chinese soil, which is of great significance to the world, is to do philosophy on a global scale and consciously participate in the contemporary development of the history of world philosophy with our own philosophical creations. Feng Youlan is undoubtedly a model in this regard. In the process of carrying out his original philosophical work, he consciously placed his philosophical thoughts in the context of the development of Eastern and Western philosophy. As for Western philosophy, he considered his philosophical work "to re-establish metaphysics through the empiricism of the Vienna School"; For Chinese philosophy, he started from his own philosophy to determine the value of the major schools in the history of Chinese philosophy. Therefore, his philosophical thinking of "New Theory" is to "continue to say", not only following the theory of Song and Ming Theory, but also following the theory of Western philosophy, and therefore also speaking about the future of the world. And then he said, "to be able to speak the words of a true family." There is one word and a hundred schools of thought, so naturally there will be different opinions and a worldwide contention between different schools of thought.

To participate in the world's controversy, we need to face all kinds of rich ideological resources of "ancient and modern, Chinese and Western" with an open mind. This is not only a "good opportunity" for Hu Shih, but also a great challenge to the minds of philosophers. Feng Qi said: "Generally speaking, philosophers who have had a positive impact on modern history have always been good at combining advanced Western ideas with China's excellent traditions to answer practical and theoretical questions, so as to make creative contributions." The philosophical thinking is inseparable from the utilization of the ideological resources of the history of philosophy, and the Chinese philosophical thinking in the context of the controversy between "ancient and modern China and the West" has to be "cross-opened": on the one hand, it has established vertical connections with its own traditional philosophy, and on the other hand, it has established horizontal connections with Western modern philosophy. For philosophical thinking, the so-called establishment of connections inherently requires the adoption of the ideological posture of "knowing how to achieve transcendence": treating the ancient and modern Chinese and Western ideological resources as their own treasures, and taking them for themselves through conscious critical use. On the one hand, Chinese philosophers see themselves as the rightful successors of traditional Chinese thought, and at the same time as the rightful heirs of Greek, Hebrew, Islamic, Indian, and other traditions of thought. On the other hand, with the encounter of different intellectual traditions, the historicity and cultural relativity of truth have been highlighted as never before. No one tradition of thought (let alone a school of thought within a tradition, such as the Confucian or Taoist traditions in the ancient Chinese tradition of thought) has no unique and absolute truth, and is not enough to solve all the problems of contemporary reality in a ready-made way. An open philosophical thinker has the ability to admit the truth of his own intellectual tradition, as well as the truth of other intellectual traditions.

In addition, Feng Qi also discussed the controversy between "ancient and modern China and the West" at the level of philosophical discourse. Philosophical thinking is inseparable from categories, and the categories used by contemporary Chinese philosophical thinking often fuse ancient and modern China and the West. Feng Qi commented on Jin Yuelin's philosophy: "Jin Yuelin integrates Chinese and Western philosophies, and his entire theory of knowledge talks about the unity of sensibility and reason, matter and reason on the basis of realism, which is summarized as 'to return experience to those who have gained experience', which not only inherits the Chinese tradition, but also connects China and the West." Inheriting the Chinese tradition and connecting China and the West is not only the characteristic of Jin Yuelin's philosophy, but also the characteristics of Jin Yuelin's philosophical terms: "sensibility" and "reason" come from Western modernity, and "matter" and "reason" come from ancient Chinese tradition. Moreover, in terms of the categories of "matter" and "reason", on the one hand, they come from the ancient Chinese tradition, and on the other hand, they are endowed with new philosophical implications. There are many use cases of similar situations in Jin Yuelin's book "On the Dao", such as "several", "luck", "number", "sex", "life", etc. The same is true of Feng Qi's transformation of the Buddhist term "turning knowledge into wisdom". According to Feng Qi's usage, "zhi" (knowledge) is the scientific knowledge of specific things and principles, and "zhi" (wisdom) is the understanding of "sex and the way of heaven": "the way of heaven" is the entire cosmic torrent and its evolutionary process, "sex" is the comprehensive activity of the self as a concrete spiritual subject (as the unity of group and individuality), and "and" is the interaction between the cosmic torrent and man as the subject. In addition to philosophical categories, traditional propositions that have existed since ancient times can also acquire new meanings. For example, after Jin Yuelin's "systematic elaboration and refined philosophical analysis", the ancient idea of "Tao parallel but not contradictory" has taken on a new significance. Feng Qi thus made a general assertion: to carry out a systematic elaboration and refined philosophical analysis of traditional categories and propositions, so as to give them a new philosophical significance, "This is not only a necessary part of the modern transformation of traditional Chinese philosophy, but also the only way for Chinese philosophy to go to the world." Following Feng Qi's argument with a slight change, we might as well say that the systematic elaboration and refined philosophical analysis of foreign categories and foreign propositions, so as to give them new philosophical significance, is not only a necessary part of the sinicization of Western foreign philosophy, but also the only way for Chinese philosophy to go global.

Above, we have analyzed the situation of "Chinese philosophy" in Hu Shi and Feng Youlan, as well as Feng Qi's thoughts on the relationship between "ancient and modern Chinese and Western" and Chinese philosophy. It is not difficult to see that the controversy between "ancient and modern China and the West" restricts the movement of contemporary Chinese philosophy, and even "Chinese philosophy" itself is the product of the controversy between "ancient and modern China and the West". From another point of view, "Chinese philosophy" embodies the interplay structure of "ancient and modern China and the West" from a specific perspective. We used to call this structure "space-time generative structure". "Chinese philosophy" is not only the product of the spatio-temporal generative structure of "ancient and modern China and the West", but also presents itself as a specific form of spatio-temporal generative structure: traditional Chinese philosophy and Western modern philosophy are integrated and mutually reinforcing, and gradually generate a future-oriented world philosophy.

03

Generation, coherence and commonality of structures

The essence of the intertwined development structure of "ancient and modern China and the West" lies first in generation. The structure has its own established and stable aspect, but it is also lively. The elements contained in it are different from yin and yang, and they are intertwined and used in each other, so that the structure is in a continuous process of generation. As mentioned earlier, the German philosopher Rombach was concerned with the cosmopolitan dimension. His insight is based on his insight into structure. In his view, structure precedes existence, and "the deepest foundation of reality is not the condition of existence, but a form of movement, a mode of occurrence." "From a structural point of view, different cultures are not fixed and opposing entities, nor are they mechanically placed together, but interact with each other, and in the process emerge worldwide.

Interestingly, Rombach's version of philosophy itself is a good example of how ideas emerge from the intersection of "ancient and modern, Chinese and Western". On the one hand, it follows the entire history of Western philosophy, using the three basic words "entity", "system" and "structure" to identify the development history of Western philosophy from ancient times to the present, and believes that the contemporary era is in the process of transforming from system to structure. On the other hand, it uses "structure" to connect the experience of Tao in Chinese thought. In Rombach's view, the "structure" is closer to the Chinese "Tao" than to the Western "Logos". Logos seeks objectivity from a standpoint that transcends things, while Tao places essence in the process of transition from one thing to another, based on the experience of the path. However, he argues that the basic word of our time is "structure" rather than "Tao": in theory, the idea of Tao is only guiding and needs to be further elaborated from the perspective of structure; In terms of terminology, "Dao" is easy to be confined to Chinese cultural traditions, while "structure" is more inclusive and more suitable for "the kind of cultural forms that come together with our contemporaries", that is, cultural forms that are no longer limited to the scope of Chinese and Western traditions. Thus, we see that Rombach's "structure" attempts to transcend the East and the West, striving to "find the more difficult, but at the same time brighter, forms of life and thought that belong to a new era". The concept of "structure" is generated in the life structure and ideological structure of the new era, which are intertwined with "ancient and modern, Chinese and Western".

In the structure of "ancient and modern, Chinese and Western", one does not have to be limited to the "small" tradition of a particular ideology and culture in which one lives, but at the same time, one cannot profess to understand it just because one is in a particular ideological and cultural tradition. Philosophers in the "small" traditions of different ideologies and cultures participate in the worldwide controversy with different opinions, and the worldwide controversy of the hundred schools of thought is also the proper meaning of the generated question. Rombach communicates "Tao" in terms of "structure", which is sometimes not necessarily accurate. While Rombach sees that the Chinese way is not anthropocentric, he may not have noticed the Chinese Confucian tradition of taking man as the heart of heaven and earth. In the world of life, "it is beautiful and the most spiritual" (Zhou Dunyi's "Taiji Diagram"). This special status does not give human beings the unlimited power to conquer nature and make use of all things, but gives human beings the sacred responsibility to counsel and nurture and care for all things. Rombach discusses the Tao of Lao Tzu by communicating the Tao with "structure", but he fails to pay attention to the Tao of contemporary Chinese philosophers, such as Jin Yuelin's experience and discourse on the Tao. In fact, Jin Yuelin also believes that Tao and Logos are the most noble concepts in Chinese and Western cultures, respectively, and the original experience of Tao is different from the original experience of Logos. "The Greek Logos seem to be very dignified; Or because of its dignity, the more we feel that its bottom temperature makes us a little nervous in terms of knowledge. In contrast, the Chinese Tao "does not have to be too straight, it does not have to be too narrow, and its bottom boundary does not have to be very clear; It's still okay to wander around it." Rombach's understanding of structure and Tao, Jin Yuelin's understanding of Tao and structure, and our understanding of Tao and structure can be used interchangeably to generate a better understanding of Tao and structure.

"The Tao is made by doing" (Zhuangzi Qi Wu Theory). The road becomes the road in the process of walking, which is a very ordinary experience, but it is also an experience generated by lively structures. We walk step by step, and the way is formed as we walk. Where, then, is the Word? In every step of the way? In the whole that adds up step by step? Not really. The Tao is in the process of transitioning from the previous step to the next. The Tao runs through every step, and the Tao is the "one" that is "consistent" in each step, the "one" that is generated as a structure.

Consistently, or consistently, this is one of the basic models for understanding structure. One is formed in the process of coherence, and one is coherence itself. One of the consistent, one of the inconsistent, one in common. Discussed above about the relationship between world philosophy and philosophy and philosophy, we see that world philosophy is both in philosophy and philosophy, but it is not the abstract and universal co-existence of philosophy and philosophy; On the other hand, world philosophy is neither representative nor exhaustive by philosophy. From the perspective of the consistent model, world philosophy is the "one" of "consistency", and philosophy and philosophy are both "consistent" and "of". Philosophy and philosophy are "many", and world philosophy is "one". The "oneness" of world philosophy is not the universal commonality of philosophy and philosophy ("many" is not the special aspect of "one"), but the commonality generated by the interaction between the "many" and throughout the "many". In this way, we have obtained a way of understanding the relationship between one and many, which is different from the common and special (universal and particular), that is, the model of consistency.

According to the consistent model, the one-many relationship is a structure of mutual development, in which the elements in the structure are "many" (any one of them can also be said to be a small "one"), and the structure formed by the interplay of the elements is "one". The "one" that runs through the "many" is the universality of generation, not the universality of abstraction. It is worth noting that the elements in the structure often have a separable individual aspect, so they are often regarded as "one" (or "small one"); Moreover, a tendency of universal thinking will also highlight one of the "little ones" and make it a representative of universality. In other words, a certain "small one" is arrogant to a "big one", and this "big one" is an essentialist "big one", so it has overwhelming power over the "many" constituted by the other "small ones". In order to overcome "universalism", people often cite "pluralism" to oppose it. However, the way "pluralism" is named and "universalism" does not seem symmetrical. "Pluralism" focuses on the "many" of elements in a structure, and it is on a different level from the "one" that "universalism" focuses on. If we want to name it from the perspective of the corresponding "one", it is worth proposing that "universalism" is opposed to "universalism". Both "universalism" and "universalism" advocate "one"; But the former advocates one in common, and the latter advocates one in general. Both "universalism" and "universalism" have to deal with a lot, but in very different ways. "Universalism" adopts the method of "coherence and unity", using the universal one (and regardless of whether this "one" is transgressed by the "small one") to suppress the particular. "Universalism" takes a "consistent" approach. "One", commonality; "through", manifold generation, through without hindrance; The "of" and the "one" form a multi-shot situation, one more than many, and more than one.

From ancient times to the present, Chinese thinkers have had a wealth of experience with the "consistent one", and they have found consistency and commonality in different fields such as heavenly way, morality, and cognition. Let's take Wang Chuanshan, Dai Zhen, and Jin Yuelin as examples. Wang Chuanshan sees the Heavenly Dao as a gasification structure. Between heaven and earth, one breath is popular, and there are gods and gods. Gathering into an image to form to give birth to all kinds of changes, it is called transformation; "Its dense and contains the nature of health, with lifting, bending and stretching, the order must be believed", it is said to be a god. God walks in gasification, runs through gasification, and runs through gasification, so it can be called "one". Here in Funayama, God is one of the consistent structures of gasification, and it is the commonality that runs through all kinds of changes.

Dai Zhen also understood the way of heaven and humanity as the process of gasification, so that humanity leads to the way of heaven, and man's moral ability is in harmony with the transformation of heaven and earth, which is not natural. Further, human moral faculties have a class of commonality. "The heart knows the nature, and there is no one who is displeased with reason." "Not" means that people's moral faculties ("knowing" and "please") are common, and based on this commonality, commonality between subjects, or class, will naturally be formed. The commonality between subjects is of course based on the subject, but it is also an objectivity, that is, objectivity in the sense of class: all members of the human class have a common moral capacity, and the normal use of this moral capacity will lead to a common moral experience. The commonality between subjects is objectively based on the transcendental nature of moral capacities: all moral experiences always have to apply common moral capacities.

So, how do we grasp the commonalities between subjects in experience? Dai Zhen put forward the methodology of "affection for feelings": "Those who are based on me are reasonable." Those who are rational in heaven are also natural in their words; The division of nature is based on my feelings, and it is not impossible to be peaceful. "The approach to grasping universality through emotion is quite different from the idea of grasping universality through reason that we have seen in modern moral philosophers such as Kant. The ability to use emotions includes "knowing" and "pleasing one", as well as being reasonable. Universality can also be said to be "one", but it is the "one" that transcends abstraction externally; In contrast, commonality is the "oneness" of "consistency" generated by internal penetration. The "one" of "consistent" is different from any "of" that runs through "one". The relationship between the two has not been well handled by Dai Zhen. Dai Zhen once discussed reasoning and opinions. Dai Zhen said: "What the heart is the same is the reason, and the meaning is the meaning; It is not the same, and it is based on the opinions of others, which is irrational and unrighteous. Whoever thinks so, the world will say 'it is not easy', and this is the same. "Reason and righteousness are not one's own opinions, but the public will reached among all subjects in the world for all ages." It is said that "it is not easy" in the world", although it can never be realized, but it is indeed a desirable and exemplary goal. According to this approach, reason and meaning are the goal of infinite proximity of opinions, which understands reason and opinion as the same category, and there is only a difference in degree between the two, but no difference in level. But in reality, we can understand reason and opinion as falling into different categories. Rationality is a priori and universal moral ability, which belongs to the "one" of "consistency"; Opinions are empirical moral knowledge acquired by specific people by using this moral capacity in specific situations, which belongs to the "one" of "consistency". There is a fundamental difference in hierarchy between the two. Transcendental moral faculties remain unabated, while empirical moral knowledge can increase or decrease (in terms of the history of the individual), change with the world (in the case of human history), and be culturally different (in terms of different cultural traditions). Empirical moral knowledge can be proven or falsified, but a priori moral competence is still required to be invoked to do so. Falsification and overturning an empirical moral knowledge not only does not overturn a priori moral capacity, but also confirms a priori moral capacity in a way that coping with "reversal". The application of a priori moral competence unfolds historically and realistically in the practice of the interaction between man and the world, and in the distinction between the group and the self.

The distinction between a priori moral capacity and empirical moral knowledge is similar to the distinction between the inductive principle, which is the general principle of acceptance of our knowledge of the empirical world, and the concrete conclusions obtained by the application of this principle. Jin Yuelin had an in-depth discussion on this. Jin Yuelin distinguishes between a priori and experience. A priori means that it is valid at all times, but "the concept of transcendentality does not have any transcendental form that makes experience possible with the help of it." It has a form that is valid for any experience. Its source does not involve a transcendent mind. And our awareness of it does not precede any experience." The principle of induction is a priori, and its correctness has nothing to do with the content of experience. No matter how experience unfolds, the principle of induction will never be overturned. Even if the content of the experience is extremely abnormal, we still have a way to accept it, and if the old concepts are not enough, we can formulate new concepts to accept the new content of the experience. The content of the anomaly is contrary to our hopes, but as long as we can formulate new concepts to understand it and accept it, we are resigned, and submissive acceptance is of course an inductive principle, and adversity is still an inductive principle. The principle of induction is the "one" of "consistency", or in other words, one of the commonalities; Experience is the specific conclusion obtained each time the principle of induction is applied, and it is the "consistency" of "consistency". "Consistently", "one" a priori runs through experience.

Abandoning the abstract universality that dominates modern thinking and instead pursuing the universality of generation is the proper meaning of the "contemporary" question. The "consistent" model, together with the "ever-time" model described above, may help us better see the generation and commonality in a multitude of structures.

epilogue

The above examines the structure of "ancient and modern China and the West", focusing on the positive aspects of generation and commonality. However, this is not yet the end of the story. On the one hand, we need to be more active in our reflections. The structure is small and large, and the above world surpasses a single civilization, but such a world only considers the small world of human beings, and needs to be expanded into a large world that encompasses all things in heaven and earth. On the other hand, we must not be optimistic about our reflections, but must also see the negative aspects of the structure. There are mutual uses, but there are still contradictions; There is generation, and there is destruction; There are commonalities, but there are obstacles. We still need to examine the contradictions, conflicts, failures, and obstacles of the structure, and then think about how to move towards mutual use, generation, and commonality in the contradictions, conflicts, defeats, and obstacles. In this way, our thinking about the structure of "ancient and modern Chinese and Western" is concrete.

One of the most important aspects of thinking is concreteness in the sense of "embodied in the body". It is this concreteness that has the potential to overcome contradictions, conflicts, defeats and obstacles. The "one" as a universal is generated in many, and in this respect, it is no longer an abstraction. However, such a "one" is still the "one" grasped at the level of thinking, and it still lacks the sense of "oneness" in the body. If there is a sense of oneness, then there will be a community of pain and itch related to each other and a sense of harmony between the individuals who have this feeling. The so-called "itch-related" people not only naturally know the pain and itch of others, but also have an intolerable ability to push those who know pain and itch to naturally take action to relieve pain and itch for others.

Chinese philosophers with contemporary spirituality have seen this. For example, Feng Youlan believes that Confucianism uses the "cause of love" to eliminate selfishness, eliminate the separation between people and me, and finally achieve the state of "all things are prepared for me", that is, I and all things are one. The "everything" here is first and foremost human, and at the same time transcendent. In his later years, through his critical reading of Zhuangzi, Xiong Shili interpreted the life of self and all things as the life shared by all things in heaven and earth, and then explained the relationship between individual life and this shared life with "one many": "Life is not unique to me alone, but a life shared by all things in heaven and earth. …… The life shared by all things in heaven and earth is the life that is unique to me; The life that is unique to me is the life shared by all things in heaven and earth. In other words, the life shared by all things in heaven and earth is the life unique to each of them. Its words are synonymous with all things in heaven and earth. The life that is unique to all things in heaven and earth is the life they share. Amazing life! If it is said to be one, then one is many; If it is many, then many is one. "Whether it is Feng Youlan or Xiong Shili, when they think about the issue of community, they expand the scope of the body from human beings to all things including human beings, and correspondingly, the community has also moved from the small world of human beings to the world of heaven, earth and people, and from the interpersonal community and civilization community to the community of heaven and man in which human beings and natural objects and man-made things coexist and coexist.

Similarly, Rombach makes a similar observation: "Humanity must grow from a multitude of peoples. For this, a mere general consciousness of 'humanity' in general is simply not sufficient, and here a fully concrete, embodied totality of life is necessary, which can rediscover itself in humanity as a whole, and from which it returns vigorously, extensively, and in height. This is the great task of our time. In fact, this is also advocating the transition from a human community to a community of heaven and earth and all things. Chinese and Western philosophers have invariably emphasized one of the oneness, emphasizing that people must experience this "oneness" firsthand, otherwise it is not enough to form a community of life, that is, the "total life" mentioned by Rombach, or the "life shared by all things in heaven and earth" mentioned by Xiong Shili.

It is undeniable that whether it is Feng Youlan, Xiong Shili, or Rombach, they are only one of the concrete ones proposed in a speculative way. What needs to be further explored is how to give full play to the potential of one of the concrete ones, overcome the contradictions, conflicts, defeats and obstacles in reality, so as to concretely realize the intermingling, generation and commonality of the structure of "ancient and modern China and the West".

How does the mind transcend speculation? Academic philosophers often meditate on philosophy in their studies and in armchairs, and such philosophies seem to be inevitably speculative. To overcome speculation, we also need the interaction between philosophical theory and social practice. The theoretical contemplation of the controversy between "ancient and modern China and the West" should achieve a positive interaction with the concrete practice of the structure of "ancient and modern China and the West". The encounter between Chinese and Western civilizations on the land of China has launched a great practice of human civilization on a grand scale. In this process, there is not only the interaction between Chinese and Western civilizations (the combination of the basic tenets of Marxism and the excellent traditional Chinese culture constitutes an extremely important aspect), but also the interaction between Chinese and Western civilizations and the living social practices that have taken place on the land of China, and gradually give birth to an unprecedented new form of modern civilization and human civilization of the Chinese nation. The living practice of "ancient and modern Chinese and Western" is the source of the solution to the theoretical problems of the dispute between "ancient and modern China and the West". The human community is only a distant ideal, let alone the community of heaven and man. There are both commonalities and contradictory divisions between people. But just as we don't have to lose our belief in the goodness of nature because of the evil in real life, we don't have to lose our belief in the common because of the opposite. In fact, such a belief itself is a source of strength to oppose the contradictory division, and thus to achieve a common one. Based on this belief, we must not be satisfied with sitting and talking about the Tao, but must strive to get up and act, and go through various practical links to transform philosophical theories into reality. The mission of philosophy is to provide the possibility to change the world by explaining it.