azijskestudije asianstudies Modern Confucianism and Chinese Modernity Of ASIAN STUDIES MODERN CONFUCIANISM AND CHINESE MODERNITY Volume II (XVIII), Issue 1 Ljubljana, May 2014 ASIAN STUDIES, Volume II (XVIII), Issue 1, Ljubljana, May 2014 Editor-in-chief: Jana S. Rošker Editor of the issue: Jana S. Rošker Assistant and managing editor: Nataša Visočnik Proof reader: Chikako Shigemori Bučar Editorial Board: Raoul David Findeisen, Nataša Vampelj Suhadolnik, Beatrix Mesce, Mingchang Lin, Tamae K. Prindle, Ana Jelnikar, Nataša Visočnik, Yuriko Sunakawa, Tamara Ditrich, Bart Dessein, Mitja Sje, Jeff Kingstone, Geir Sigur5sson, Ivana Buljan, Andrej Ule, Shaun Richard O'Dwyer, Mislav Ježic, Zouli Wang, Jana S. Rošker, Mark James Hudson All articles are double blind peer-reviewed. The journal is accessable online in Open Journal System data base: http://revije.ff.uni-lj.si/as. The editors of this anthology would like to thank the Chiang Ching-kuo Foundation for the publication support. © University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts, 2014. All rights reserved. Published by: Znanstvena založba Filozofske fakultete Univerze v Ljubljani/Ljubljana University Press, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana For: Oddelek za azijske in afriške študije/Department of Asian and African Studies For the publisher: Branka Kalenic Ramšak, Dean of Faculty of Arts Ljubljana, 2014, First edition Number printed: 200 copies Graphic Design: Janez Mlakar Printed by: Birografika Bori, d. o. o. Price: 7,00 EUR ISSN 2232-5131 This publication is indexed in the Cobiss database. This journal is published three times per year. Yearly subscription: 18 EUR, (Account No.: 50100-603-40227) Ref. No.: 001-033 ref. »Za revijo« Adress: Filozofska fakulteta, Oddelek za azijske in afriške študije, Aškerčeva 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija tel.: +386 (0)1 24 11 450, +386 (0)24 11 444 faks: +386 (0)1 42 59 337 This journal is published with the support of the Slovenian Research Agency (ARRS). CIP - Kataložni zapis o publikaciji Narodna in univerzitetna knjižnica, Ljubljana 130.2(510X082) 221.7(082) 008(510)(082) MODERN Confucianism and Chinese modernity / [editor of the issue Jana S. Rošker]. - 1st ed. - Ljubljana : Znanstvena založba Filozofske fakultete = University Press, Faculty of Arts, 2014. - (Asian studies, ISSN 2232-5131 ; vol. 2 (18), issue 1) ISBN 978-961-237-643-7 1. Rošker, Jana S. 273649152 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Jana S. ROSKER.................................................................................................1-4 Chinese Foreword Ming-Huei LEE Contemporary New Confucian Theory of the "Development of Democracy from Confucianism", its Theoretical Contents and its Modern Significance............................................................................................7-18 Modern Confucianism as a New Chinese Ideology Geir SIGURBSSON Confucianism vs. Modernity: Expired, Incompatible or Remedial?.........21-38 Bart DESSEIN Faith and Politics: (New) Confucianism as Civil Religion....................39-64 Philosophical Approaches Jana S. ROSKER The Philosophical Sinification of Modernity and the Modern Confucian Paradigm of Immanent Transcendence (I^^S^'ftt)........................67-82 Tea SERNELJ The Unity of Body and Mind in Xu Fuguan's Theory........................83-95 Confucian Values and the Contemporary World Loreta POSKAITE Filial Piety (xiao for the Contemporary and Global World: A View from the Western and Chinese Perspectives...................................99-114 Monika GANBBAUER 'A Special Zone for Confucianism'? Theses of the Academician Zhang Xianglong on Traditional Chinese Culture...................................115-126 Asian Studies in Slovenia Matjaž VIDMAR Šanghajski geto in zgodovinsko ter politično ozadje judovskih beguncev iz Tretjega rajha v letih 1933-1945............................................129-148 Discussions Hans KUIJPER What's Wrong with the Study of China? 151-185 Book Reviews Jana S. ROSKER Huang Chun-chieh ed.: The Study of East Asian Confucianisms: Retrospect and Prospect .....................189-194 Tea SERNELJ Huang Chun-chieh: Humanism in East Asian Confucian Contexts......195-197 Introduction Jana S. ROSKER* The present issue of The Journal of Asian Studies is dedicated to problems linked to the specific features of Chinese modernization, as viewed through the lens of Modern Confucianism. It contains selected contributions from the international symposium, Contemporary Confucianism and Chinese Modernization, Reykjavik, 7-8 September 2013, which was organized by Geir Sigurdsson, in cooperation with the Northern Lights Confucius Institute and the Chinese Studies Department of the University of Iceland. In international Sinology, this current of thought has been translated with various, sometimes colourful terms, which range from Neo-Confucianism, Contemporary or Modern Neo-Confucianism, to New, Modern or Contemporary Confucianism. The first group, which includes the term "Neo-Confucianism", is impractical because it is often confused with the term that, in Western sinology, generally denotes the reformed Confucian philosophies of the Song and Ming periods (li xue or xingli xue ffM^). A similar confusion can be found in Chinese discourses, which commonly designate this current with one of the following expressions: RH^, «HM, tftf!^, «RH^, t^Rf! etc. In our view, the Chinese expression MiXRM^ is most appropriate, given that in China (as opposed to European sinological discourses), the Neo-Confucianism of the Song and Ming dynasties has never been associated with the concept of New Confucianism and thus the character that signifies "new" in this phrase is not problematic. Instead, for the English translation, given that we are dealing with philosophies, social theories and ideologies that belong to Chinese modernity we have decided to use the term Modern Confucianism in the title of this special issue. * Jana S. ROSKER, Department of Asian and African Studies, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia jana.rosker@guest.arnes.si Modern Confucianism arose China at the edge of the previous century and was later developed further by theorists from Taiwan, and, to a lesser degree, from Hong Kong. Unlike the People's Republic of China, where Confucianism was considered to be the "ideology of outdated feudalism" and therefore silenced (at least formally) until the 1980s, in Hong Kong and Taiwan, both of which were defined by post-colonial social discourses, a number of intellectuals began opposing the growing Westernization of their societies already in the 1950s. Due to the multilayered cultural, national and political situation in Taiwan, intellectuals from that country played an important role in developing this new philosophical current from the very outset. However, the last two decades have seen intense research and an increasingly open debate regarding the postulates and discourses of the new Confucianism philosophy also in the People's Republic. Academic groups such as Research into the intellectual current of Contemporary New Confucianism (Xiandai Xin rujia sichao yanjiu which was founded in November 1986 by the philosophy professors, Fang Keli ^^^ and Li Jinquan have been especially active and influential in this area. Some Modern Confucian scholars in the PRC (e.g. Jiang Qing have criticized Taiwanese Modern Confucianism for deviating from the original Confucian principles and being overly influenced by Western liberal democracy. These scholars have proposed Constitutional Confucianism (also known as Political Confucianism, or Institutional Confucianism) as an alternative path for China, within the trilateral parliamentary framework. Despite these controversies, the revival of Confucian philosophy in the PRC, together with increasing interaction among philosophers in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan, have the potential of contributing enormously to the reintegration of Chinese philosophical life after the politically conditioned divisions of the latter half of the 20th century. Furthermore, Confucian thought, from its origins to contemporary interpretations, offers both new areas of possible convergence or fusion with Western thought, and a platform from which Western philosophy can be constructively criticized. Indeed, the Modern Confucian current primarily grew out of the search for a synthesis between Western and traditional East Asian thought, in order to elaborate a system of ideas and values capable of resolving the sociopolitical problems of the modern, globalized world. The scholars belonging to this stream sought to reconcile "Western" and "traditional Chinese" values in order to create a theoretical model of modernization that would not be confused or equated with "Westernization". Because they viewed modernization primarily as a rationalization of the world, they explored their own tradition for authentic concepts that were comparable to certain Western paradigms deemed essential for modernization. As one of the most influential and important streams of thought in contemporary East Asian theory, while also representing a crucial part of the new, dominant ideologies in the P.R. China, the so-called Confucian revival is considered by many scholars in Chinese studies to be of utmost importance in terms of research and investigation. However, while many books and articles on this topic are available in Chinese, Western academic studies remain few and far between. In taking this situation as their point of departure, the authors of the present collection analyze the central values of Confucianism, and interpret them within the very different Chinese and Taiwanese socio-political contexts in order to evaluate their impact on the dominant, contemporary ideologies. The authors also examine the main elements that enable the amalgamation of traditional Chinese values into the framework of capitalistic ideologies and axiological contexts. The present special issue thus not only examines the main Modern Confucian philosophical approaches, ideas and methods, but also explores the political, social and ideological backgrounds of the current revival and its connections with the ideological foundations of East Asian and, most especially, Chinese modernity. The contributions to this special issue address four different research areas. The volume opens with a foreword in Chinese by Prof. Lee Ming-Huei, member of the Academia Sinica in Taiwan and an internationally recognized authority on Modern Confucianism. The Chinese text is accompanied by a short abstract and a longer summary in English. In focusing on Modern Confucian political theory, the author explains the significance of the theory of the "Development of Democracy from Confucianism", as elaborated primarily in the works of the Taiwanese Modern Confucians. The second section, entitled Modern Confucianism as a New Chinese Ideology, consists of articles by Geir Sigurósson (University of Iceland) and Bart Dessein (Ghent University). Sigurósson's article analyses the debates surrounding Confucianism as a stimulant for economic activity and the recent attempts to rehabilitate Confucianism in the PRC. Bart Dessein's contribution instead addresses the issue of whether Modern Confucianism can be regarded as a "civil religion with Chinese characteristics", and focuses on how politico-religious narratives that reiterate China's Confucian tradition serve to create a sense of belonging and sharedness in a community. The next section is entitled Philosophical Approaches, and consists of articles by Jana S. Rosker and Tea Sernelj (both from the University of Ljubljana), who explore a number of concepts crucial to Modern Confucian theory. In her essay, Jana Rosker explains how the third generation of Taiwanese Modern Confucian philosophers changed the framework within which traditional Chinese philosophical inquiry had been carried out, and the importance of the concept of immanent transcendence within this process. Tea Sernelj's article instead focuses on one of the leading representatives of the second generation, Xu Fuguan (1903-1982), and elucidates some of the key concepts in his philosophical thought. In the final section, entitled Confucian Values and the Contemporary World, Loreta Poskaité (Vilnius University) and Monika GanBbauer (Friedrich-Alexander-Universitat Erlangen-Nürnberg) introduce some of the multifarious connections within this specific area of inquiry. In her article, Loreta Poskaité discusses the role of xiao one of the central Confucian virtues, in contemporary intercultural dialogue, while Monika GanBbauer explores Zhang Xianglong's ft idea of a "Special Zone for Confucianism", and its controversial significance for experimental areas in contemporary Confucian discourses. Although the authors of the present collection often hold very divergent views regarding many aspects of the Confucian revival, they all share a complex intellectual culture which enables them to explore the Revival and its manifold issues with variety, subtlety, dynamism and an openness to dialogue with Chinese philosophy. We hope that the collection before you will contribute to the realization of our common goal and that Chinese philosophy will finally assume its rightful place in world philosophy. Because Modern Confucian efforts to revitalize and reconstruct traditional Confucian thought can also be seen as an attempt to counter the dominant ideological trends and preserve Chinese cultural identity, the present collection will hopefully also contribute to the development of theoretical dialogues between "China" and "the West". Jana S. Rosker, Chief Editor Chinese Foreword ^BJff Ming-huei LEE* ^M^M^memMz-o sftfflt, r^wisi^iüi, rnrnrn: ^mmmu, n^i^m ^nwsmm Abstract In the 1950s, Contemporary Modern Confucians of Hong Kong and Taiwan have exposed the theory of the "Development of Democracy from Confucianism". In their controversies with the Taiwanese liberals, this theory also became one of the main points of debate. The author of the present article believes that the contents of this theory are not too complicated to understand; however, it nevertheless often became subject of various misunderstandings and questionings. During the past years, the author has written several studies on this topic, aiming to clarify such misunderstandings and to responding to such questionings. Therefore, the present article does not restate the details of this theory, but rather aims to provide further explanations of its essential meaning. Keywords: Taiwanese Modern Confucianism, the Theory of the "Development of Democracy from Confucianism", liberalism, political theory, Self-negation of Conscience. Ming-huei LEE, Research Fellow, Academia Sinica, Taiwan lmhuei@hotmail .com mmz&to rnzT, 195Q mmmmm «fin, s^iâM 1 + 165 ^(1982 ^ IQ M IQ > , , ^ftAtf (Stt: 1991 (Lee 2QQ9, 33-62). 2QQ1 81-117o (Isaiah Berlin, 1909-1997) ^HW (negative liberty) tM^tt, «MM^: iMgiJ rMSiJ (positive liberty )o [ff^^KiiJ^ifSIii^Io 1958 A±ts) 4o im iiwia^tfA, m (I 897 ) + (I 896 897 ) A^iififrtttf, ^eissst^- m (M 896 ) TK^WiMJ oRIil^dDIAI: 4 9 1 $(1958 ¥ 1 M 5 1 1 $(1958 ¥ 1 1981 1980 + 1975 + HKiM, 1974 ittT, f^Tif.IAS^K^i^iiSfttT, I'JA&faK mrawm^it, AKtliii^At^t^wK^iMiift »liiio IS-AtSl, TMJ « iSliWii, IfSlKiftIK, ^^^^iftlKt*^^, &MAT, l^lEHfiifto ft &MAT, ^AAi^Mt^to t^AA^ f^ttl^K^ltKi^S, ^iftAIiiSlifii io (K 903-904) tfg.itKiffllS^i; ^^i^^Iff^iWI^fHo + , ^ftT^fWMitffittJ (synthetically rational spirit MitffittJCanalytically rational spirit) Hit. S «Kl^£l» + , ftXS^ [itttlfflf I ( functional presentation ) ® ^ fi M I ( constructive presentation ) J f iittt^^WMS ( intensional presentation )^^bMWMI(extensional presentation) JSMI r-^p^ru m ra^ di±i) tsst^ (self-negation)J o «ft^w^mgp^rnm6, ihhIO Ä^M^M mmmj, ra^m^J» ^ÍÜTMSSO fo'mfèm&'ù^mm&ù&m- Ä*--m» m (......) M^M^I'JffiHo ífí^MJ ( Co-Ordination )o ífí^MJ M ž»rsttJ IftëlK^ttilWo 7 fêJo 8 O 6 106-115o 7 1987 52-53 (»fc:«^®^, 2003 10 ffl.H M^ft^WMXWïlÂSMfô^teWïliito 8 140 (10: 155)o ««i, ^.m.mmx^^^m^m^^^mm, «s10) it, i$anMê#imo », 11o wMAS««^ (MMW«», il^t^ttMl (communitarianism) » TäÄj WiK^Ü^o t^^iÂifcaiwiëofttt, « M^ (justification) SlülT, ril^ft^lâj rn^WM^j o 9 2003 ¥).W 82-83, 174-175o 10 2000 11 S®«^ 1958 ^ 5 n 1 + 18 9 1990 11 577o ^(John Rawls)W Theory of Justice) fiMMMM 1949 (^rffiffi r®^ij) [^Iftljo 1960 ^ + MAMffi. fia 1986 ^ «^^i^imrffiffir^iij), is^i^tfff.fiisi 2000 2008 ^ as. finwi, af^nwffi^, (populism) MM^S, iiaift. sm, M^WWoJ 12 MESW) , ffil^^^ftWitKi. 1947 1949 li^tiilf^oiifiiH ^ 1966 ^b, »»M^ 1949 ^«^ii^R^*^ 1963 iMff13, Mffi^R^ r^ftft o H^, MUtt 1980 wat14oiii,ifKiim 2000r^t® ft (is^iiii)Wiio io (Heiner Roetz) W^fe, mM^S TS^W^ reconstructive hermeneutics of accommodation) (Roetz 1999, 257). 12 «Sffi»® 20 2012 ^ 1 175. 2010 ^)o + 81-98o^#M (Lee 2013, 129-43). ^^ iKiWiHJ (democratically Confucian) , rMIKiJ( Confucian democracy)-- mmm, (King 1997, 174)0 (ffi&^WK«) Islamic fundamentalist) Il^WtilfftffiSIfloffl-ai.fflWlift^iittf ^iMt.iitwt^iai^^t^asiws irffiMKi», MMi^mf^ffi^ftMo ma rMIMi*J (Confucian fundamentalism) ^^^^ ^iMISSiKiftWIfSto References Chen, Zhaoying IMBS^. 2012. "Xu Fuguan yu ziyou zhuyi de duihua WSlS (The Dialogue between Xu Fuguang and the Liberals)." Sixiang (Reflexion) 20, November: 175-93. Jiang, Qing ^M. 2003. Zhengzhi ruxue: Dangdai ruxue de zhuanxiang tezhi yu fazhan ^ gftM^Wtt^ (Political Confucianism: The Re- Orientation, Characteristics, and Development of Contemporary Confucianism). Taipei County: Yangzhengtang wenhua shiye gongsi. King, Ambrose Y. C. 1997. "Confucianism, Modernity, and Asian Democracy." In Justice and Democracy: Cross-Cultural Perspectives, edited by Ron Bontekoe and Marietta Stepaniants, 163-79. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Lee, Ming-huei. 1994. Dangdai ruxue zhi ziwo zhuanhua g^M^^ ff^ffft (The Self-Transformation of Contemporary Confucianism). Taipei: Zhongyang yanjiuyuan Zhongguo wenzhe yanjiusuo. -, ed. 1998. Rujia sixiang zai xiandai Dongya: Zonglun pian fS^SS^ïï^.^^: SS (Confucianism in Modern East Asia: A General Perspective). Taipei: Zhongyang yanjiuyuan Zhongguo wenzhe yanjiusuo. -. 2009. "Culture et démocratie: réflexions à partir de la polémique entre libéraux taiwanais et néo-confucéens contemporains." Extrême-Orient, Extrême- Occident 31: 33-62. -. 2013. Konfuzianischer Humanismus: Transkulturelle Kontexte. Bielefeld: transcript. Mou, Zongsan ^^H. 1987. Lishi zhexue (Philosophy of History). Taipei: Taiwan xuesheng shuju. -. 1987. Zhengdao yu zhidao (The Principle of Legitimation and the Principle of Governance). Taipei: Taiwan xuesheng shuju. -. 2003. Mou ZongsanXiansheng quanji (Collected Works of Mr. Mou Zongsan). Taipei: Lianjing chuban gongsi. Roetz, Heiner. 1999. "The 'Dignity within Oneself: Chinese Tradition and Human Rights." In Chinese Thought in a Global Context, edited by Karl-Heinz Pohl, 236-61. Leiden: Brill. Tang, Junyi 1975. Zhonghua renwenyu dangjin shijie ^^À^^ô^fi^ (Chinese Humanistic Culture and the Contemporary World). Taipei: Taiwan xuesheng shuju. Yin, Haiguang 1990. "Genzhe wusi de jiaobu qianjin ig^iHWP^^^ (Going Forward by Following the Footsteps of the May Fourth Movement)." In Yin Haiguang quanji ^^^^^ (Collected Works of Yin Haiguang), edited by Lin Zhenghong 11: 571-78. Taipei: Guiguan tushu gongsi. Zhou, Ailing ^SM. 2010. Huaguo piaoling: Lengzhan shiqi zhimindi de xinya shuyuan (The Dispersion of Flowers and Fruits: The New Asia College under Colonial Rule during the Cold War), translated by Luo Meixian S^FmI. Hong Kong: Shangwu yinshuguan. Summary The 1950s witnessed a debate between the Modern Confucians of Hong Kong and Taiwan on one side and the Taiwanese liberal intellectuals on the other side. The debate focused on the issue as to whether traditional Chinese culture, especially Confucianism, was appropriate for the development of science, technology and democratic political system in the modern sense. In this context, the Modern Confucians of Hong Kong and Taiwan have exposed the theory of the "Development of Democracy from Confucianism". Since the author of the present article has already tried in several past studies to clarify various misunderstandings connected to these questions, this article does not restate the details regarding the abovementioned theory. Instead, it rather offers further explanation of its inherent significance. On the one hand, even though the Modern Confucians admitted that traditional Confucianism did not include science and democracy in modern sense, they did not believe that the Confucian tradition was obstacle to the of modern country with its attributes. On the other hand, the liberals believed in the opposite and insisted that China had to get rid of all of its relicts of Confucianism if it wished to become a modern, technologically developed and democratic state. This debate has shown that the Modern Confucians acknowledged the limits between politics and morality; however on the theoretical level they stressed that political freedom has to presuppose moral freedom. The representatives of the liberal camp denied this assumption, because in their own opinion this scenario (in the best case) would lead to a "totalitarian democracy". Through in depth analyses of this controversy, the author comes to the conclusion that democracy and traditional Confucianism do not exclude one another. He exposes the fact that Taiwanese Confucian scholars have never rejected multiple approaches to democracy on the basis of different cultural traditions. In this sense, Taiwanese Modern Confucians have been thoroughly--though indirectly—contributing to the democratization of their country. Povzetek V petdesetih letih smo bili priča razpravi med sodobnimi konfucianci iz Hong Konga in Tajvana na eni in liberalno strujo tajvanskih izobražencev na drugi strani. Razprava se je osredotočila predvsem na vprašanje, ali je tradicionalna kitajska kultura in zlasti konfucijanska miselnost primerna za razvoj znanosti, tehnologije in demokratičnega političnega sistema zahodnega tipa. V tem kontekstu so moderni konfucijanci iz Hong Konga in Tajvana izpostavili teorijo o »razvoju demokracije iz konfucianizma«. Ker je avtor tega članka že v več preteklih študijah poskusil razjasniti različne nesporazume povezane s temi vprašanji, ta članek ne prinaša podrobnosti glede zgoraj omenjene teorije. Namesto tega raje nudi dodatno razlago o pomenu teorij. Čeprav moderni konfucijanci na eni strani priznavajo, da v tradicionalnem konfucijanstvu ti elementi sicer niso bili prisotni, vendar to še ne pomeni, da konfucijanska tradicija razvoj moderne države s temi atributi zavira, so bili liberalci prepričani o nasprotnem in so zato poudarjali, da mora Kitajska, če želi postati moderna, tehnološko razvita in demokratična država, odstraniti vse prežitke konfucijanske miselnosti. V tej polemiki se je izkazalo, da so moderni konfucijanci sicer priznavali razliko med politiko in moralo, vendar so sistem politične svobode na teoretski ravni pogojevali z moralno svobodo. Predstavniki liberalnega tabora so zanikali njihovo predpostavko, po kateri naj bi bila politična svoboda osnovana na moralni, kajti to bi po njihovem mnenju v najboljšem primeru privedlo do »totalitarne demokracije«. Skozi poglobljene analize te polemike avtor pride do zaključka, da demokracija in tradicionalni konfucianizem ne izključujeta drug drugega. Avtor izpostavlja dejstvo, da tajvanski konfucijanci niso nikoli zavračali demokratičnega razvoja na osnovi kulturno pogojenih razlik. V tem smislu so tajvanski moderni konfucijanci nemalo - četudi posredno - prispevali k procesu demokratizacije njihove države. Modern Confucianism as a New Chinese Ideology Confucianism vs. Modernity: Expired, Incompatible or Remedial? Geir SIGURBSSON* Abstract This paper is an exploration of the reappraisal that has been taking place since the 1980s of Confucianism's suitability for a modernized society. The first section focuses in particular on the discussion that took place in Singapore on Confucianism as a stimulant for economic activity, arguing that it was first and foremost a politically motivated attempt to establish Confucianism as a convenient ideology. I then move to a discussion of recent attempts to rehabilitate Confucianism in the PRC. In the final section, I suggest how Confucianism can be a healthy antidote to some of the ills produced by contemporary capitalist practice. Keywords: Confucianism, modernization, capitalism, consumerism Izvleček Ta članek raziskuje prevrednotenje primernosti konfucionizma za modernizacijo družbe, ki se odvija od 1980. Prvi del se osredotoča predvsem na razpravo, ki je potekala v Singapuiju o konfucianizmu kot poživilu za gospodarske dejavnosti, z utemeljitvijo, da je bil najprej in predvsem politično motiviran poskus vzpostavitve konfucionizma kot priročne ideologije. Nato preidem na razpravo o nedavnih poskusih vnovične rehabilitacije konfucionizma v Ljudski republiki Kitajski. V zadnjem poglavju pa predlagam, kako je lahko konfucionizem zdrav protistrup za nekatere tegobe, ki jih proizvajajo sodobne kapitalistične prakse. Ključne besede: konfucianizem, modernizacija, kapitalizem, potrošništvo * Geir SIGURBSSON, Senior Lecturer (Associate Professor), Chinese Studies, Vice-head, Department of Foreign Languages, Literature and Linguistics, University of Iceland geirs@hi.is Introduction: The Changing Meanings of Confucianism The term "Confucianism", whether in its Western version or its Chinese equivalent rujia is gradually receiving a new, while still inchoate, signifi- cation. Its meaning will probably never be entirely clear, nor, I argue, has it ever been. As with any complex philosophy or ideology with a long history, it is not— and most likely should not be—easily definable. While a number of specific Confucian values, approaches and notions can be identified, Confucianism's lack of indispensable foundations or dogmas eschews rigorous definitions. What is at least clear, however, is that its point of reference in academic and even public discussion has recently been undergoing considerable changes. Today, "Confucianism" is beginning to literally mean something rather different from what it did only three decades ago when it was predominantly understood as the major stream of thought in ancient China, and, somewhat more narrowly, as the ruling ideology of the Chinese dynasties. Back then, however, and during most of the 20th century, Confucianism was only rarely presented as a viable or desirable way of thinking. On the contrary, in fact, it was largely rejected, and sometimes even persecuted, as a relic of the past and the primary culprit of China's alleged stagnation during the last few centuries of dynastic rule (Chen 2011, 205). The fact, however, that not everyone rejected Confucianism in this manner should not be understated. A number of philosophers in Taiwan and Hong Kong, for instance, significantly upheld the reverence for the Confucian enterprise during the 20th century. Thinkers who held comparable views were certainly also present in the People's Republic of China, while state repression provided little if any possibilities for them to expound their views without running the risk of suffering serious personal consequences. Some prominent Western sinologists, moreover, engaged themselves critically but in many cases also constructively with Confucianism as a philosophical tradition worthy of consideration. But the link with modernization was rarely, if at all, made until in the 1980s. Indeed, until very recently, few Western sinologists or other academics would even dare mention Confucianism and modernity in the same sentence. It would simply not occur to the majority of them that Confucianism might have anything to offer to a "modern" or "modernizing" society. While certainly of indisputable historic importance, Confucianism tended to be regarded as comparable perhaps to medieval Christianity, a previously powerful ideology that had all but outlived its days.1 The decisive first steps taken towards a reevaluation of Confucianism were taken in the 1980s. While dialogues took place in China and Taiwan about Confucianism's suitability for a modernized society, it was in Singapore that Confucianism was first suggested as a potential catalyst for modernization after Lee Kuan Yew's government introduced Confucian ethics in the secondary curriculum in 1982. What ensued was a major philosophical, sociological and economic discussion hosted by the Institute of East Asian Philosophies (IEAP), which was established at the National University of Singapore in 1983, about Asian and notably Confucian values as an appropriate platform for social and economic modernization. The aim seemed to be taken towards a Confucian revival, or perhaps rather inception, as it is questionable whether Confucianism had ever been a strong cultural force in the city state. The government-sponsored Confucian programme in Singapore sought to find values and motivations inherent in Confucianism that could establish it as being parallel to the Protestant ethic in its Weber-inspired image, i.e. as a cultural force informing ways of living that forge ahead capitalism, industrialization and modernization. Apparently, hopes were high that an Asian cultural stimulant for a social and economic progress comparable to earlier breakthroughs in Euro-America would be discovered and affirmed. Confucianism was perceived as an important strand in and aspect of what came to be called "Asian values", a broader cultural base on which modernization could be constructed while westernization could be avoided. But not everyone was in such a hurry to come to the desired conclusion. Tu Weiming, the well-known scholar of Confucianism, then based at Harvard University, was brought into the dialogue as a leading authority in the field. As Tu is generally considered a champion of Confucianism, one would have expected him to be eager to identify and affirm its positive and modernizing effects. But Tu is also a careful and thorough scholar. One may surmise that he failed to fulfil the high expectations of his hosts as he was unwilling, as published in a later paper, to 1 Besides the many May Fourth and Maoist denouncements of Confucianism in 20th century China, a prominent view of Confucianism as a relic of the past is found in Joseph R. Levenson's monumental Confucian China and its Modern Fate, in which he concludes that "Confucian civilization" is merely historically significant in much the same way as ancient Greek and Egypt civilizations (Levenson 1958-1965, 3: 123f.). subscribe to the thesis that Confucianism "provides a necessary background and powerful motivating force for the rise of industrial East Asia", arguing that the method of finding the functional equivalent of the Protestant ethic in the "modernized" or "vulgarized" Confucian ethic is too facile, simple-minded, and mechanistic to merit serious attention. (Tu 1993, 8) He further wrote: The question, In what sense has the Confucian ethic contributed to the economic dynamics of industrial East Asia? seems less interesting than a much more profound subject of investigation: How does the Confucian tradition, in belief, attitude, and practice, continue to impede, facilitate, and guide the modern transformation in East Asia and, in the process, how is it being rejected, revitalized, and fundamentally restructured? (Tu 1993, 13) It appears that Singapore's endorsement of Confucianism as a modernizing power was largely intended as a self-fulfilling prophecy. An ideology convenient for an authoritarian regime was to be established on the grounds that it was the cultural basis of Singapore's economic success story. Thus, the discussion was first and foremost ideologically driven rather than searching for real understanding, while a number of good scholars participating in the dialogue certainly aimed at and contributed to the latter. By concocting a Confucian cultural foundation, the People's Action Party under Lee Kuan Yew's leadership had found a vindication for continuing its authoritarian rulership in a period of world history characterized by growing demands for stronger democratic principles. The state was attempting to "naturalise, validate, and ironically reunite (Chinese) Singaporeans with a presumed moral and philosophical code." (Yew 2011, 277) Ong Pang Boon a first generation People's Action Party politician, and an outspoken critic of the Confucian programme, warned that successive generations of monarchs had always made use of and promoted those parts of Confucianism that were advantageous to feudal rule. (Hong and Huang 2008, 105) In this respect, it is illuminating that in the 1970s and into the mid-1980s, the Singapore leadership praised and encouraged "rugged individualism" until it suddenly began endorsing a Confucian kind of collectivism, duty and self-sacrifice. (Englehart 2000, 555) The Confucian programme in Singapore turned out largely to be a failure, most decisively due to fear by other ethnic groups that the country was being Sinicized, but also because of scarce interest and even opposition by the Chinese population (Yew 2011, 277). The Institute of East Asian Philosophies was changed in 1990 to the Institute of East Asian Political Economy (IEAPE) and given different tasks in line with its new name. Around the same time in the People's Republic of China, or in the wake of the Four Modernizations campaign launched at the end of the 1970s, a radical reexamination of Confucianism began taking place. This was a time calling for a thorough reconsideration of the present and future status of the various ideological, philosophical and religious forces in the PRC. Much of the discussion during the first years revolved around Confucianism's adaptability to the official Marxist state-ideology. This particular issue was of broader political nature and applied to major religions such as Buddhism and Christianity as well. But Confucianism's historical and cultural status is only partly comparable to that of other religions and therefore required a more differentiated treatment. Not only is Confucianism not represented by some kind of ideological establishment, such as a church, but it was and still is considered by many as some kind of locus or core of Chinese culture that transcends any ideological categories, or, as Li Zehou has put it, a "psycho-cultural construct" beyond the manipulation of human will. (Song 2003, 88) Thus, an acceptance of Confucian deep-seated social and cultural influences would call for an investigation into its compatibility with a modernizing society. While the discussions in China and Singapore were set against different backdrops, the former was somewhat influenced by the latter. For instance, some of the participants, such as Tu Weiming, were active both in China and in Singapore. The cultural implications of Singapore's notion of "Confucian capitalism" (rujia zibenzhuyi ff^®^^^) may to some extent be meaningfully compared with China's notion of "socialism with Chinese characteristics" (Zhongguo tese shehui zhuyi ), although Confucianism's impetus for economic modernization was only fleetingly addressed in China, perhaps, one may surmise, because China was officially still socialist and not 2 In 1997, the Institute of East Asian Political Economy was then changed again into the still operating East Asian Institute. On the opposition to and eventual failure of the Confucian programme, see Kuo (1996, 303ff.). heading towards becoming a capitalist country. Fang Keli, an influential Marxist-Confucian thinker, "was adamant that mainland scholars did not advocate the road of 'Confucian capitalism', and that what they were exploring was the socialist road to modernization with Chinese characteristics." (Song 2003, 95) Thus, whether or not in line with the views of those participating in the debate, it seems that such considerations were more or less brushed aside and the main attention turned toward Confucianism as a cultural, ethical and even "religious" foundation in China. The 1980s debate was, after all, termed "culture craze" or "culture fever" (wenhua re indicating that it revolved mostly around the search for a national culture suitable for China's intention to find its place among other modernized nations of the world. Confucianism's Present Status in the People's Republic of China The "culture craze" came to a halt with the repressive political situation in China after the student revolts were crushed in 1989. But the question of Confucianism's place in China's future was by no means forgotten. Already in the mid-1990s it was becoming obvious that a reconsideration of Confucian values was inescapable. This has become even more obvious in the new millennium, when Confucianism has been enjoying positive reappraisal in China as a kernel of a new and still ongoing "craze" of "national learning" (guoxue H^). A grassroots embrace of Confucianism is taking place, and a clear, while also clearly debated, top-down endorsement of Confucian culture has been occurring, manifesting itself in both private and public schools that teach Confucian values and virtues, university institutes for the furtherance of Confucian studies,3 not to mention the now more than 300 Confucius Institutes operating all over the world. While the Confucius Institutes are not, as many people seem to believe, specifically designed to further the Confucian philosophy as such, they are certainly symbolic for the radically changed attitude to Confucius and Confucianism in the PRC. A growing number of intellectuals in China are now considering Confucianism in a favourable manner. Some of these even explicitly endorse it as a viable 3 The first institute of such a kind, the Chinese Confucius Research Institute (^^JL^W^W), was established already in 1985 in the birthplace of Confucius, Qufu. In the new century, however, they have proliferated and been established at various universities in China, for instance, at Renmin University of China in Beijing in 2003 (?L^W^IS), Qufu Normal University in 2007 IS), Sichuan University in 2009 (H^f^W^IS), Shandong University in 2010 (f^S^W^IK) and Peking University in 2010 (f^W^IS). ideology for China's future. Others suggest it more as a practical guide for everyday life. Among those belonging to the first group, Jiang Qing ^^ and Kang Xiaoguang ^^^ are probably the best known thinkers. They differ, however, considerably in their approaches and motivations. Jiang, a self-proclaimed Confucian, believes in the correctness of Confucian institutions, way of life and values.4 Kang, on the other hand, is rather a pragmatic thinker who, while not considering himself a Confucian, believes that the foundation of a unifying institute such as a "Confucian church" would have beneficial effects on the anomical state of Chinese society.5 In the second case, I am of course primarily referring to Yu Dan's ^ ^ somewhat controversial but overall popular interpretation of the Analects6 Within the continuous educational reforms in China, Confucian values and insights have received and are receiving more and more attention as potential sources for moral education and existential meaning, not least during the previous leadership of Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao, who "moved closer to an official embrace of Confucianism" and repeatedly came up with Confucian-based slogans and encouragements such as "harmonious society", "filial piety" and "eight glories and eight shames". (Bell 2010, 91f) It is still too early to detect the attitude of the present leadership to Confucianism, but on the surface it seems certainly less openly supportive of a Confucian-inspired policy. One may surmise that the bizarre case of Confucius's statue on Tiananmen Square in 2011, erected in January, removed overnight in April, may be associated with a more skeptical attitude to Confucianism with the then incumbents-to-be. (Gardner 2011) Be that as it may, the growing number of positive allusions to Confucian ways of thinking, both in media and on the political arena in China, makes it increasingly urgent to come to a better understanding of their meaning. While it would be easy to dismiss these allusions as empty and meaningless, as much of Western media often does, I believe that such cynicism is unhelpful, and that we should rather be taking them reasonably seriously. 4 Jiang's ideas of Confucianism's future political role in China are well presented in Fan (2011). 5 The best English introduction to Kang's suggestions and approaches is found in Gaenssbauer (2011). 6 On its controversial nature, cf. Zhao (2007). 7 Cf. Shobert (2011) who implies that in Chinese politics "Confucianism is a tool to be employed, a means to an end" of silencing any opposition in the country, and Roberts (2012) similarly concludes his article by citing a Hong Kong-based scholar who says that the "Party uses Confucianism as a tool, Hence an important question is what Confucianism means, or should mean, in a contemporary context. This question obviously also begs the question what sort of form it might take in its future development in China. The second and probably more important question is what, if anything, Confucianism can offer modernity: whether it is still, or perhaps once again, relevant to modern societies. This is of course a topic for many dissertations and books and here I can only briefly touch upon a few pressing issues. With regard to the contemporary meaning of Confucianism, there is no simple and fixed definition or formulation that could fill in the blanks for us—not even from a historical point of view. Confucianism has a long and a highly syncretic history, it has, explicitly or not, been generally rather inclusive of other streams of thought in China, and was so pervasive in Chinese society that there were few if any aspects of human living that had no association with it at all. As the Confucian reformer Liang Qichao ^^^ remarked in his Confucian Philosophy from 1927, "Confucian philosophy does not equate with the whole of Chinese culture, but if you take Confucianism away, I am afraid that not much else will remain."8 (cited in Zhou 2011, 27) To conflate Confucianism with Chinese culture would certainly be an over-generalization that left the label largely meaningless. But one can hardly deny that Confucianism has been pervasive in the entire cultural history of China. Confucianism has been many things and it has had many paradoxical manifestations—some of which were present at the same time. In its ancient form as philosophy, it was anti-dogmatic in nature, flexible and adaptive. During the Han-dynasty, it was a powerful but also a largely creative state ideology. In its Neo-Confucian guise, it was highly syncretic, lofty and idealistic, while also practical and realpolitical. In the Ming and Qing, it became inward-looking, somewhat dogmatic, nostalgic and thus reactionary. It was always a motivation for learning, although the learning it encouraged may not always have been, as it was meant to be, appropriate for the times. Confucianism also always justified hierarchy, both within family and society at large—but the hierarchy it justified as a way to legitimize their rule, and as a way of criticizing Western democracy". An editorial in Der Spiegel also concludes that Confucianism may be a convenient ideology for the CCP by assuming a misleading interpretation of a passage from the Analects (12.19): "the virtue of the junzi is like the wind, while that of the xiaoren like the grass. As the wind blows, the grass is sure to bend." (Brüder im Geiste 2007) was often realistic and not necessarily rigid. Which of all these Confucianisms do people want? And is the Confucianism people want really still Confucianism? And, perhaps more importantly, who are these people? In any case, it probably goes without saying that the institutionalized, or indeed, politicized Confucianism of fixed moral codes and hierarchies is unlikely, to say the least, to gain much ground with the Chinese population at large. Considering its heightened exposure to persuasive "global" (i.e. predominantly Anglo-American) values, such as individualism, negative freedom and increased consumer choice, as well as other progressive social changes in China, such as improved women's rights, this development will exclude, or has already excluded, the possibility of anything close to the formerly institutionalised Confucianism to be reconstructed. Hence, should Confucianism continue to be interpreted in a historicist manner by specialists on Confucianism, who tend to identify it with the reactionary Qing Dynasty establishment, then it would appear unlikely that the population will embrace the Confucian ideology. On the other hand, it is intriguing that Yu Dan's highly popular interpretation of Confucianism has precisely been criticized for being too accommodating to the status quo; critics say "that her thinking and her lecturing resemble a scholar-official from the feudal society", aiming at the reduction of critical social input in order to "maintain harmony", virtually as if the May Fourth Movement had never existed. (Zhao 2007) And yet, however curiously, the public readership seems to embrace it. Perhaps such criticism of Yu Dan is too subtle, perhaps even pedantic. A guide through everyday life rooted in local culture may simply find easier access to people's way of thinking and valuing than foreign self-help manuals. Even so, a return to a dynastic kind of Confucianism would seem entirely out of place. The New Confucian movement that has sought to find some commensurability between the Confucian philosophy and modern (or Western) institutions and values such as democracy, human rights, gender justice and individualism would seem to be the most promising for a kind of Confucianism suitable to the modern times. On the other hand, it must also be taken into account that Confucianism cannot simply be a vehicle to implement "modern" values in their Western format. If such values are to be adopted, as Daniel Bell has correctly observed, they must also be adapted (Bell 2010, 93). Confucianism's Contribution to the Modern World: A Suggestion Whether Confucianism is capable of adapting to modernity, however, does not answer the question whether it has something specific to contribute to modernity. In this regard, I would like to propose a suggestion. Which issues are the most pressing ones in modernity? Currently, economic considerations are without doubt the most conspicuous ones. Has Confucianism anything to contribute to these issues? I believe so, but in a way rather different from what people might expect. Let me explain. As touched upon in the first part of this paper, the last few decades have witnessed much discussion about what sort of influence Confucianism would have (and has had) on capitalist enterprise. Although the Chinese Communist Party was prone to regard Confucians as "capitalist-roaders", Confucianism had, in history, probably somewhat restraining effects on commerce and market forces, as it assigned merchant activity a very low social status, which, admittedly, was rather a reflection mainly of Legalist views. (Hansen 2000, 99) This tendency has been criticized by some historians as having inhibited the development of Chinese society, eventually causing it to lapse behind the Western powers (e.g. Fairbanks and Goldman 2006, 179ff). There is probably some truth in this, but today we may need to reevaluate this entire historical development as it has arguably triggered a number of grave problems in the world at large, social, moral, environmental and even existential. Indeed, considering the long-term interests of humanity and other living beings on the planet, the narrative of the West's success may in fact turn out to be simply a brief preface to the horror story of humanity at large. There are other and more recent arguments for considering Confucianism in fact a catalyst for capitalist activity. I will not go into detailed discussion of these arguments here, but briefly explain my conviction that most of these are actually misguided, partially resting upon a mistaken interpretation of Max Weber's Protestant Ethics thesis as an explanation of, let alone a blueprint for, desirable progress. Weber was concerned about the process of increased rationalization (Rationalisierung) in the Western way of living, thinking and valuing, certainly triggering a more systematic approach to organized co-existence, but also leading to depersonalization, loneliness and isolation. The fateful factor in this process was the quest for money-making, stimulated unintentionally by certain Protestant theological interpretations, and leading to the unique Western capitalist system, which Weber envisaged as becoming dominant in Western culture with all its inhumane and deplorable consequences.9 In this process, money-making becomes not only a rationalized activity but one that takes precedence over all other human activities: it becomes an end in itself. According to Weber, the unique feature of Occidental capitalism derives from its reliance upon an inner motivation to strictly organize our mundane life in such a way that virtually all of our actions contribute to the accumulation of capital. But not only is this an absurd and meaningless way of living, it also has profoundly negative consequences for human civilization and the "quality" of the human creatures being moulded by such a framework of values when gaining ascendancy in our societies.10 Weber would certainly have agreed that the process of rationalization has brought many improvements to Western societies, but considering his ironic remarks towards the end of his Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, it seems evident that he did not regard the "capitalist revolution" as a civilizational progress, and in fact rather the opposite: For of the last stage of this cultural development, it might well be truly said: "Specialists without spirit, sensualists without heart; this nullity imagines that it has attained a level of civilization never before achieved." (Weber 1930, 182) Thus, to base one's quest for cultural factors giving rise to social progress on Weber's thesis seems seriously misguided unless it is utilized as a powerful critique of modernity's ills. There is in any case a pressing need to reform the global capitalist system and radically reconsider the underlying values that help to maintain it. Marxism or socialism, at least of the conventional kind, is probably not that effective, not only because of its painful repressive history that has made it unattractive, but also because it is based on the fundamental idea that the system needs to be overturned before the way people think can be changed. We should have ample examples from history to realize to what sort of results such efforts tend to lead. Confucianism starts at the other end, with pedagogy, and seeks to instil certain 9 Tu Weiming (1984, 86) observes in this respect that "the Protestant ethic that has contributed to the rise of capitalism in the West has led to all kinds of problems such as excessive individualism and excessive rights-consciousness. (...) Excessive self-interest has led to the fragmentation of the individual, the generation gap and other problems of similar gravity." 10 It is illuminating for Weber's overall project that when hard-pressed by his critics to explain the focal point of his extensive comparative social and cultural investigations of which the Protestant Ethic was a part, he himself said that it was "not the advancement of capitalism in its expansion that was of central interest" to him, "but the evolution of the humankind [Menschentum] shaped through the confluence of religiously and economically dependent factors." (Weber 1978, 303) values and ways of thinking that contribute to a flourishing human co-existence and may even be necessary for the future of human societies and life on earth as a whole. Should it be unclear whether Confucian traits are likely to have a stimulating effect on industrial producer capitalism, it seems far less compelling when considering our modern consumer capitalist system. For Confucians would in most circumstances be reluctant consumers and generally rather frugal. Interestingly, however, they would not see anything wrong as such with material wealth to the extent that it simply provides conditions for good living. At first glance, this may seem contradictory, but, as will be clear, a closer look at the Confucian teachings reveals that it is not. Ruiping Fan has made the following observation about the Confucian attitude to material wealth: Material rewards are accepted as generally good, so that there is a pragmatist affirmation and openness to various means (such as central planning, the market, or both) as the source of monetary wealth, which is in turn a source of family and individual well-being. Confucians are this-worldly in pursuing a good life and human flourishing. They work for their families within a non-Puritanical acceptance of material success in this world in which material wealth is taken as, ceteris paribus, good and not grounds for moral suspicion. Wealth is desirable and should be pursued, as long as one does not pursue it by violating morality. (Fan 2010, 233) Wealth, however, is not an acceptable goal in its own right, as Confucius himself states rather clearly in Analects 7.12: If wealth were an acceptable goal, even though I would have to serve as a groom holding a whip in the marketplace, I would gladly do it. But if it is not an acceptable goal, I will follow my own devices. (Analects 1998) On another occasion, where Confucius is engaged in conversation with one of his disciples, he expresses his approval of the dictum "Poor but enjoying the way; rich but loving ritual propriety" (1.15). This view comes through more clearly in the following statement: Wealth and honor are what people want, but if they are the consequence of deviating from the way, I would have no part in them. Poverty and disgrace are what people deplore, but if they are the consequence of staying on the way, I would not avoid them (4.5). Wealth is thus first and foremost an expedient tool for improving one's moral development. Other things being equal, it is to be preferred to poverty, but only insofar as it will not corrupt the individual in question. After all, Confucius has nothing against making a nice profit: Zigong said, "We have an exquisite piece of jade here—should we box it up and put away for safekeeping, or should we try to get a good price and sell it off?" The Master replied, "Sell it! By all means, sell it! I am just waiting for the right price!" (9.3) Greed, egotism and extravagance, however, are all deplored. When fishing, Confucius himself avoided excess by using a line, not a net (7.27). Frugality is presented as a commendable virtue, while miserliness is not. Nevertheless, frugality leading to miserliness is better than extravagance leading to immodesty (7.36). An exemplary person (junzi ^^) is often contrasted with the petty person (xiao ren 2. Its participants are comparable to the members of a symphony orchestra who are professional players of different 12 instruments put in tune. Workers in both the natural and the cultural (i.e. cognitive, behavioural, social, and human) sciences are increasingly using mathematical methods and techniques. Since the bridge between these sciences and mathematics (the wider, higher and deeper growing study of topics such as quantity, structure, space, and change)13 is heavily traveled, the interdisciplinary dialogue is stimulated. Moreover, scientific collaboration is facilitated by e-research, which may be called a major breakthrough in science and technology. It combines a) vast quantities of digitised data (digital libraries), b) supercomputers running sophisticated software, and c) hightech connectivity between computers (cloud- and grid computing, semantic web). With modern computers, almost any form of knowledge can be precisely expressed, and multi-dimensional computations of complex multi-scale phenomena are not beyond reach anymore. The potential of the Internet, implying the availability of all information for everyone, instantly and everywhere, seems to be boundless.14 Wide and Deep Unmistakably, there is something terribly wrong with Western Sinology (Zhongguóxué). The field is not circumscribed. Unable to define their disciplinary matrix, lacking a research agenda, not having built a domain ontology (a precise explanation of the basic terms of their discourse), not commanding a theory of their own, and not searching for systematised knowledge with regard to China in and of itself, the so-called China experts in Europe and America are not scientists, 12 See Frodeman et al (2010), Bhaskar el al (2010), Bammer (2013), Thoren and Persson (2013), Montuori (2013), Bourgine (2013), and Mathieu and Schmid (2014). For an interesting but unconvincing counterpoint, see Jacobs (2014). In 2012, the Centre for Interdisciplinary Methodologies (CIM) was established at the University of Warwick. 13 Visit www.zbmath.org and www.ams.org/mathscinet/msc/msc2010.html. In addition, see note 6. 14 See Dutton and Jeffries (2010), Anandarajan and Anandarajan (2010), Hesse-Biber (2011), Nielsen (2012) and Floridi (2014). Also visit www.digitalhumanities.org,www.supercomputing.org and http://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/internet. even if 'science' is broadly defined. Ignoring the elephant in their room and refusing a Reflexion auf eigenes Tun, these scholars boldly claim to synthesise the results of all kinds of professional study regarding the country of their choice, but —without a conceptual framework, i.e. without a model representing China as such—they are not able to present a comprehensive and coherent picture of the country, not to mention a lucid exposition of its dynamics, its phase transitions, its transformation logic. Browsing and trespassing rather than really "putting together" is what these heroic polymaths are good at. Having no degree in any of the disciplines concerned, they do not shrink from rushing in where angels fear to tread. Implicitly claiming to be scientific all-rounders in respect of China, these jacks-of-all-trades keep the reader/listener/viewer in the dark as to how the parts fit into the whole and, conversely, how the whole stands interconnected with the parts. Their China approach is mile-wide-but-inch-deep. Though their population is dwindling, they are by no means extinct, their scholarship often being the pretentious garbed in the unintelligible. The claimed post-war "split of sinology into specialisms" has worsened the situation, because there is confusion and obfuscation as to who has a thorough grounding in a scientific discipline and who has not. Some, and we believe many, 'China experts' are actually amateurs who have the bad habit of donning the hat of a scientist without filling his shoes. Others have no qualms about introducing themselves simply as "Professor at the University of ... (name of city)". A courteous request to present academic credentials is considered a token of disrespect, and deeply ingrained customs (old boys network) preclude fundamental internal criticism, causing intellectual inbreeding, a deplorable situation politicians choose to turn a blind eye to. Occasionally—we confine ourselves to one example—someone, knowing very well that studying a language is not the same as studying the literature written in that language, decided to enrol for literary studies before hurling him/herself at the Chinese literature. His/her monodisciplinary approach to the country is then mile-deep-but-inch-wide (the truth would be intolerably stretched if such a person permitted people to call him/her "China expert"). However, the problem with these one-dimensional scientists, who Max Weber would have derogatorily called Fachmenschen (de- or compartment people), is that they are accusable of silo/stovepipe thinking, of not seeing the big country-picture, of being unable to think systemically (to discern the parts as well as the whole). To remove this odium, they have a tendency to cross boundary lines, blissfully ignorant about the dangers of skating on thin ice. Readers taking pains to check the list of contributors to 'Chinese/Asian Studies' journals will discover that the editorial boards of these competing periodicals (the number of titles runs into the dozens) have not been consistent in their declared policies on the professionalism of authors. All too often, published articles are not "of the highest academic standard". In our view, the wheat has not always been separated from the chaff, and experts in their own field of study are still allowed by editors who may not be kosher themselves to veer off course, that is, to leave their academic home turf and to enter unlawfully upon somebody else's professional domain. Goodbye, intellectual integrity! The fork in the road ahead for Western Sinologists is two-pronged: translating or collaborating. They are reported/supposed to be fluent in classical and modern Chinese. So our advice would be: cobbler, stick to your last. There are numerous important Chinese books eagerly awaiting translation. If their desire is to embark on the study of a China related subject, we would counsel them not to venture forth on too vast a sea, but to look around for China oriented experts (i.e. scientists [in the first place] who have a special interest in China) to set up a joint venture, with the caveat that partial views do not add up to a picture of the whole of China. For making good use of organised and structured databases, they need to be interconnected.15 Partial studies that are not nicely dovetailed or firmly interlocked with each other present the reader with a spectacle coupé, with a Humpty-Dumpty broken into bits. Such studies (one may think of those collected in the only chronologically ordered set of hefty tomes entitled Cambridge History of China, this work being a far cry from a profound, multiperspective narrative/story of China's past) do not constitute a coherent whole. They lack the critical and unifying (not: uniforming) framework that could be provided by the science of systems and the related science of networks, the theoretical parts of which must appeal to researchers really willing to work together and fully aware of the awesome power of making the right distinctions and abstractions. Parceling up neglects relations that matter. Compartmentalisation, or departmentalisation, the breaking down (mentally) of a complex system into "more manageable" subsystems easily results in losing sight of the context, of the 15 The online Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (www.eolss.net) is a striking example. Being an "integrated compendium of twenty one encyclopedias", the EOLSS body of knowledge "attempts to forge pathways between disciplines in order to show their interdependence". It "deals in detail with interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary subjects, but it is also disciplinary, as each major core subject is covered in great depth by world experts." See note 12. environment, of the surroundings, of the conditions under which these subsystems operate within their suprasystem. A good physician and a commander-in-chief know this. We need a cubistic, multi-professional perspective, a multimodal integration. If and only if they are orderly and specifically put together (assembled), single parts/modules/entities/agents make up a whole, as every architect, astronaut, chef de cuisine, choreographer, composer, flower arranger (ikebana), novelist, even a football coach can tell. The interactions and interfaces between the components of a country (e.g. its political, legal, military, economic, financial, social, educational, and cultural system) need to be investigated, much in the same way as the fundamental structure of the human language faculty is examined in current linguistics, that is to say, the interfaces between phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics. (Ramchand and Reiss 2007, 1-13; O'Grady et al 2009, ch. 2-6 and 12-14).16 For, as the ancients intuitively knew already, the perpetual interplay of components (a process involving exclusiveness-dissimilarity-uniqueness-discreteness as well as inclusiveness-similarity-commonness-continuity) is the basic principle of life and the core of all matter; it is the very essence of intelligence, creativity and harmony. In the words of Chinese-American theoretical physicist Kerson Huang: "Interaction makes the world tick". Studying China multidisciplinarily is fatally flawed; it will lead to hamartia, to "missing the mark" (illuminating the whole country); it is bound to result in a building not held together by cement, in the sterile juxtaposition of accounts forming a picture of incompatible colours. Partition walls must be lowered (but certainly not removed). What we need is detribalisation, collaborative scholarship, a well-coordinated joint effort, a disciplinarily integrated approach, that facilitates consilience, the joyful jumping together of scientific knowledge. The main thrust of this debunking argument is that China ought to be seen under the aspect of its whole, sub specie totius, which is not to say that analysis, as understood in analytic philosophy, is unimportant (see note 4). The country must be depicted not in a "flat", or "curved", but in a "fully rounded" way. For knowledge of the whole is knowledge of each and every part of it, and the other way around. It cannot be overstressed: in order to be scientific, the approach to China should be integrative, orchestral. Professional players should put their 16 According to French (2014): "At the most fundamental level, modern physics presents us with a world of structures and making sense of that view is the central aim of the increasingly widespread position knowns as structural realism". various instruments in tune and perform a symphony. Different perspectives must be brought together into the same dialogue space. Being a large, intricate and culture-soaked society cum polity cum economy cum geography cum history, China has to be studied truly interdisciplinarily. L'unité fait la force. Besides collaboration between Sinologists and China oriented scientists, we need ICT-driven collaboration between these scientists. In other words, we are in need of Sinologists who are prepared to work together with scientists having a) profound knowledge in a particular discipline, b) a special interest in China, c) proficiency in communicating with other "T-shaped" experts, and d) skill in using the tools provided by rapidly developing e-research; with scientists being, additionally, conscious of the important but often forgotten fact that geography (the study of who, what, how, why and where) is nothing but history in space, while history (the study of who, what, how, why and when) is only geography in time. The methods of grounded theory and "structured dialogic design" (Flanagan and Christakis 2010) could be used to engage the stakeholders in a productive conversation; the newest techniques of categorisation, concept mapping, (big) data mining, information visualisation/virtualisation and PowerPoint presentation could be applied to stimulate their imagination; and much could be learned from those having first-hand experience in operations—and/or project management. First and foremost, however, Sinologists (presumed to be highly competent to translate) and China oriented scientists willing to team up with each other should consult people versed in network—and (complex) systems science. For these are the fast evolving fields of research that may provide a conceptual framework within which the closely intertwined patterns of China can be described and analysed in a meaningful way. What is more, these are the disciplines that can play a crucial role in understanding any country/nation and, ultimately, die ganze verknotete und vernetzte Welt, which is—we hope those involved in global, or international (relations), studies will really realise it—a hypercomplex system of complex systems of complex systems in the cosmos (the grand total).17 17 For network science, see Newman (2010), and visit www.barabasilab.com and www.cnn.group.cam.ac.uk. For the science(s) of systems, see Ramage and Shipp (2009), Hofkirchner (2009), and Capra and Luisi (2014). In addition, visit www.isss.org,www.ifsr.org, www.iascys.org and www.collegepublications.co.uk/systems. For a short cut through the vast literature on the science(s) of complex systems, visit www.springer.com/physics/complexity? SGWID=0-40619-6-127747-0. In addition, see note 8 and 9. More than a decade ago, Taylor (2001) captured a whole new Zeitgeist in the making. Multidisciplinarity is certainly not the solution to the problem of Western Sinology. Changing from the mile-wide-but-inch-deep approach of the generalist ('China study') to the mile-deep-but-inch-wide approach of juxtaposed partial studies ('Chinese studies'), one gets out of the frying pan into the fire. (Western) Sinologists should decisively act, attempt to engage the interest of scientists from various quarters, and treat China as a Ganzheit, as a territory-bound, history-moulded and goal-directed totality of identifiable and yet interdependent actors and factors. The study of China, in particular the long overdue interdisciplinary study of its modernisation,18 should be mile-wide-and-mile-deep, and the most important words should be "coordination" and "integration". The dilemma as to whether to take the road to "knowing nothing about everything" or to "knowing everything about nothing" in respect of the country will then be broken, and both the wood and the trees will be seen. Firmly distancing itself from multidisciplinary research, the study of China we have in mind requires a well-thought-out, perfectly balanced division of labour, i.e. the specialisation of cooperating individuals valued by Adam Smith and Emile Durkheim. Parts and whole, the reader will remember, are mutually implicated and inseparable from each other. It takes two different persons to perform a pas de deux. Entangled, Yin and Yang form Taiji, the fundamental concept that was created in ancient China and has been visualised as the suggestive © diagram but that the West appears to have great difficulty in understanding. Working together as a scientific team informed about the latest developments in (complex) systems—and network science is the key to understanding China in and of itself, to comprehending the country taken as a single but not isolated or separated entity. The change to interdisciplinary research in the study of China will be a paradigm shift. Reading John King Fairbank's widely acclaimed book China: A New History (Belknap, 1992), one might be impressed by the ease with which the great American China-scholar wrote about all kinds of subjects related to the country he had fallen in love with. However, it should not be overlooked that Professor Fairbank, whose well-known students were Benjamin Schwartz, Mary C. Wright, Rhoads Murphey, David Nivison, Albert Feuerwerker, Merle Goldman, Thomas Metzger, Philip Kuhn, Paul Cohen, Orville Schell, Andrew Nathan and Ross Terrill (to name but a few influential Sinologists), is to blame for 18 The key question here is: Can China become a modern nation without liberty? For "liberty", "liberté" or "Freiheif, explore Wikipedia. Schelling (1809) and Lisin (1995) are must readings for Chinese intellectuals. See Kuijper (2013). encroaching upon foreign territory, for having entered without announcement/ permission the domains of professionals. Now let J.K. Fairbank & Co. be a legal person with many cross-communicating heads, each graduated in, and familiar with the history of, geography, demography, archaeology, linguistics, literary studies, economics, agronomy, (corporate, public and/or international) finance, business administration, political science, law, military studies, medicine, psychology, sociology, anthropology, mythology, pedagogy, semiotics, cybernetics, informatics, communication studies, transportation studies, religious studies, Kunstwissenschaft, energy studies, ecology (sustainability science) or philosophy, and—common denominator—having mainly research interest in a particular, discipline related aspect of China. We dare say this scientific, the university spirit epitomising community, by focusing on the process of finding answers to carefully formulated shared questions and then pooling the resources of its members, would be able to produce a book on the complex and multi-faceted history of the country entirely different from, and more thoroughly researched than, the one written by JKF, provided the poly-dimensional mapping project is well managed, provided the scientific orchestra is well conducted. Were such a comprehensive, diasynchronically focused book (series) published, the giant step from multi- to interdisciplinary research and production would have been taken, a decisive move those subscribing to the fundamental idea of Das Bauhaus would loudly applaud but no automobile—, aircraft—, or spacecraft manufacturer would be surprised at. Having only superficially dealt with this matter of utmost importance, we leave it to be further discussed at the highest echelon of the world's top universities.19 Conclusion With philosophy, mathematics, science and technology changing their character, the study of China should be lifted onto a higher plane, higher than what 'China experts' at the School of Oriental [sic] and African Studies (SOAS), the German Institute of Global and Area Studies (GIGA), the National Institute of Oriental [sic] Languages and Civilisations (INALCO), the Institute of Far Eastern [sic] Studies (RAS), the Brookings Institution, the University of California (Berkeley), the 19 In December last year, we sent a copy of this article to the current and a former director of the highly prestigious Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies at Harvard University. We suggested discussing the subject of the paper at the next "advisory committee" meeting. The former let us badly down; the latter, student of JKF, did not even care to respond to our e-mails. Nobody at this famous China policy advising centre seems to be interested in uplifting the study of China! University of Tokyo, the East Asian Institute (Singapore), Collège de France, CECMC, Academia Sinica (Taipei), Fudan-, Tsinghua-, Columbia-, Princeton-, Stanford-, Yale-, Heidelberg-, Leiden-, Lund-, Aichi-, Keio-, Kyoto-, Jawaharlal Nehru- and/or Australian National University allegedly aim at; higher than the declared objective of the leadership of CCPN Global, that "unique global academic society for advancing the study of China and the Chinese from a comparative perspective", launched in March 2013. If the purpose of Sinology, Chinakunde, CHHonoraa or Chugokugaku is to make a fine weave, its approach should be diachronic and synchronic at the same time; it should be historical/longitudinal as well as cross-sectional/transversal. That is to say, those embarking on the study of China as such should take a leaf out of the historical sociologist's manual; they should from the very outset bear in mind that paths and patterns are point-counterpointedly related, on macro-, meso- and microscale. With each and every one of the cultural sciences beginning to realise that without the help of the other neither will be able to proceed very far, the heyday of Sinology is yet to come. However, this crucial point (Wende!) in the history and evolution of that odd field of research called "China study", or "Chinese Studies", cannot be reached until one thing has been accomplished: the official opening of a truly scientific, genuinely interdisciplinary, and professionally managed China research centre, this being an Institute for Advanced China Study fitting neatly into the university imagined by Elkana and Klopper (2012), affiliated with a yet to be established International Union of Area/Country Studies, and linked up with the global e-infrastructure. Meanwhile, the organisation of an international conference on (comprehending, and coping with) the complexity of China, i.e. a world forum co-organised by Associations/Societies of Sinologists (e.g. EACS) and really committed to improving the current state of the study of China, might be worth considering. "Really", because the high-profile "World Forum on China Studies", co-sponsored by the State Council Information Office of the People's Republic of China and the Shanghai Municipal Government, is a complete farce, a shameless show of partisanship.20 The active participants in the onsite and/or online conference/congress we are thinking of, especially the 20 It should be noted that the Chinese Communist, or Capitalist (?), Party, used to falsify the history of China and pursuing a policy of chanxin (mind binding) rather than chanzu (foot binding), attempts, by any means possible, to prevent social and human scientists from doing serious research in/on the country—a major subject "China experts" thinking of their next application for a visa to visit China refuse to discuss at public meetings and/or do not dare to write about. younger generation among them, will undoubtedly benefit from a fundamental, critical, open, and professionally moderated discussion. Phrases like "systems thinking", "research synthesis", "nonlinear behavior", "circular causality", "agent-based modeling", "pattern formation", "data compression", "level of analysis", "concept mapping", "upper ontology", "conceptual modeling", "knowledge integration,—cartography, and— management", "network evolution", "sub/superlinear scaling", "system dynamics", "scientific collaboration", "soft computing", "multi-formalism modeling", "intelligent information systems", "e-research" and "semantic web" are increasingly used, not only in the natural but also in the cultural sciences. The main reason for this is the closing of the gap that has been yawning between the two worlds. This deliberately provocative article is nothing but a wake-up call for 'China experts', not only in Europe and the USA but also elsewhere, to be aware of this and to act accordingly, that is, to make the complexity turn in order to reveal the whole elephant. It has been our intention throughout the paper to convince the reader that there is an elevated place (a meta position) where the huge body and bewildering variety of data on a country can be compressed into a falsifiable or refutable theory, where multiplicity (multa) can be turned into simplicity (multum), where—in the case at issue—a breathtaking view of the whole of China can be gained. At that high altitude, long-held convictions will be disestablished and the Eureka effect, the Aha-Erlebnis will be, that—by seeing both the many in the one and the one in the many; by realising that kinds of fruit, like apples and oranges, can be compared—one finally "com-prehends" (fasst zusammen). Beautiful and profound is, therefore, the old Chinese proverb: "the pattern is one, the parts are different" (M — ^ ^).21 China, being a universe the centre of which is everywhere (like an organism the hereditary material of which is encountered in each and every one of its cells), should be studied 1) professionally (i.e. by China oriented people not only running the gamut of the natural and cultural sciences, but also taking full advantage of the latest in information and communications technology), 2) on the basis of reliable/primary sources, and 3) with the translation skill of sinologists being put to good use. The country (indeed, each country) should be approached respectfully 21 In 1970, the author wrote a MA thesis on 'the key character M'. The 264-page piece of writing has never been published but its subject has intrigued him ever since, because M (pattern, structure), he learned, is intimately connected with M (path, the way of nature). For recent research on M, see Liu (2005), Krummel (2010) and Rosker (2012). (account also being taken of its history), looked at with an open, unbiased mind, and presented in a critical but fair and honest way. China is a Gestalt; it is a dense and intricate network of ties developed over a long period of time; it is an organisation of numerous agents/individuals having different, often convoluted and sometimes strained relations with each other; it is a cluster of institutions (commonly cognised patterns by which societal games are recurrently played and expected to be played); it is a complex system of evolving hierarchical systems; it is a non-linear universe, to be studied as such by China oriented, truly collaborating experts from various disciplines, linguistics, or literary theory/ criticism, being only one of them. China is a partly self-organising system, to be defined in terms of space, time, structure and agency; it is an entirety, a holon, to be described holographically. China, "l'autre du monde indo-européen", somehow behaves; it has a personality, symbolised by its flag and national anthem, and embodied/personified by its head of state, because its people have a sense of belonging (sustained by the Chinese script)22 and constitute a values-sharing community of destiny; it has its own particular culture, the rayonnement of which cannot be measured. The country has unique, emergent properties, that cannot be attributed to any of its constituent subsystems; it is an individuum, something that cannot be divided up without losing its history and geography-related identity.23 The argument advanced in this bold article boils down to a single, deceptively simple statement: without scientific collaboration, there will be no (empirically and theoretically founded) knowledge of a country. To know a man, it has been said, you have to walk a mile in his shoes; and to know a city, you have to walk a thousand miles. To know a country, we would like to add, you need nothing less than a scientific team. Our inspiration came from the work of Ludwig von Bertalanffy, the creator of Allgemeine Systemlehre who has been described as "the least known intellectual titan of the 20th century". His Leitmotiv was "unity-through-diversity" (providing space for different perspectives while sharing a common goal).24 Our hope is that "the brick we have thrown will attract a 22 The reader will remember Hugo von Hofmannsthal's speech Das Schrifttum als geistiger Raum der Nation (1927). 23 See Blitstein (2008). For "identity", see Parfit (1984), Straub (2004), Descombes (2013), and Gasser and Stefan (2013); 24 Visit www.isss.org/lumLVB.htm and www.bcsss.org. In addition, see note 17. For multiple interacting perspectives, visit http://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de/article/multiperspectivity. Philosophically seasoned readers should also visit http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspektivismus and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/anekantavada (nota bene: the references are the German and English wikipedia respectively). jadestone from others" (IM ^ Ï)—for the improvement of intercultural and international understanding, for more peace and harmony in this hyperconnected yet deeply troubled world.25 CHINA ORIENTED EXPERTS FROM ALL DISCIPLINES, UNITE! References Allen, Peter, Steve Maguire, and Bill McKelvey, eds. 2011. The SAGE Handbook of Complexity and Management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Anandarajan, Murugan, and Asokan Anandarajan, eds. 2010. e-Research Collaboration. Berlin: Springer. Atkinson, Rita, Richard Atkinson, Edward Smith, Daryl Bem, and Susan Nolen-Hoeksema. 1999. Hilgard'sIntroduction to Psychology. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Bammer, Gabriele. 2013. DiscipliningInterdisciplinarity. Canberra: ANU Press. Batty, Michel. 2013. The New Science of Cities. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Béziau, Jean-Yves, and Katarzyna Gan-Krzywoszynska, eds. 2014. New Dimensions of the Square of Opposition. München: Philosophia Verlag. Bhaskar, Roy, Cheryl Frank, Karl-Georg H0yer, Petter Naess, and Jenneth Parker, eds. 2010. Interdisciplinarity and Climate Change. London: Routledge. Blitstein, Pablo. 2008. "A New Debate about Alterity". Accessed on May 1st 2014, www.uba.ar/ceca/newsletters/diciembre_08/newsletter-english_diciembre_08.php. Bourgine, Paul. 2013. "Complex Systems Science as a New Transdisciplinary Science". Accessed on May 1st 2014, www.diplomacyandforeignaffairs.com/complex-systems-science-as-a-new-transdisciplinary-science. Byrne, David, and Gill Callaghan. 2014. Complexity Theory and the Social Sciences. London: Routledge. Caplat, Guy. 2008. Modèles et métamodèles. Lausanne: PPUR. 25 Taking the study of countries (not to be confused with Kulturkunde, Kulturologie or Kulturwissenschaft) to a higher level, we believe, will make a critically important contribution to understanding the dynamic nature-culture /society interactions, the negative manifestations of which are often referred to as "the human predicament". See Ehrlich and Ehrlich (2013), Kelly (2013), Parker (2014) and McCabe (2014); visit www.clubofrome.org,www.uncsd2012.org, www.ecologyandsociety.org, www.energsustainsoc.com, www.millenniumassessment.org, www.resalliance.org,www.globalchange.gov,www.futureearth.info,www.isecoeco.org, www.earth.columbia.edu,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/sustainability, www.stockholmresilience.org and www.beijer.kva.se. Conversely, a detailed understanding of those interactions, in particular thorough knowledge of the global-regional-local problem attendant on them, will help to better comprehend the complexities of countries. Capra, Fritjof, and Pier Luisi. 2014. The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Vision. Cambridge: CUP. Chaitin, Gregory. 2005. Metamaths: The Quest for Omega. London: Atlantic Books. Cheng, Anne. 1997. Histoire de la pensée chinoise. Paris: Seuil. Cheng, Chung-Ying, and Nicholas Bunnin, eds. 2002. Contemporary Chinese Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell. Clark, Herbert. 1996. Using Language. Cambridge: CUP. Critchley, Simon, and William Schroeder, eds. 1999. A Companion to Continental Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell. Cua, Antonio, ed. 2003. Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy. London: Routledge. Descombes, Vincent. 2013. Les embarrass de l'identité. Paris: Gallimard. Dutton, William, and, Paul Jeffrieseds. 2010. World Wide Research: Reshaping the Sciences and Humanities. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Ehrlich, Paul, and Anne Ehrlich. 2013. "Can a Collapse of Global Civilization Be Avoided?" Proceedings of the Royal Society B 280 (1754), March 7: 1-9. -. 2013. "Future Collapse: How Optimistic Should We Be?". Proceedings of the Royal Society B 280 (1767), September 22: 1-2. Elkana, Yehuda, and Hannes Klöpper. 2012. Die Universität im 21. Jahrhundert. Hamburg: Körber-Stiftung. Feng, Youlan. 1953. A History of Chinese Philosophy, Vol. II. Translated by Derk Bodde. Princeton, NJ: PUP. Flanagan, Thomas, and Alexander Christakis. 2010. The Talking Point: Creating an Environment for Exploring Complex Meaning. Scottsdale, AZ: Information Age Publishing. Floridi, Luciano. 2014. The Fourth Revolution: How the Infosphere is Reshaping Human Reality. Oxford: OUP. Fraser, Chris. 2014. Chinese Philosophy: An Introduction. New York: Columbia University Press. French, Steven. 2014. The Structure of the World. Oxford: OUP. Frodeman, Robert, Julie Thompson Klein, and Carl Mitcham, eds. 2010. The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity. New York: Oxford University Press. Gasser, Georg, and Matthias Stefan, eds. 2013. Personal Identity: Complex or Simple? Cambridge: CUP. Gray, Wayne, ed. 2007. Integrated Models of Cognitive Systems. New York: OUP. Hesse-Biber, Sharlene, ed. 2011. The Handbook of Emergent Technologies in Social Research. New York: OUP. Heywood, Andrew. 2007. Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Hofkirchner, Wolfgang, ed. 2009 ff. Exploring Unity through Diversity. Litchfield Park, AZ: Emergent Publications. Jacobs, Jerry. 2014. In Defense of Disciplines. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Ji, Sungchul. 2012. Molecular Theory of the Living Cell. New York: Springer. Johnson, Jeffrey. 2014. Hypernetworks in the Science of Complex Systems. Singapore: World Scientific. Jullien, François. 2007. La pensée chinoise dans le miroir de la philosophie. Paris: Seuil. Kelly, Michael. 2013. "Why a Collapse of Global Civilization Can Be Avoided: A Comment on Ehrlich & Ehrlich". Proceedings of the Royal Society B 280 (1767), September 22: 1-3. Krausz, Michael, ed. 2010. Relativism: A Contemporary Anthology. New York: Columbia University Press. Krummel, John. 2010. "Transcendent or Immanent? Significance and History of Li in Confucianism." Journal of Chinese Philosophy 37(3): 417-37. Kuijper, Hans. 2000. "Is Sinology a Science?" China Report 36(3): 331-54. -. 2013. "The Modernisation of China". www.academia.edu (fill in author's name). -. 2014. "Perception: An Interdisciplinary Essay". www.academia.edu (fill in author's name). Lai, Karyn. 2008. An Introduction to Chinese Philosophy. Cambridge: CUP. Lisin, Dimitri. 1995. "Philosopher of Freedom". Accessed May 1st, 2014, http://vis-www.cs.umass.edu/~dima/mytexts/suff.html. Liu, Jeeloo. 2005. "The Status of Cosmic Principle (li) in Neo-Confucian Metaphysics". Journal of Chinese Philosophy 32(3): 391-407. Mathieu, Nicole, and Anne-Françoise Schmid, eds. 2014. Modélisation et interdisciplinarité. Paris: Quœ. Mayaram, Shail, ed. 2014. Philosophy as Samvada and Svaraj: DialogicalMeditations on Daya Krishna and Ramchandra Gandhi. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. McCabe, Viki. 2014. Coming to Our Senses: Perceiving Complexity to Avoid Catastrophes. New York: OUP. Montuori, Alfonso. 2013. "Complexity and Transdisciplinarity: Reflections on Theory and Practice". Accessed May 1st, 2014, www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02604027. 2013.803349?journalCode=gwof20. Mou, Bo, ed. 2009. History of Chinese Philosophy. London: Routledge. Newman, Mark. 2010. Networks: An Introduction. Oxford: OUP. Nielsen, Michael. 2012. Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science. Princeton, NJ: PUP. O'Grady, William, John Archibald, Mark Aronoff, and Janie Rees-Miller. 2009. Contemporary Linguistics: An Introduction. Boston: Bedford-St. Martin's. Parfit, Derek. 1984. Reasons and Persons. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Parker, Jenneth. 2014. Critiquing Sustainability, Changing Philosophy. London: Routledge. Ramage, Magnus, and Karen Shipp. 2009. Systems Thinkers. London: Springer. Ramchand, Gillian, and Charles Reiss, eds. 2007. The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Interfaces. Oxford: OUP. Reck, Erich, ed. 2013. The Historical Turn in Analytic Philosophy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Rose, Nikolas, and Joelle Abi-Rached. 2013. Neuro: The New Brain Sciences and the Management of the Mind. Princeton, NJ: PUP. Rosker, Jana. 2012. Traditional Chinese Philosophy and the Paradigm of Structure (Li 3). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Samuelson, Paul, and William Nordhaus. 2009. Economics. New York: McGraw-Hill. Schelling, Friedrich von. 1809. "Philosophische Untersuchungen über das Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit". Accessed May 1st 2014: www.hs-augsburg.de/~harsch /germanica/Chronologie/19Jh/Schelling/sch_frei.html. Soames, Scott. 2014. The Analytic Tradition in Philosophy, Vol. I: The Founding Giants. Princeton, NJ: PUP. Starr, Cecie, Ralph Taggart, Christine Evers, and Lisa Starr. 2013. The Unity and Diversity of Life. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning. Straub, Jürgen. 2004. "Identität", Handbuch der Kulturwissenschaften Vol. I, edited by Jaeger, Friedrich and Liebsch, Burkhard, 277- 303. Grundlagen und Schlüsselbegriffe. Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler,. Taylor, Mark. 2001. The Moment of Complexity: Emerging Network Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Thorén, Henrik, and Johannes Persson. 2013. "The Philosophy of Interdisciplinarity". Accessed May 1st 2014, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10838-013-9233-5. Wolf-Branigin, Michael. 2013. Using Complexity Theory for Research and Program Evaluation. New York: OUP. Zufferey, Nicolas. 2008. Introduction á la pensée chinoise. Paris: Marabout. Book Reviews Huang, Chun-chieh ed.: The Study of East Asian Confucianism: Retrospect and Prospect (t^MW^HSM^M) (525 pages, 2005, Taipei: National Taiwan University Press) The present book has been published as a part of the research program of East Asian Confucianisms in the Institute of Advanced Studies in Humanities and Social Sciences, National Taiwan University, which has been established at the National Taiwan University in 2006. The research program was focused upon East Asian Confucianisms and it resulted, among others, in seven extensive book series. The book Retrospect and Prospects of the Research in Eastern Asian Confucianism has been edited and published by Chun-chieh Huang, one of the most well-known experts on Confucianism in contemporary Taiwan. The editor (who is also author of several contributions included in the book), is National Chair Professor of Ministry of Education, Taiwan, a research fellow at the Institute of Chinese Literature and Philosophy at the Academia Sinica in Taipei, Honorary President of Chinese Association for General Education and Dean of the Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities and Social Sciences at the National Taiwan University in Taipei. In his function of the director of the Program of East Asian Confucianisms at this university he has edited several books on this traditional stream of thought in the scope of his comprehensive book collection on East Asian Civilizations (t^X^W^S*) which has been brought to life due to the increasing relevance of these regions on the global level. In the 21st century, East Asian societies have namely redraw the map of progress: the balance of economic—and increasingly also political—power, is shifting from the Euro-American to the East Asian areas. This shift confronts us with many new questions linked to transformations of material and intellectual paradigms, defining not only the development of East Asian societies as such, but also decidedly influencing international relations. Strategic solutions to these issues need to consider broader perspectives within the context of particular cultural backgrounds. They are not limited to economic and ecological issues, but also include political and social roles of ideologies and culturally conditioned values, representing the central epistemological grounds on which the most characteristic and enduring institutions of these societies are resting. Hence, the series is dealing with many crucial aspects defining these idea foundations, including a several volumes dedicated to the research of Confucian theories and practices. The present book represents one of the most comprehensive volumes of this series and an indispensable source of valuable information for every scholar dealing with East Asian Confucianism. Speaking of Eastern Asia as a concept, however, can be a risky issue. Thus, Prof. Huang Chun-chieh clarifies the notion already in the Foreword. He points out that such a clarification is important, for in the academic worlds within these areas, there are still many prejudices and "unnecessary misunderstandings" regarding the notion of Eastern Asia. The concept has namely often been understood as implying certain historical connotations linked to the Japanese imperial tendencies in the respective geographic area. Prof. Huang lays stress upon the fact that in the present anthology, the term East Asia has by no means been applied in such a universalistic and/or essential manner. It has rather been understood as a term, implying multicultural dimensions and rooted in a free interaction between multifarious Eastern Asian cultures on the one hand, and in the historical contemporary interrelations between them and other cultures of our common world. Thus, the notion of Eastern Asia as has been implied in the present anthology, is not following the strict demarcation lines between the "Center" and "Periphery" as applied in Wallerstein's world system theory and similar earlier discourses within the postcolonial studies. In the two millenniums of history which delineates the scholarly research of which the present book is consisting, these demarcation lines were never static enough to form such categories; they were a dynamic part of mutually influencing cultures and histories and have in their courses undergone several profound changes. In my opinion, however, the importance of the book introduced in the present review is easy to understand, especially regarding the fact that for centuries, Confucianism has represented the central foundation of cultures in the majority of East Asian regions and that it still forms many aspects of their contemporary value systems. Here, we could mention another common cultural ground which bounded the area together during longstanding centuries, namely the pictographic writing. The main goal of the present anthology is thus twofold: first, through the lens of researching their common Confucian grounds, it aims to introduce comparisons and mutual influence between the major East Asian countries, namely China, Japan and Korea, and, secondly to evaluate the interaction in this research field between these countries and the Western world. The anthology consists of nine comprehensive studies, dealing with various aspects of East Asian research in Confucianism. It opens with a study written by Huang Chun-chieh, the editor of the entire anthology. This study contains a detailed general introduction of the present state and the future prospects of interpreting Confucian classics in Eastern Asia. The introduction and the critical evaluation of the present state in these research areas forms a basis that enables the author to delineate the most probable future directions and guidelines in the research of Confucian classics on the one hand, and to design the most relevant research questions still open to investigations in this field that has, as the study shows, an immense potential for further development. As the author points out, the study does not represent a catalogue of all works that were written in this research field in Eastern Asia, but rather a theoretical evaluation of the respective discourses, focusing upon problems, linked to their scope, their contents, as well as to their cultural and social backgrounds, mainly aiming to raise awareness on these issues. The second study that has been compiled by the Japanese scholar Masayuki Sato, contains six chronologically structured sections introducing the Japanese research in Xunzi during the 20th century. This overview does not represent a critical evaluation of the material, but rather aims to introduce the main Japanese currents, works and authors, working in this research field, to the Chinese academic readership. This section is followed by a chapter on the Ritual books from the Tang and Song dynasties through the lens of the controversial thesis, according to which the end of the Tang and the beginning of the Song dynasties represent the demarcation line between ancient China and the Chinese middle age. Chang Wen-Chang, the author of these six chapters has based his investigation on previous research results derived from Japanese scholars who carried out a broad scope of research in the reforms and social transformation that have been taking place in both abovementioned dynasties. The relatively detailed analyses of their ritual books which, of course, were containing the main criteria and central codes for formal social interactions, were carried out in order to shed further light upon the abovementioned controversy. Lee Bong Kyoo introduced some focal points and central issues guiding the Korean research in Confucianism in the next chapter. This chapter concentrates especially upon the Korean investigations and elaboration of the Jeong Yak-yong's (wider known as Dasan) teachings, that have been later even more extensively elaborated in Huang Chun-chieh's book The East Asian Perspective of the Dasan Discourse and the Korean Confucianism which has been published in 2006 in the scope of the same series as the present anthology. Divided into seven different sections, this chapter offers a comprehensive introduction of the Korean research material on this important scholar who wrote highly influential books about philosophy, science and theories of government, held significant administrative positions, and was noted as a poet. His philosophical position is often identified with the Neo-Confucian school of practical learning (in Korean: Silhak), focusing upon the research in his philosophy, his interpretations of the Confucian classics and rituality, as well as on his theories on statecraft. The next chapter, written by Hung Yueh Lan, is dedicated to the research and a critical evaluation of Japanese Confucianism. In six sections, it analyses the post-war Japanese interpretations of Masao Maruyama's classical work Investigations in the Japanese Political Thought and establishes a fundamental critique of Maruyama's theories. These theories were rooted in a search for the specific origins of Japanese enlightenment and modernity through the analysis of Dong Zhongshu's reformed Confucianism, known under the name Dezhou Confucianism. Through this critique and through the exposition of certain errors in interpretation, the author aims to underline the future guidelines for possible directions in researching Dezhou Confucianism. These essays are followed by another chapter which also focuses upon the Confucian research in Japan. It is written by Kun-Chiang Chang and mainly deals with the Japanese research in the teachings and discursive developments of the most important represent of the Neo-Confucian School of the Heart-mind (Xin xue ' %), namely with Wang Yangming's work. The chapter which is subdivided in eight different sections, points out the importance of this Japanese research field due to its contribution to the widening and the internationalization of the influential sphere of this important philosopher. Because of respective Japanese research works, Wang Yangming's philosophy and its theoretical implications were not only upgraded, but also placed in a broader East Asian context. In this sense, they represent a good example of fruitful cooperation and interaction between particular cultures that were (and still are) profoundly influenced by Confucian philosophy. Chapter 7, which was written by Shyu Shing-Ching, deals with the Chinese and Japanese research of the works created by Zhu Shunshui (Shu Shun- Sui, 1600-1682), a Chinese scholar from the Ming dynasty who lived and worked in Japan, thus contributing immensely to the exchange between China and Japan, as well as to Japanese education and intellectual history. The next chapter that has also been written by the main editor of this anthology, Prof. Chun-Chieh Huang, represents an important excursus to the main line of writings that have primarily been focused upon East Asian research in Confucianism. It namely deals with the post-war Confucian research that has been carried out in the period between 1950 and 1980 by sinologists from the USA. This excursus is significant because it widens the horizon of the central conceptualization of the discussed book which is based upon exposing the intercultural dimensions of Confucian research. The author points out that in contrast to European Sinology which dates back to the 13 th century and which has been well documented especially regarding its research in the area of Confucian studies, the North American research in this field has hitherto not been considered enough. Thus, he decided to order and introduce to the wider Chinese academic public the immense amount of respective research work implemented by American sinologists, especially regarding the fact that after the WWII, the leading guidelines of Chinese, and also of Confucian studies in respect of both, their methodology as well as their contents, were gradually shifted from the European to the North American region. Previous research that has been heavily relying upon the philological research has thus been replaced by more topical methods that concentrate upon placing the particular subject matters of Confucian research into their respective social, political and historical contexts. Chun-Chieh Huang points out that after the beginning of the seventies of the previous century, American sinologists have, however, also begun to apply certain modernized text bounded research methods, implying the analyses of conceptual and axiological aspects of Confucian teachings. The author concludes that both methods that have still been applied by foreign scholars are mutually complementary and can contribute a lot to the further development of Confucian research not only in the East Asian, but also in the wider, global context. The last, eight chapter of the anthology was written by Chao-yang Pan introduces the specific features of the post-war Confucian research in Taiwan, focusing upon both, its central problems as well as upon its broader significance. The author points out that Taiwanese research in traditional Chinese philosophy cannot be divided from its social and political contexts including its colonial past as well as its Westernized present. Hence, the chapter exposes that a reconstruction of the core traditional values prevailing in classical Chinese philosophy and their incorporation into the modern Taiwanese society belongs to the main tasks that should direct the future Taiwanese research in Confucianism. We could add that in this way, modern investigations in Confucianism could be significantly contributing to the re-establishment of the local cultural identities, shaping new, modernized images not only of the Taiwanese, but also of Chinese and East Asian cultural heritages. The book that has been introduced in the present review is representing an important step on this significant path of academic inquiry. Jana S. Rosker Huang, Chun-chieh: Humanism in East Asian Confucian Contexts Edited by Jörn Rüsen, Oliver Kozlarek, Jürgen Straub, and Huang Chun-Chieh (165 pages, 2010, transcript Verlag, Bielefeld) This book deals with the most relevant issue connected to the question of the specific Confucian humanism. Not only many Western, but also several East Asian contemporary scholars are namely still following the presumption according to which humanism is a specific Western concept, deeply rooted in the European intellectual history. The book, written by Professor Huang Chun-Chieh, challenges this Eurocentric presumption and shows through brilliant analyses that humanism can manifest itself in various cultural forms, including the Confucian one. And not only this: the author also clearly illuminates the fact that humanism is not only an inherent part, but rather the very essence of classical Confucian thought, even though it manifests itself in a form that is quite different from the forms that can be found in the extensively individualized contexts of European humanistic tradition. The author of this book, Prof. Huang Chun-Chieh, is a distinguished National Chair Professor of Ministry of Education, the Dean of the Institute for Advanced Studies in Humanities and Social Sciences at the National Taiwan University (NTU), and the Director of the Program of East Asian Confucianisms at the same academic institution. He is also a research fellow at the Institute of Chinese Literature and Philosophy of the Taiwanese Academia Sinica in Taipei. He is a well-known expert in traditional and modern Confucianism and has written and edited numerous excellent works in this research field. The book Humanism in East Asian Confucian Contexts was published in English and can thus reach a wider readership in Western, and especially in European academic circles. It consist of 5 chapters and 3 appendices and represents modified and upgraded studies dealing with diverse traditions of East Asian Confucian humanisms. The author opens every chapter with an introduction which offers the conceptualization and the structure of each topic and closes with a conclusion which summarizes particular cross sections of each delineated content. The extensive and very informative introduction guides us through the chapters of the book, offering a brilliant overlook over the crucial concepts in the East Asian Confucian thought. The author places these concepts into a wider cultural context, explaining their developments in the entire geopolitical region which has historically been influenced by Confucianism, focusing upon the area of China, Japan and Korea. The second chapter, entitled The Unity of Body and Mind, explains the basis of Confucian discourses that manifest themselves through intertwined relations of the human body and the heart-mind (xin) and their connections to the social environment. The author shows why and how this unity is thoroughly representing the basics of Confucian humanist spirit which is rooted in the continuum of mind and body, in the harmony between oneself and the others, in the unity of heaven and humanity, and, above all, in a profound historical consciousness. The bodily recognition of the heart-mind and its relation to the culture and society is essential for the practice of self-cultivation which is a platform for regulation and pacification of "everything that is under Heaven (tianxia)," i.e. of the social order. In this context, the author refers to Xu Fuguan's concept of mesophysics which places the heart-mind (xin) in the center of human reasoning, allowing men to obtain an insight into the basic cosmic structures, simultaneously offering them possibilities of proper value judgments. Here, Xu follows the Mencian distinction of great and small bodies (dati, xiaoti) which refers to the Confucian binary category of the nobleman (junzi) and small man (xiaoren). Only when reasoning follows the bodily heart-mind, one can become a great human person, the nobleman or junzi. The body is then perceived as a manifestation of spiritual cultivation or the cultivation of humanness (ren). What Mencius called the great body is the reasoning performed by our bodily heart-mind which consists of the enduring quest for self-improvement and self-cultivation. This self-cultivation is regarded as a cultivation of the unity of body and mind. The third chapter is based on the conceptualization of this unity and places it into its cultural and political context, defining it as the human moral self. The chapter further deals with the relation between the self and the others in terms of intellectual interactions between China and Japan from the 17th century onwards. The next chapter discusses the relationship between the human person and nature, focusing upon their connection to ren (humanness). Since every human being is an inherent part of nature, as an organic and holistic whole which is constantly in dynamic motion, he/she constantly seeks harmony with it. As far as ren (humanness) is immanent in both, the human person and the nature or cosmos, it manifests itself as a moral imperative that strives for the harmonization of personal and cosmic aspects of being. The author exposes the fact that in traditional Confucian discourses, this harmonization should thoroughly be based on the self-realization of the individual moral self. By acting in accordance with humanness (ren), the individual could be united with Heaven/Nature (tian ren heyi) and thus comprehend the genuine meaning and value of existence. This section is followed by the last, fifth chapter which clarifies some general questions related to the historical consciousness which underlies the theoretical platform of the central topic. Following Qian Mu's interpretation of historical reasoning, the author points out that in order to understand the social, political and cultural background of Confucian humanism, it is by no means sufficient to analyze it merely through the lens of the Aristotelian concept of homo politicus, nor exclusively through the optics of the modern (Western) concept of homo economicus. In this context, the author draws our attention to the fact that humans are both, shaping and being shaped by history; thus, in understanding and interpreting traditional functions of Confucianism, the concept of homo historicus also plays an important role. The second and the fifth chapter of the book are deepened and explained in a more profound and detailed way by three appendices that follow the last chapter. The present book is by no means limited to clarifications of the basic concepts delineated above. Moreover, Huang Chun-Chieh's contribution clearly shows that East Asian Confucianisms are, in fact, specific forms of East Asian humanism. The fact that the author gives Confucianism the plural form is linked to the urgent need to highlight that Confucianism is not a monolithic entity, but has various forms in regard to the particular cultural and political backgrounds. Furthermore, the author wants to express the dynamic and creative ability of Confucian thought throughout the East Asian intellectual histories. Prof. Huang's contribution is of great importance to the contemporary understanding of classical and modern Confucian thought and its significance for possible future developments in the global world which is confronted with a profound crisis of values during the last decades. Tea Sernelj TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Jana S. ROŠKER.........................................................1-4 Chinese Foreword Ming-Huei LEE atti» rffi$HtfiR±ifrj ttatftMKM*« Contemporary New Confucian Theory of the "Development of Democracy from Confucianism", its Theoretical Contents and its Modern Significance...............................7-18 Modern Confucianism as a New Chinese Ideology Geir SIGURDSSON Confucianism vs. Modernity: Expired, Incompatible or Remedial......................21-38 Bart DESSEIN Faith and Politics: (New) Confucianism as Civil Religion............................39-64 Philosophical Approaches Jana S. ROŠKER The Philosophical Sinification of Modernity and the Modern Confucian Paradigm of Immanent Transcendence iyy-mmftis ii i .....................................67-81 Tea SERNELJ The Unity of Body and Mind in Xu Fuguan's Theory...............................83-95 Confucian Values and the Contemporary World Loreta POŠKAITE Filial Piety (xiao in the Contemporary and Global World: A View from the Western and Chinese Perspectives.................................................99-114 Monika GANfiBAUER 'A Special Zone for Confucianism'? Theses of the Academician Zhang Xianglong on Traditional Chinese Culture..............................................115-126 Asian Studies in Slovenia Matjaž VIDMAR Šanghajski geto in zgodovinsko ter politično ozadje judovskih beguncev iz Tretjega rajha v letih 1933-1945 ......................................... 129-148 Discussions Hans KUIJPER What's Wrong with the Study of China/Countries? .............................151-185 Book Reviews Jana S. ROŠKER ^ Huang Chun-chieh jSffl^'dl, ed. The Study of East Asian Confucianisms: Retrospect and Prospect ......................189-194 Tea SERNELJ Huang Chun-chieh: Humanism in East Asian Confucian Contexts ...................195-197 ISSN 2232-5131 9 772232 " 513009 9772232513009