【專一包養網站比較訪】楊國榮傳授：學術進路與哲學之道

Time:

February 6, 2021

Previous article: Analytics

Fang Xudong (hereinafter referred to as “Fang”):

I don’t know that the 21st century has passed one fifth, and it has been 40 years since the 20th century. At this point, the “Hangzhou Teachers’ Major Research (Social Science Edition)” has opened a column and invited first-line researchers from different subjects to give a summary and expectations. I think it is very interesting. Teacher Yang, you are a renowned scholar in the Chinese philosophy community, and your personal academic experience is also very representative: you were the first batch of students to study after the Cultural Revolution. You obtained a doctorate in 1988 and were the early doctorate winners after China’s resumption of the degree system, so the first question I want to discuss is about your academic course. We understand that modern philosophers such as Wang Yangming and Liu Zongzhou all commented that they all said “to learn a few changes”. I just wonder, can you also summarize a few changes in your academic process? I have an observation that I don’t understand the accuracy of the ban. Can you say that your academic process is like a trajectory like “from history to thought”?

Yang Guosheng (hereinafter referred to as “Yang”):

I started studying in 1977 and 1978. My academic journey can be divided into two stages: the first stage is from the 1980s to the end of the 20th century, and the important focus is on the study of the history of Chinese philosophy; the second stage is after entering the 21st century, during this period, I focused on the theoretical thinking of philosophy. Judging from my own view on “historical interaction”, the previous stage was important about “history”, and the next stage started with the first touch and “thinking”. Of course, “history” and “thinking” are always interactive:The previous stage also included theoretical thinking on history; similarly, the latter stage is not indifferent to the focus on history. Although the two stages are each side, they are not strictly separated and opposed.

If you go into a step, these two periods can also be divided into several small stages. As you said, I thought I was an important study of Wang Yangming’s mind in my later years, but before that, my scholarly essay was the subject of the discussion of the Qianlong and Jiajia School and Hu Yang. I spent a lot of time on these two, and wrote related articles, which touched and thought about the way of discussion. Afterwards, during my doctoral level, I began to focus on Wang Yangming’s mind. The way I studied was not only touching Wang Yangming’s mind and learning himself, but also related to the evolution of his history. My doctoral essay title is “The Two Inner Natures of Wang Xue and His History Expansion”. From this we can also see the fusion of “history” and “thinking”: “The Two Inner Natures” point to theoretical power, “history Expansion” and Wang Xue’s historical evolution process. I completed this research in 1987. I submitted an answer in January 1988 and published a book in 1990. Interestingly, the scholar who later studied Wang Yangming, the president and vice president of the Korean Yangming Association, translated the book separately without knowing each other, and published two different Korean versions in 1994.

After Wang Yangming’s discussion ended, I assessed the proof theory in modern Chinese philosophical thinking. In 1995, the research results were published in Taiwan with the theme of “Certification of the Ideology and Modern Chinese Philosophy”. The following year, the Higher Education Book Club in Beijing published a simplified version of the book, and the title of the book was changed to “From Serious Return to Jin Yuelin: Certification of the Ideology and Chinese Philosophy”. In a while later, I made a comprehensive assessment of the Confucianism evolution from Confucius to modern neo-Confucianism. The 1994 Shanghai National Library Society’s “The Journey of Good” can be regarded as the result of the research and development of this problem. The book extends the path of Wang Xue’s research, that is, it is important to assess from the perspective of history, rather than focusing on a specific person or a specific period. Later, in 1996, I once again transferred to Wang Yangming’s research. This is my second systematic analysis of Wang Yangming’s study of the mind. The focus of this assessment is Wang Yangming’s study of himself, not his historical evolution process. The book title also shows this feature: although the object is a historical figure, the assessment focuses more on theoretical considerations. The book title of “Thoughts://twlovecandy520.org/”>Baohuan’s experience also shows this. The book was published by Beijing Sanlian Bookstore in 1997. After this book, I had assessed the modern scientific theory of China. This work was based on the extension of my previous discussion on practical theory and modern Chinese philosophy. The result was “The Metaphysical Virtue of Scientific” published by the Shanghai National Library Society in 1999.

After the assessment of modern scientific theory is over, the “road of history” is the important pointThe research and discussion task came to an end. Since then, my focus has turned to theoretical thinking. The first test is moral philosophy or ethics, and its research results are found in the book “Ethics and Existence: Research on Moral Philosophy”. The discussion of the issues involved in this book can be traced back to 1999 and was published by the Shanghai National Library in 2002. In line with the book “Ethics and Existence”, the characteristic of my exploration of moral philosophy is that I do not talk about ethics about ethics, but rather develop my thoughts in the perspective of moral metaphysics. However, the moral metaphysical differences between Kant’s philosophy and the existence of human beings have an inherently theoretical correlation: I tried to return to the actual existence and the relationship between human beings (including the relationship of ethics) and fully realize the tradition of Confucianism in a certain meaning. In comparison, Kant developed more from the conditions of preliminarily philosophizing and experiencing development at the situation level. After that, I turned to a more common sense theoretical problem, which appears in the study of metaphysical learning, and the important results are in the Taoist Scriptures. The title of the first edition of the book is “The Realm of Existence”. It is easy to see the focus on metaphysical problems. Its subtitle is “Metaphysics of the Post-Metaphysical Age”, which was published by the National Book Society in 2005. The subtitle of the first edition of this book has its own specific meaning: as is well known, after the rise of the 20th century Oriental analytical philosophy, metaphysics has always been regarded as having no interest in the theoretical figures. Later, although some metaphysical rejuvenation was also shown in the analytical philosophy, it still stayed on the level of language analysis. What they point to is not the real existence outside of language, but the various problems they face when saying “existence”, and generally does not transcend the speech process itself. Later, Habermas proposed “post-metaphysical thinking”, which is the condition that the current era is regarded as “post-metaphysical era”. My “metaphysics in the post-metaphysical era” is the opposite, and I believe that metaphysics cannot end. In the so-called “post-metaphysical era”, we still cannot leave metaphysical studies. In my opinion, the main thing is not whether to learn metaphysically, but how to understand metaphysical. In my book, I divided the metaphysics of divergent times, starting with the metaphysics of abstract figures and the metaphysics of specific figures. Abstract metaphysics relate to the various speculative assessments of existence since ancient Greece and China’s pre-Qin periods. Their characteristics are to look at the world outside of human existence, speak “Tao” and talk about “existence” from the “process” to talk about “existence”. Such metaphysics is indeed beyond the demand. From modern philosophy, not only did philosophy criticize this traditional metaphysics,