requestId:68499ac6483371.99933765.
Taiwanese scholars’ trial on the conversion of the thinking and research on the thinking and research of Xunzi
——Advisory features of the thinking and research of the thinking and research of “comprehensive” and “change”
Author: Sato Yoshizhi (Taiwan Department of Philosophy, Doctor of Han, Netherlands)
Source: “Handangjian Academy News”, 20180 Issue 4
Time: Confucius was in the 2570s and was the third day of the month of Jihai and Pu.
� In the first half, after first evaluating the research status of this issue, he talked with three important opinions from students, Cai Fengchang, Wang Qingguang, and Liu Youqian, who were conducting a new vision in Taiwan, who were discussing the new vision of “Xunzi”. In the second half, after first, after finishing the previous japan (Japanese) students’ understanding of related problems, we should take “comprehensive” and “change” as the point, and describe the characteristics of the thinking system of “Xunzi” in three dimensions. Through this, the author tried to put the words “focus” that mainly focus on “nature aphorism” and “dividing between heaven and man” into the clone, in order to be a foundation for the future to construct and represent the basic work of “Xunzi” thinking of the overall nature.
The purpose of this article is to explore another kind of ability to construct Xunzi’s philosophy through the experiment of understanding the two frameworks of Xunzi’s philosophy – “nature mortality” and “division between heaven and man”. As we all know, the “nature aphorism” in “Xunzi” has been regarded as the focus of Xunzi’s philosophy. It is not only for the representative scholars of the Song Dynasty, but also for contemporary Chinese philosophical researchers, “nature aphorism” is still the focus of Xunzi’s philosophy, but often becomes the preset or development point for them to “exploration” the philosophical characteristics of Xunzi. [1] Relatively, the “division between heaven and man” was the part that began to attract the attention of scholars after the East Asia region introduced the discussion of Oriental philosophical methods. So far, together with “nature aphorism”, has been regarded as two major characteristics of “Xunzi” philosophy.
The discussions in this chapter are divided into two parts. In the first half, after first evaluating the research status of this issue, we talked with three important opinions from students Cai Fengchang, Wang Qingguang and Liu Youshen, who were conducting the research on new vision in “Xunzi” in Taiwan. After first cleaning up the previous japan (Japanese) students’ understanding of related problems in the second half, they use “comprehensive” and “change” to improve the long-term maintenance points, and describe the characteristics of the Xunzi’s ideological system from three dimensions. Through this, the author tried to put the words “focus” that mainly focus on “nature aphorism” and “dividing between heaven and man” into the clone, in order to be a foundation for the future to construct and represent the basic work of “Xunzi” thinking of the overall nature.
1. “Solution” of traditional Xunzi
As we all know, most intellectuals have always believed that since the Song and Ming dynasties, “nature aversion” is Xunzi’s focus. Because the word “nature evil” is a significant contrast with Mencius “nature goodness” and when he understands the word “nature goodness”, the Chinese intellectuals who begin to express “at the beginning of man, nature is good, and the nature is close to each other” (“Three Characters”) have been destined to look at the characteristics of Xunzi’s thinking from the cognitive structure of “nature goodness-nature badness”. Such traditional Chinese intellectuals are clear about Xunzi’s overall thinking and are always long and short and stable. By the end of the 19th century, we began to accept the Eastern philosophical history method, and the so-called “study” gradually changed to “study research” or “Chinese Thoughts and Philosophy Research”. Despite this, as far as the thinking and research of the “Xunzi” in the Taiwanese academic community has been around for nearly 50 years, the structure of Xunzi’s view, which takes “nature evil” as the middle, seems to have not changed much to this day.
Reviewing the study of Xunzi in the Chinese language community in the early 20th century, such as Hu Yang, Yang Yunru and Liang Qi, who were suspected of the protruding ancient style at that time, divided the contents of the book “Xunzi” into “representing Xunzi’s own department” and “addition of future generations” “Two departments; on the other hand, as can be seen in Hu Yang’s explanation, since the experiment uses the main philosophical concepts and models in the history of Eastern philosophy to explain the connotation of Chinese philosophy, the “division of heaven and man”, “logical thinking”, and “scientific thinking” in Xunzi’s thinking are also listed as the main characteristics of Xunzi’s thinking. [2] However, regardless of how Xunzi’s thoughts and literary principles are divided, the focus position of “nature malpractice” in Xunzi’s thoughts will never be affected. [3] Moreover, in the mid-20th century, the focus of Confucian research in Taiwan and Drumi Hong Kong returned to Benzhi to find the ethical value and metaphysical basis that could be compared with Oriental ethics. Xunzi’s “natural malignancy” and “dividing between heaven and man” that seemed to be opposite to Mencius was once again concerned by scholars. In this kind of thinking, Xunzi’s “nature abhorrence” is regarded as “Song Wei explained: “It was received in the community, about five or six months old, and it is a serious denial of human respect”, and its “division between heaven and man” is regarded as a proof of “lack of moral metaphysics.” Because of his job, Cai Fengchang and Liu Yan believed that in the second half of the 20th century, the purpose of the study of Xunzi in the Taiwanese academic community was greatly influenced by Mou Zongsan’s view. Cai Fengchang pointed out:
Because the neo-Confucian scholars of the three schools of Mou Zong have had considerable influence in the Chinese philosophical world in Taiwan and established a so-called “metaphysics of morality” and “the inner sage opens the outer king”. Some Confucian scholars in Taiwan can be the one who criticized Xunzi for the argument that “Mencius was authentic for Confucianism” by this school. Whether it was a complimentary or a confrontational sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial [4]
Liu Youyan also expressed:
Many contemporary scholars (Yimu)Zong San and Cai Renhou, representatives) followed the main process of the Song and Ming dynasties of Zhu and King of the King of the Song Dynasty and made a further step in this theory. It highlighted Xunzi’s philosophical strange temperament and produced a wide range of influences. [5]
In fact, in the current research on the content of the thinking of “Xunzi”, it is rare to use its “nature argument” to value Xunzi’s thinking. Especially in the past 50 years, scholars who doubted the “important characteristics” of traditional Xunzi’s thinking have appeared continuously, and the approach they have taken can be acquainted with the following four ways: (1)[6] Find new positive meanings in Xunzi’s thinking, such as “scientific thinking” The reasons for “modern” science such as logical thinking; (2) [7] emphasize that the true meaning of his proposition is not contradictory to the view of Mencius or Confucianism’s “mainstream”; (3) [8] The historical landscape is determined by the certainty of historical landscapes (the historical links that appear in a large country that is approachable), or the differences in the landscapes faced by Confucius and Mencius