Category Archives: Chinese philosophy – 中國哲學 – 中国哲学

Conference: Cultures of Ancient Science

Cultures of Ancient Science
Friday, March 15 2013 – Sunday, March 17 2013
University College London

This conference will bring together the leading international scholars of the history science of many ancient cultures to discuss the content and methodology of the study of ancient science and prospects for future research. The scope here is important and unique. While there are conferences on the science of individual ancient cultures, there are not conferences on ancient science across many cultures.

Continue reading →

Review of Makeham, Ed., Learning to Emulate the Wise

My review of the new volume edited by  John Makeham, Learning to Emulate the Wise: The Genesis of Chinese Philosophy as an Academic Discipline in Twentieth-century China, has just been published in The China Journal. Anyone who lacks JSTOR access and would be interested in a copy, please let me know. My conclusion: “In sum, Learning to Emulate the Wise is a splendid and unusually unified collection, as important for thinking about the nature of philosophy around the globe today as it is for understanding the complex Chinese intellectual world in the first half of the 20th century.”

International graduate student research scholarships at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia

These are generous scholarships, running for 3 years for a PhD and 2 years for a Masters degree. The scholarships pay for the tuition fee (which are around AUD$20,000 per year) and an annual stipend of $24,653.

If you are interested in submitting a proposal for research in Chinese philosophy, please get in touch with A/Prof Karyn Lai (k.lai@unsw.edu.au) as applications require the support of the supervisor.

More details are available at: http://research.unsw.edu.au/sites/all/files/related_files/regular_page_content/international_scholarship_guidelines.pdf?t=1360177126

The closing date for applications is 1st March 2013.

NECCT Announcement

Announcing the Northeast Conference on Chinese Thought, to be held at Wesleyan University on Friday and Saturday, November 8-9, 2013.

The goals of the Northeast Conference on Chinese Thought (NECCT) are twofold:

  1. To provide a regional forum for everyone from graduate students to established scholars to present work, learn from one another, and establish or strengthen mutual relationships; and
  2. To bring together scholars and students who approach Chinese thought from diverse disciplinary perspectives so as to foster understanding of our various objectives, perspectives, and constraints—the point not being to privilege one approach or hope for a grand synthesis, but simply to encourage each of us to be less insular and to find ways to learn from the approaches of others.

We will issue a call for abstracts later in the Spring, the submission deadline for which will be June 1. Papers will not be circulated in advance, there will be no pre-determined commentators, and we do not anticipate a conference volume. In short, this is intended to be an informal (though high-quality) discussion at which new ideas and work-in-progress are very welcome.

Continue reading →

CFP–Constructing and Interpreting the Daotong

Call for papers
Constructing and Interpreting the Daotong (Transmission of the Way) in the Perspective of Chinese and Korean Neo-Confucianism

International conference organised by:
–         The Centre of Chinese Studies (CEC, ASIEs, Inalco),
–         The Centre of Korean Studies (CECO, ASIEs, Inalco)
–         The Institute of Confucian Philosophy and Culture (Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul)
The organising committee is pleased to invite colleagues and Ph.D students interested in Neo-Confucianism to submit abstracts for this international conference regarding the construction and (re-)interpretations of the Daotong. Its objective is to re-examine the process through which Neo-Confucian discourse was legitimated by promoting the notion of Transmission of the Way, both in Chinese and Korean contexts.

Continue reading →

International Conference on Nature and Value in Chinese and Western Philosophies

I am pleased to be able to share the program for a conference that Tao Jiang of Rutgers University has organized, with some assistance from me and from Ruth Chang of Rutgers. Anyone who is interested in attending can contact Ms. Susan Rosario (see below) for information.

1st Annual Rutgers Workshop on Chinese Philosophy (RWCP)

An International Conference on Nature and Value in Chinese and Western Philosophies

April 4-5, 2013
Rutgers University Inn & Conference Center 178 Ryders Lane
New Brunswick, NJ 08901
USA

Continue reading →

Weber, The Politics of Confucian Political Philosophy

In this guest post, Ralph Weber of the University of Zurich shares with us his English translation of an opinion piece just published in Germany (as “Politik, Konfuzianismus und konfuzianische politische Philosophie in der VR China heute.” In: Widerspruch – Münchner Zeitschrift für Philosophie, Nr. 56, 2013.) Please direct comments to Dr. Weber.

The Politics of ‘Confucian Political Philosophy’

Ralph Weber, University of Zurich

***

In the People’s Republic of China (PRC), Confucius, the Master, is “standing tall” again, as a People’s Daily headline put it (13 January 2011), referring to a ten meter bronze statue which since January was standing right next to Tiananmen Square in Beijing, before it was dislocated to a less prominent spot in April 2011 for reasons as yet unknown.[1] Not to be mistaken, the statue was not the latest version of the Goddess of Democracy, which students had erected in June 1989 as a symbol of protest and reform. The Confucius statue was not erected against the Chinese government; it had been put there with official endorsement – something that only decades ago would have been unthinkable – and surely it was also dislocated again with official endorsement. The short but prominent appearance of the Confucius statue at one of the most symbolic places in all of China showcases the wavering attitude of the Chinese government on what to do with Confucianism and perhaps reveals once more how split the government is in terms of doctrine and ideology.

Continue reading →

Review of Angle, Contemporary Confucian Political Philosophy

NDRP has published a review by BAI Tongdong of Fudan University of my recent book, Contemporary Confucian Political Philosophy: Towards Progressive Confucianism (Polity, 2012). Many thanks to Tongdong for this generous review!

I’d like to take this opportunity to respond very briefly to a couple of the things that Tongdong says in his review. He feels that both Mou Zongsan and I, in our related but separate ways, have left largely unaddressed the question: “can Confucianism make any constructive and systematic contributions to fundamental issues in political philosophy other than being only a “cheerleader” (a sincere one, as Angle tries to show) of liberal democracy?” This is related to some of the other critical remarks he raises late in the review, including the suggestion that in my chapter on human rights, I rest content with the current “responsibility to protect” doctrine, and also Tongdong’s questions about how “Confucian” Progressive Confucianism is.

Continue reading →

Li, Qi, and Transcendence in Neo-Confucianism

This is a guest post by David Chai of the University of Toronto. Please address all questions or comments to him. 

In thinking of a topic to share with all of you, I found myself repeatedly returning to the subject of a new course I am teaching this semester: Neo-Confucianism. While gathering materials for the course I came across an article by Donald Blakeley (“The Lure of the Transcendent in Zhu Xi” History of Philosophy Quarterly, 21.3 (2004): 223-240). The paper discusses whether qi and li should be read as transcendent or immanent. After surveying a variety of contemporary theories, Blakeley argues that “a modified definition of transcendence” is needed such that “that there is independence and self-sufficiency in certain respects but not in others.” (232-233) His conclusion is that “li transcends qi in that any material formations depend upon li. Qi is in a dependent relation to li in this respect and li is independent from qi in this respect. Li, in being what it is as li, is independent from the ongoing affairs in the field of qi. But qi transcends li in that any material formations depend upon qi; li is in a dependent relation to qi in this respect and qi is independent from li in this respect.” (233)

For me, his argument is not convincing for several reasons. First is his need to modify the traditional meaning of transcendence. Second is his very use of transcendence to describe Zhu Xi’s li. From a Daoist perspective, li comes across as being very close to natural law. While Dao is transcendent, its fa, or li, is immanent. For li to possess the same transcendental qualities as Dao would be to deny Dao its own existential nature. So, my question is can li be understood as Blakeley so wishes without the need to modify what is meant by transcendent? If so, how would this play-out in terms of qi’s connection to Dao? On a more fundamental level, can we say Zhu Xi is espousing a cosmogonist doctrine involving qi and li or is he merely putting forth one that is pseudo-cosmological? If the former, then I’d have material with which to conduct a soteriological comparison with Zhuangzi; if the latter, then I am unclear as to the advantages his qi-li dyad holds over the wu-you pairing seen in the texts of Lao-Zhuang.