1985 an exploration of the mode of thinking of ancient china

7/30/2019 1985 an Exploration of the Mode of Thinking of Ancient China

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1985-an-exploration-of-the-mode-of-thinking-of-ancient-china 1/12

An Exploration of the Mode of Thinking of Ancient ChinaAuthor(s): Liu Jingshan

Source: Philosophy East and West, Vol. 35, No. 4 (Oct., 1985), pp. 387-397Published by: University of Hawai'i PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1398537 .

Accessed: 10/08/2011 16:43

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

University of Hawai'i Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy

East and West.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uhp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1398537?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1398537?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uhp



Liu Jingshan An exploration of the mode of thinking of ancient China

In Western philosophy, ontology has often been developed in terms of two

categories-materialism and idealism. With respect to ancient Chinesephiloso-

phy, however, we hold that it cannot be properly understood in these terms.

There is neither pure materialism nor pure idealism in the ontology of ancient

Chinese philosophy. It has rather its own basic mode of thinking which mightbe characterizedas "one noumenon with two

principles" (yi-ti er-yuanb).What is "one noumenon with two principles?""One noumenon" means the

unitary reality of the world, while "two principles"indicates that there are two

elements, aspects, or units in this single reality. Figuratively speaking, "one

noumenon with two principles" is like a mother's body pregnant with twins:

within "one" there are "two."

In ancient Chinese philosophy, the noumenon of the world is often referred

to as taijic (ultimate extreme), daod (the way), yie (change), taiyif (the primor-dial unity of yin and yang), xuang (the mystic truth), taisuh (the primordial

element), tiani (heaven), ziranj (nature), and so on, while the two elementsembraced are referred to as yinyangk (the negative and the positive), you wu'

(being and nonbeing), xingshenm(shape and spirit), liqia (principle and vital

force), daoqi0 (way and concrete thing), xinwuP(mind and thing), and so on.

Usually, the two elements are not equal in the sense, for example, that the male

positive often prevails over the female negative. Although there have been

numerous theories concerning the origins of the world in the history of Chinese

philosophy, some detailed and some brief, some subtle and some crude, their

basic thrust is yet the same: "one noumenon with two principles." There is

much support for this assertion, but owing to the limitation of space, we will

only cite a few examples in their historical order to demonstrate this point.In the Book of Changes, compiled somewhere between the Yin and Zhou

dynasties, the two symbols representing yinq (the negative) and yangr (the

positive), respectively, appeared for the first time, constituting the first form of

philosophy in China. Later, in their explanations of the Book of Changes, the

authors of the "Commentaries" portion of this text advanced the following

proposition: "A negative (yin) and a positive (yang) together arecalled 'the way

(dao)'."Their text also states, "Changehas its ultimate extreme, and it producestwo patterns." Here, "ultimate extreme" (taiji) refers to "the way" (dao), and

the "two patterns" means "the positive and the negative." In The TrueMean-

ings of the Book of Changes, Zhu Xis, the leading scholar of Song Neo-

Confucianism, says:

Liu Jingshana s a memberof ThePhilosophyTeachingOffice, Party School of HeilongjiangProvince,

Harbin, China.

AUTHOR'SOTE:This article was first submitted to the 17th Session of the World Conference of

Philosophy (heldin

Montreal, Canada, August 1983),and was

acceptedforits

formal agenda ofpresentations.

PhilosophyEast and West35, no. 4 (October 1985). © by the University of Hawaii Press. All rights reserved.



388 Liu

Change has an ultimate extreme, which produces two patterns. The ultimateextreme is 'the way'; the two patterns are the negative and the positive. And thenegative and the positive are the 'one way'."

That is to say, "taiji" (the ultimate extreme) in the Book of Changes is com-

posed of yinyang. If a diagramwere used to describethis, it would indicate that

the taijibifurcatesto constitute the yinyang. Such is the basic ontological model

originated in the Book of Changes.This model then became a basic frameworkor mold, and the philosophical reflections of the following several thousand

years have seldom departed from this basic line of thinking. It has only been at

a concrete level that there have been developments and changes. This would

indicate that the fundamental model established in the Book of Changes has

been long-enduring, and as such, has a value that ought not to be overlooked.

Laotset of the Spring and Autumn and Warring States periods, in the work

named for him (also called The WayandIts Power-DaodejingU), takes dao (the

way)to be the

originof the world.1 "Dao" has two

aspects-"wu (not-being)"and "you (being)." He states:2

Namelessness (not-being)-the beginning of the world;Named reality (being)-the mother of everything.Hence we see the subtleness of dao through constant not-beingAnd see its outline through constant being.

These lines constitute the generalprinciples of the work. Through these words,

Laotse has briefly pointed out that "dao (way)" as the origin of the world

includes "not-being" and "being," and that "not-being" and "being" are the

two indispensable and inseparable aspects of "dao." In other words, the "way"is the unity of "not-being" and "being." The Laotse, then, is described appro-

priately and precisely in the "Below in the World" chapter of the Zhuangzivwhere it says:

He built it on constant not-being and being,And centered it around the primordialunity of yin and yang.

In terms of ontology, Laotse has followed the tradition of the Book of Changesin

acceptingthe notion of "one noumenon with two

principles."For this

reason,it does not seem appropriate to describe his theory as either materialistic or

idealistic.

To the extent at least that Zhuangzi also discusses the "not-being" and

"being" of the "way," his thinking can be construed as coming down in one

continuous line with Laotse.

Wang Chongwof the Han dynasty believed that "people who have died will

not turn into ghosts," yet at the same time, he held that "when a person has

died, his spiritwill go to Heaven and his skeleton will returnto the earth."That

is to say, the human being itself includes two components-a physical shapeand spirit. Further, spirit is a temporary guest residing in this physical shapesuch that once a person dies, the spiritwill departthe physical shape and ascend



389

to Heaven. Fan Zhenx of the Northern and Southern dynasties further devel-

oped Wang Chong's ideas, saying:

Spirit is shape and shape is spirit.Hence, when shape exists, there is spirit;whenshape withers, spirit will perish, too.

He further states:

Shape is the substance of spirit while spirit is the function of shape-shape andspirit cannot be separated from each other.

They are "differentexpressions referringto one and the same entity." Viewingit from this perspective, Fan Zhen considers that shape and spirit combine to

form one entity, and this one entity separates to constitute shape and spirit.Neither Wang Chong nor Fan Zhen has departed from the basic assumption of

"one noumenon with two principles."In this respect, the views of Wang Chongand Fan Zhen are representative:Huan TanY.Ji Kangz, and other philosophers

of that same period are similar.Zhu Xi of the Song dynasty would seem to assert that "liaa(principle)comes

before qiab (vital force)," but he also says that "there has neither been qi without

i, nor li without qi,"3 and "since wherever there is principle there is vital force,

principle is also within vital force."4 This would indicate that li and qi are

interdependentand inseparable;in fact, they meld as one. Zhu Xi then is not an

idealist, for he also accords with the traditional theory of "one noumenon with

two principles."Wang Chuanshanacstates:

All things on earth are, in the last analysis, nothing but concrete things(qiad).... People are able to say that without dao (the way) there cannot be itsconcrete things (qi).... But few people would say that without its concretethings (qi), there is no dao (way).5

This means that dao (way) and qi (concrete things) are never separate from each

other, which is to say that li (principle) and qi (vital force) are never separate.He further states:

When separated, it is called the negative and the positive (yinyang); whencombined, it is called heaven (tian) (Here "heaven" is an ontological category).

Thus, it is clear that since Wang Chuangshan has not gone beyond "onenoumenon with two principles" he was not a materialist. Other philosophersof this period such as the two Cheng brothersae,Zhang Zaiaf,Luo Qinshunag,

Wang Tingxiangah,and so on also focus their discussions around "principle(li)and vital force (qi)" or "the way (dao) and concrete things (qi)." They too

shared in this concept of "one noumenon with two principles."

Fang Yizhiai, between the Ming and Qing dynasties, discussed the relation-

ship between xin"j (mind) and wuak(thing). He states:6

What we call "nature and destiny," "life and death," and "ghosts and gods" aresimply principles of one great thing. Without mind (xin), there can be no thing(wu), and vice versa.



390 Liu

He furtherobserves:7

If separatedfrom things, mind can never exist, and vice versa.

That is to say, in this unified world, mind and things are interdependent and

inseparable.He states:8

Chaos came from youal (being) while creation came from wuam (not-being).Chaos does not end wu (not-being) and creation does not start you (being)either. Youand wu cannot be separated. If one forces a separation, it would be:before creation, you lies in wu;after creation, wu lies in you.

Here "being" and "not-being" refer to reality and nothingness (existence and

nonexistence). They are philosophical terms often used by the Laotse school

and Buddhism. "Chaos" refers to the state before the cosmos takes shape while

"creation" indicates the cosmos. Fang means that being and not-being are

inseparable. Although the state before the cosmos takes shape is not-being,

being is nonetheless embracedwithin it; although the cosmos is being, not-beingis nonetheless contained within it. Revealed not-being of the state before the

cosmos is formed is nourished by concealed being;revealedbeing of the cosmos

is supported by concealed not-being. The revealednot-being of the state before

the cosmos is formed is not the end of not-being, for there is still the concealed

not-being of the cosmos after it. On the other hand, the revealed being of the

cosmos is not the beginning of being, because there has already been concealed

being long before it. Fang opposes the one-sideness of seeing only "being" or

"not-being," and insists that one should explain the birth of the universe from

the dialectical viewpoint that "being" and "not-being" are a unity of opposites.Here we find that besides "mind" and "things," Fang also has recourse to

"being" and "not-being," categories often used by Laotse and the Buddhist

schools to elucidate the nature and origination of the cosmos. Whether it is

"mind and things," or "being and not-being," it all suggests that Fang Yizhi

also falls into the tradition of "one noumenon with two principles."

Assimilating the European thinking of modern times, Doctor Sun Yat-sen"a

advanced "the theory of the original element of life." He states:9

Scholars have often translated the fundamental element of life as "cell," but Iwould create a special term for it: shengyuana°origin of life), taking it to mean"the beginning of living beings."

In Doctor Sun's view, "the original element of life" is, on the one hand, a cell,that is, the material basis of life; on the other hand, it is a fine and subtle

creature "having consciousness and intelligence," "capable of thinking and

moving" and "able to decide and plan." It is the foundation of the physiolog-ical functions of an organism and the source of its functions of consciousness as

well. In this way, spirit and matter are combined into one in "the basic organ-ism," the shengyuan (original element of life). In Spiritual Educationfor Sol-

diers, Doctor Sun further clarifiesthis point of view, stating:



391

In the sum consequence of all phenomena in the universe, nothing goes beyondthese two: matter and spirit. Spirit is the opposite of matter, but in fact theydepend on each other.

That is to say, although matter and spirit are opposite to each other, theycondition and influence each other, forming a unity. Doctor Sun also borrows

the ancient Chinese philosophical terms, "ti yongaP (substance and function),"

to describe the relationship between matter and spirit. He says that matter is"tiaq (substance)" while spirit is "yongar (function)"; with regard to human

beings, the body is "ti (substance)," belonging to matter, while speech and

movement belong to "yong(function)," the product of spirit.He maintains that

just as "substance" and "function" cannot be separated, so spirit and matter

'cannot be separatedeither;if a person has lost his spirit, though his body is still

there, he can neither speak nor move, and thus has become a dead thing. So he

concludes that a complete human being must have two aspects: spirit and

matter.Therefore,

Doctor Sun cannot beadequately

described as amonisticmaterialist. His thinking is still within the ancient tradition of "one noumenon

with two principle."From the above historical summary, we may find that although the basic

notion of "one noumenon with two principles"has remainedunchanged, yet its

concrete formulations are several. It would have seemed to have undergone a

process of evolution. Concretely speaking, it began as yinyang in the Book of

Changesbefore the Qin dynasty, then became youwu (being and not-being) in

the Laotse and Zhuangtse school. In the period between the Han and Tang

dynasties, it developed into the xingshen(shape and spirit) of Wang Chong, FanZhen and other thinkers. In the Song and Ming dynasties, it appeared as liqi

(principle and vital force) or daoqi (the way and concrete thing), chiefly repre-sented by Zhu Xi and Wang Chuanshan. Between the Ming and Qing dynasties,

Fang Yizhi put forward xinwu(mind and things). In modern times, Sun Yat-sen

in suggesting xinwu, "spirit and matter," has given the ancient notion of "one

noumenon with two principles" yet one more novel turn.

If we were to provide a simple scheme to illustrate the processjust described,it would look as follows:

yinyang (the positive and the negative) youwu (being and not-being)xingshen (shape and spirit) liqi (principle and vital force) or daoqi (the wayand concrete thing) xinwu (mind and thing; spirit and matter).

These pairs of categories reflecta process of gradual development and clarifi-

cation, until at last they have found some consistency with conceptions promi-nent in European philosophy. This is not mere conceptual development, but

furtherdiscloses an evolutionary tendency in philosophical thinking. Because of

this, can we not further assert explicitly that these several categories are ahistorical clue which embodies the basic direction of the ontology of Chinese

philosophy? And this ontology is like a red line running through the develop-



392 Liu

ment of Chinese philosophical thinking, representing the main current of ab-

stract thinking of the Chinese nation.

From the above historical chain, we may also find that although the concrete

pattern of each link in the chain is different,the basic form is the same, that is, a

unified noumenon embracing two opposite but complementary elements. "One

noumenon with two principles" is a general theme extracted from varied and

complex philosophical patterns and is indeed the basic mode of ontology intraditional Chinese philosophy. It is profoundly different from the philosophyof the West, for, deeply rooted in Oriental soil, it fosters its own unique

product.

First, it is differentin that the model reflects a typical holistic way of thinking,a perception of all things as a unity. To define the principle of the world as one

element such as earth, water, wind, or fire is reductive. Western philosophershave frequentlyrelied on this method to probe into the underlyingprinciplesof

theworld; they

reduce it to either thepurely

material orpurely spiritual

with

some abstract and unitary nature. Ancient Chinese thinkers were seldom moti-

vated to seek the original cause or the final nature or any other purely abstract

answers. For example, instead of turning to a transcendent and extrinsic con-

cept of God, they concentrated on a philosophy of life itself, with particularstress on the transformations of life, and the relationships obtaining amongconcrete things. Therefore, in Chinese philosophy, we should hardly expect to

find diametric contrasts between materialist and idealist, subjective and objec-

tive, holy and secular, and so-forth, as is characteristic of Western philosophy.

On the contrary, mind and thing, subject and object, man and heaven, and soon are included in one entity called dao (way) or taiji (ultimate extreme). This

one entity exists everywhere,embraces, covers, and conjoins all things as some

all-inclusive unity. Thus, through this abstract noumenon, a boundless pictureof entirety has been drawn, developing fully the unity of the world. Such

opposites as yinyang, youwu, xingshen, liqi, xinwu, and spirit and matter are all

constitutive of this unitary noumenon. Because of this holistic way of thinking,traditional Chinese philosophers have not generally advanced a "monism";

rather, they have consistently advocated the notion of "one noumenon with

two principles."

Secondly, they emphasize interdependence. Rene Descartes was a dualist as

we know. According to him, God is the creator of mind and matter; these two

principlesare absolutely opposite to each other, neitherinfluencingnor depend-

ing upon each other. This kind of dualism is typical of the history of Western

philosophy. The conceptual pairs that we have described above, however, are

quite different from this absolute opposition. The two principles in the Chinese

philosophies are not independent of each other, but in fact are closely related.

They condition one another for their existence. Unlike much of Westernphilos-ophy, the dialectical thinking of interdependenceruns through the ontology of

Chinese philosophy. Moreover, traditional Chinese philosophers have taken



393

their ontology as the axis of their philosophical systems as a whole, and have

applied this dialectical thinking of interdependence to generate additional

philosophical categories around this ontological axis. For example, the "dao

(way)" of Laotse includes two interdependent principles "wu (not-being)" and

you (being)," and from this, it is furtherdetermined that the dialectical relation-

ship of things being both opposite and complementary to each other is omni-

present in the universe, such as "strong and weak," "life and death," "male andfemale," "big and small," "front and back," "misfortune and good luck," and

so on. Laotse goes on to enumerate several tens of such opposite concepts.Since the opposite states of all things are interdependent and transform from

one to the other, Laotse teaches people to follow this principle in conductingthemselves in society and in governing a country. That is, one should not onlysee the positive side of things, but should also pay attention to the opposite side.

He claims that if one wants to "youweias (do something)" he must begin from

"wuweiat(doing nothing)." Only "doing nothing"

can lead to"doing every-

thing." The whole philosophical system of Laotse is a function of the interde-

pendence of the two ontological principles, and its various methodological,

sociological, and personal insights are a reflection of this dialectic. Dialectical

ideas abound in classical Chinese philosophy-most of the fundamental con-

cepts and categories that structure it are paired, stemming ultimately from this

particularform of ontology.It would seem that traditional Chinese philosophy has attached some con-

siderable importance to the relations obtaining among things, their mutuality

or shared aspects. It is for this reason that in this tradition we frequentlyencounter expressions such as "the unity of heaven and man," "the unity of

knowledge and action," "the unity of substance and function," "the unity of

form and spirit," "the oneness of principle and vital force," "the inseparabilityof mind and thing," and so on. It has been said in comparing the Oriental wayof thinking with that of the West that "the East sees unity and overlooks

difference while the West sees difference and forgets unity." Although un-

doubtedly overstated, there is certain truth in this remark. Ancient Chinese

philosophersdid see difference; however, they always laid more stress on re-

lations and unity. The Europeans, on the other hand, stressed differenceat the

expense of connection and unity.

Thirdly, traditional Chinese philosophy celebrates the notion of "ceaseless

generation." Dominant in ancient Western philosophy is the idea that every-

thing in the world is created by or transformed from the primordiality of the

world (such as "God," "monad," "atom," "molecule," "matter,"and so-forth),but little is said about how the process of creation or transformation itself

operates. Ancient Chinese philosophy, however, is different in that it is con-

cerned with describing the concrete processes wherein things originate. Gener-ally speaking, the production of a thing results from the interaction of the two

opposite elements within the unified noumenon. What ancient Chinese thinkers



394 Liu

identify as the origin of the world is not the same as that of many Western

philosophers. It is not some deity living beyond this mortal world, but is the

beginning state of things, the proem of the world. It is in such a chaotic state

that one cannot clearly name it; when named with difficulty, it is called "the

way" or the "ultimate extreme." As there are always two opposite componentsin the noumenon, they interact and interact again to cause a gradual prolifera-tion of divisions in the world. Startingfrom the primeval unity of the universe,

through gradual fissions from few to many and from the simple to the complex,

graduallya world of rich diversity emergesand a great family with innumerable

offspringhas been formed. For example, the Book of Changesstates:

Change has an ultimate extreme and this produces the two appearances (thepositive and the negative); these two appearances produce four images (spring,summer, autumn, and winter); the four images produce the eight diagrams(heaven, earth, wind, thunder, water, fire, mountain, and lake).

And the Laotse observes:

The way produces one; one produces two (being and not-being); two producethree (heaven, earth, and man); three produce all things in the universe.

These are descriptionsdrawnby ancient Chinese philosophers of the creation of

all things on earth. At this, someone might ask: "Whatwould have given rise to

this thinking of ceaseless generation in ancient China?" Possibly, the concep-tion of unity of opposites may have arisen from the fact that, looking at it from

an evolutionary point of view, ancient Chinese thinkers relied on the cognitivemethod described in the expressions: "looking up, one sees the shape of the

heavens; looking down, one sees the way of the earth" and "take the near from

one's person; take the distant from things" to fathom the phenomena capturedin the expression: "heaven and earth express their reproductive forces, and

all things are born anew; man and woman copulate, and everything is en-

gendered." Thus, in ancient Chinese philosophy, this emphasis on "ceaseless

generation" was extended from such biological phenomena as copulation and

reproduction to their ontology and cosmology, explaining the formation and

transformation of everything as the consequence of the interaction and mutualinfluence of opposites.

On the whole, the model of "one noumenon with two principles" embodies

the "opposing yet unified" way of thinking of ancient Chinese philosophers.

Through the preceding analyses, we have seen that "one noumenon with two

principles" is a model of the unity of opposites-at once opposing and mutu-

ally dependent. For instance, the concepts yinyang as mentioned are both mutu-

ally overcoming and mutually complementary. The relation between yin (the

negative) and yang (the positive) is based on two totally different but also

interdependent points of view: the attributes of the positive are totally differentfrom those of the negative, and, therefore, it is normal that these two may be in



395

various relations, such as growing and declining, rising and falling, waxing and

waning, and so forth. However, each cannot grow without the other; each has

to be nourished by the other through their pairing and contention. It is clear

that yin and yang confront each other, but at the same time are bound together,so in the course of their mutual controlling and contending, as one falls, the

other rises, going round and round, just like a chain of rings or a series of

waves. Hence, figuratively we call this process a "curve." This tradition,

originating with the Book of Changes, has had an enduring value indeed, for

this mode of thinking-the unity of opposites advancedby it-can most appro-

priately capture the special characterof Chinese philosophical thinking. In this

respect, it is profoundly different from Western philosophy. In his article "A

Comparison between the Occidental and OrientalWays of Thinking," the Japa-nese scholar Akira Onda points out:10

The difference between Oriental and the Occidental value judgments chiefly

arises from the differencein their respectivemodes of thinking.

According to Onda, Orientalphilosophy emphasizes intuitive thinking and sees

individual, nature, and society as a whole. Therefore, it pays more attention to

the introversive, intimate, spiritual, objective, harmonious, and emotional feel-

ings, meditation, tolerance, and softness; Western philosophy, however, paysmore attention to logical analysis, thus stressing a kind of extrinsic, individual,

right-centered, utilitarian, antithetical, and logical rationality, reflection, and

principles, and so forth. It is thus clear that there is a wide difference between

the Oriental mode of thinking and the Occidental one. It is characteristic ofWestern philosophy and theology to seek "the first mover": to prove that God

is the creator of all things on earth. It is for this reason that the stipulation of the

relations between cause and effect has become a basic method of thinking for

Western philosophers and theologians. So it seems quite natural for them to

develop along the lines of "deduction," "the chain of being," "linear evo-

lution," and so on. The direction of Chinese thinking, which has put great store

in "dialectical development," cannot be expressed in charts and diagrams that

would rely upon a linear or geometrical model.A

curved line or a spiral or awave would seem more appropriateto illustrate it. In fact, in the patternson the

"Ma Jia Yao" type of colored pottery dating back to the Yangshao culture, in

the pearl chains and cloud-like whirling lines on the bronzes of the early Shang

dynasty, and in the circularloops and similarcurving patterns on the sacrificial

vessels of the Western Zhou dynasty, we can already find a clue to this kind of

thinking. This traditional curve-like mode of thinking is of very ancient originand has had a very long development. We can call it the cradle of philosophical

thinking of the Chinese nation, having contributed an enduringcharacterto the

growth of the whole national spirit.On the basis of their linear mode of thinking, Western philosophers have



396 Liu

made important contributions in certain areas. Ancient Greek philosopherswere able to make advances in naive materialism and logical methodologybecause they explored the fundamental principlesof the universe;by pondering

deeply the significance of God's existence, Christian theologians have made

original contributions in idealism and metaphysics. In these respects, ancient

Chinese thinkers somewhat pale by comparison with them, for they not only

lacked the sciences to understand the world, but also overlooked the theologyto worship God. Nevertheless, it is because of their curve-like mode of thinkingthat they did not generate a distinction between the two antithetical fields of

pure matter and pure spirit. Hence, tensions between the materialistic and

idealistic, subjective and objective, secular and holy that are characteristic of

Western philosophy are significant by their absence in the Chinese tradition.

Chinese philosophy by contrast is marked by the complementarity of matter

and spirit, the subjective and objective, man and Heaven. This method of

thinking emphasizingboth

oppositionand

unityhas hindered the

developmentof epistemology and the progress of science and techonology, but it has also

curtailedwide-ranging speculation in theology and metaphysics. What is more,ancient Chinese philosophers grounded themselves in the concerns of real life,

paying more attention to morality, arts, politics, and society as they affect

events in this world. In general, it can perhaps be said that they reflect life in

society more realisticallyand comprehensively. They have invested importancein the study of the significance of life, in the self-evaluation of a person'sbehavior and his duty to the society in which he lives. They concerned them-

selves with social problems, both at a theoretical and at a practical level, ulti-mately seeking to authenticate their ideas in the realization of a long and

peaceful reign. This has played a positive role in lending stability to society and

in resolving those kinds of problems that concern the institutions of family and

society. This is, perhaps, one of the main reasons that despite countless vicis-

situdes, China with an ancient civilization dating back several thousands of

yearshas sustained and developed its cultureup to the present day. But we must

point out: this feature of attaching great importance to the unity of contradic-

tions has been reflected at a political level in the "unified domain" conceptwhich became the theoretical basis for the feudal autocracy of ancient China.

There is no denying the fact that the concept of a "unified domain" based on

compromise of contradictions has played a great part in building and consoli-

dating the unity of the big family of all nationalities in China, and has thus

contributed a great deal to the unity of the country. But this notion of "one

unified domain" has also had the conservative effect of effacing individual

character, strengtheningpaternalism, defending autocracy, and continuing the

feudal system.We cannot deny that this has been a negative consequence of this

way of thinking.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION BY LIU GUANGDI



397

NOTES

1. Laotse, passim.2. Ibid., chapter 1.

3. Yu-lei, 1.

4. Ibid., 94.

5. Commentarieson the Book of Changes,5.

6. Wu-lixiao-shi, "Zong-lun."7. Tong-xijun, 3.

8. Ibid.

9. Selected Worksof Sun Yat-sen,volume 1.

10. Studies in ComparativeThought6 (December 1979).

a ij x[_mb

i yafm.

c* z %Ud

aa

e a ab =

m~~~~ff'~/~ac Eaj '

9 -âdad

hpt

ae~m

qi ~ âf p

j a ^ aa ~elK

$~t aq§

kli

ah ffi

I Et aiaiL

mâj ,,

n3M akt0 al

pt(i

am Eq an ,lir | ao xs t ap ,

t t+ aq*a

" arff

w at E

1985 an exploration of the mode of thinking of ancient china

Documents