Wu, Chan-liang
National Taiwan University
In the process of world modernization, the Enlightenment rationality played a central role. Modern science and technology, market economy, division of labor, bureaucracy and management, rule of law, democracy, ideas of liberty, universal human rights and individualism are all inseparable from the Enlightenment rationality that is deeply rooted in the Western intellectual tradition. A new world view and mode of thinking based on Enlightenment rationality, which is a modern form of Western rationality, is something that the Chinese have to face in their search for modernity.
The Chinese, however, also have highly developed and sophisticated world views and modes of thinking characterized by Confucian, Taoist and Buddhist traditions. Traditional Chinese thinkers tend to see the notions of time, reality, order, human nature, ethics and the idea of rationality itself in ways almost completely different from the modern Westerners. Therefore, it is natural that the meeting of the two civilizations will create some fundamental conflicts. The majority of Chinese intellectuals tried to adopted Western rationality in order to modernize China. However, there were also some Chinese intellectuals who questioned Enlightenment and Western rationality from a traditional point of view.
In this speech, I would like to examine representative figures from both conservative and modernist camps so as to have a better understanding of the conflicts stated and modern Chinese intellectual history. The first one is a leading conservative named Liang Shu-ming. Among all the cultural conservatives during the New Culture Movement period (1915-1927), Liang was the first one to provide an overall and penetrating criticism and reappraisal of Western rationality and modernity itself. His thought was deeply immersed in Buddhist, Taoist, Chinese medicine, and Confucian traditions. He searched for the spirit of Chinese intellectual tradition, the advantages of the Chinese way of thinking and the Chinese world view, and spoke eloquently of their universal values, especially their value in a mechanistic, alienated, and fragmented modern world. An analysis of Liang can demonstrate the basic conflicts between the Chinese tradition and the modern Western world view.
The second one is the leader of Chinese modernists, Hu Shih. Hu was probably the most important advocator of science, liberalism and democracy in modern China. As a devout follower of Dewey’s philosophy, Hu interpreted science, democracy and modernity mainly from a Pragmatist and American point of view. There are many advantages of this kind of interpretation. However, there are also some major problems involved. Among them, “the conflicts with Western rationality” might be the most serious one. The trouble or even paradox of Hu Shih lies in that although he intended to modernize China in the most advanced Western way, his understanding of the core and key elements of the modernity of the West seems to be quite problematic and that he did not realize the fact that the “most advanced way” he selected came much more closer to the age old tradition he wanted to remade than the Western tradition that he wanted to follow in terms of its cosmological, epistemological and ethical foundation. We may also find that Hu’s worldview and mode of thinking were similar to Liang in many ways.