香港/台湾新儒家对中国传统政治的肯定太少

IF 0.4 3区 哲学 0 ASIAN STUDIES CONTEMPORARY CHINESE THOUGHT Pub Date : 2018-04-03 DOI:10.1080/10971467.2018.1496647
Zeng Yi, Fan Xudong
{"title":"香港/台湾新儒家对中国传统政治的肯定太少","authors":"Zeng Yi, Fan Xudong","doi":"10.1080/10971467.2018.1496647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Editor's Abstract In one of the very first reactions to Li Minghui’s criticism of Mainland New Confucianism (MNC), Zeng Yi emphasizes the ties between MNC and Han-dynasty “Classical Learning” (jingxue), as opposed to the basis of Mou Zongsan-style New Confucianism in Song-dynasty Neo-Confucian “Way learning” (Daoxue). He further connects the MNC approach with an institutional, “concrete continuation” of the Confucian tradition, as opposed to the abstract, philosophical approach of Mou Zongsan. This short essay, another of the immediate reactions to Li Minghui's criticism of Mainland New Confucianism, focuses on the distinction between “old” (or traditional) and “new” Confucianism, and their differing relations to liberal democracy. Fang identifies a tension in Li Minghui's attitude toward the “old,” since Li seems to want to have a connection with the tradition but also not to be bound by it.","PeriodicalId":42082,"journal":{"name":"CONTEMPORARY CHINESE THOUGHT","volume":"49 1","pages":"113 - 118"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2018-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10971467.2018.1496647","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hong Kong/Taiwan New Confucianism Affirms Too Little of Traditional Chinese Politics\",\"authors\":\"Zeng Yi, Fan Xudong\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10971467.2018.1496647\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Editor's Abstract In one of the very first reactions to Li Minghui’s criticism of Mainland New Confucianism (MNC), Zeng Yi emphasizes the ties between MNC and Han-dynasty “Classical Learning” (jingxue), as opposed to the basis of Mou Zongsan-style New Confucianism in Song-dynasty Neo-Confucian “Way learning” (Daoxue). He further connects the MNC approach with an institutional, “concrete continuation” of the Confucian tradition, as opposed to the abstract, philosophical approach of Mou Zongsan. This short essay, another of the immediate reactions to Li Minghui's criticism of Mainland New Confucianism, focuses on the distinction between “old” (or traditional) and “new” Confucianism, and their differing relations to liberal democracy. Fang identifies a tension in Li Minghui's attitude toward the “old,” since Li seems to want to have a connection with the tradition but also not to be bound by it.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42082,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CONTEMPORARY CHINESE THOUGHT\",\"volume\":\"49 1\",\"pages\":\"113 - 118\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10971467.2018.1496647\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CONTEMPORARY CHINESE THOUGHT\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10971467.2018.1496647\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ASIAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CONTEMPORARY CHINESE THOUGHT","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10971467.2018.1496647","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ASIAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

曾毅在对李明辉批评大陆新儒学的最早反应之一中,强调了新儒学与汉代“经学”之间的联系,而不是以宋代理学“道学”为基础的牟宗三式新儒学。他进一步将跨国公司的方法与儒家传统的制度性的“具体延续”联系起来,而不是牟宗三的抽象的哲学方法。这篇短文是对李明辉批评大陆新儒学的另一种直接回应,它关注“旧”(或传统)和“新”儒学的区别,以及它们与自由民主的不同关系。方在李明辉对待“老”的态度中发现了一种张力,因为李明辉似乎想与传统建立联系,但又不受其束缚。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Hong Kong/Taiwan New Confucianism Affirms Too Little of Traditional Chinese Politics
Editor's Abstract In one of the very first reactions to Li Minghui’s criticism of Mainland New Confucianism (MNC), Zeng Yi emphasizes the ties between MNC and Han-dynasty “Classical Learning” (jingxue), as opposed to the basis of Mou Zongsan-style New Confucianism in Song-dynasty Neo-Confucian “Way learning” (Daoxue). He further connects the MNC approach with an institutional, “concrete continuation” of the Confucian tradition, as opposed to the abstract, philosophical approach of Mou Zongsan. This short essay, another of the immediate reactions to Li Minghui's criticism of Mainland New Confucianism, focuses on the distinction between “old” (or traditional) and “new” Confucianism, and their differing relations to liberal democracy. Fang identifies a tension in Li Minghui's attitude toward the “old,” since Li seems to want to have a connection with the tradition but also not to be bound by it.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: This wide ranging journal is essential reading for anyone who wants to understand the diverse themes and influences that shape Chinese thought today. It features translations of the most current and influential Chinese writings on all aspects of philosophical endeavor, from theoretical essays on systems to studies of China"s cultural and religious development, from interpretations of the Chinese classics to exegeses on Marxist thought.
期刊最新文献
An Outline of Wang Chuanshan’s Dialectics A Brief Account of the Transformation in Style of Learning in the Late Ming Dynasty Editor’s Note The Historical Dynamics of Chinese Thought and the Thesis of Early Enlightenment: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Xiao Jiefu A Critical Biography of Xiao Jiefu
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1