requestId:6852d948855b71.83806178.
RecentlyAskWhat is Philosophy
——Using the “common” of the late Zhou Dynasty as the middle
Author: Zeng Haijun (Sichuan Philosophy Department)
Source: Author Authorized by the Author Confucian Network Published
Originally published in “New Review of Tianfu” 2018 Issue 5
Time: Confucius was the fifth day of the 11th month of Wuxu in the 2569th year of the 25th century Dingchou
Jesus December 11, 2018
Content summary:The lack of a “What is Philosophy” in the late Zhou Zuzi’s philosophy, the hundreds of years of writing history of Chinese philosophy is just the result of “being philosophical”. What is important in philosophy is to try to think about philosophy from the name of “common” and form a clear difference between the name of “people”. It seems that the love area is different from the philosophical path of love, but it is different from the planner level to know each other, and can share joy and worry about each other on the level of love, which is also a respectful place for people. It is the common method of the late Zhou Zuzi’s philosophy to put forward their own thinking and initiative in the name of “common”. Although the thinking propositions expressed by the name of “common” are each available, they do not lose their “common” vision.
Keywords:Late Zhou Shuzi, philosophy, ordinary people
“What is philosophy” is a classic philosophy issue. For those who are philosophical, this may not be a question that everyone must ask, but it may not be a question that everyone is worth chasing. At the same time, not everyone who pursues this problem can ask a reason, and those who do not pursue this problem do not seem to lack self-awareness about it. It should be said that the pursuit of this problem is often related to the times, or perhaps it is a contemporary problem. In some eras, there is no need to ask for it, but in another era, everyone who can learn philosophy wants to ask it. That is because some contemporary philosophy programs are in a complete way, while some contemporary thinking is broken, and people without direction have to think from the beginning “What is philosophy”. In this era of tomorrow, the philosophical program is no longer tidy, and some people may not think that “What is philosophical” has become a subject of the era, because this can no longer be a question worth pursuing. This article uses the philosophy of the late Zhou Dynasty as the middle to explore “What philosophy is” and does not need to respond to this era within one’s ability.Major topics. If the name “Zhu Zi Philosophy” is established, then Liu Zi said that it is a philosophical creation, and Baocai.com must have carried out the question of “What is Philosophy” with the idea of ”What is Philosophy”. But this will not be made directly clear, but needs to be revealed in a philosophical way. This is the writing task of this article.
YearThe “being learned by philosophy” in the late Zhou Dynasty collapsed. The king’s official study of Lingyi and Zuzi continued to write a book to say that it was the “Hundred Schools of War” period. This is a common sense in the history of Chinese thinking. Modern scholars look at this period of thinking from the perspective of philosophy. All of them call this period “the beginning of philosophy” or “the transcendence of thinking”, which is often compared to the “axial era”. In this case, it is not self-evident that the question of “What is philosophy” is “is it not a question. The hundreds of years of Chinese philosophical history writings are basically based on the philosophical framework of Western science. The philosophical creations of hundreds of schools are also sorted out with this perspective, and the so-called “what philosophy is” is self-evident. In this meaning, the night Zhou Shuzi is really “being learned by philosophy”, and the key is that he missed the opportunity to pursue “what is philosophy”. The question of “What is philosophy” brought by the late Zhou Shuzi is not the default value of Western learning. It is similar to the reading method of “Axial Mind Age”, and it may not be suitable for the philosophical period of Zuzi. After nearly a hundred years of writing history of Chinese philosophy, we realized that this writing method has too many problems and various reflective tasks have been presented. The question of “What is philosophy” in the late Zhou Dynasty is proposed to explore the 官网 is just one of the many reflection tasks.
The evening Zhou Shuzi’s “being philosophical” hoped that she could accompany her family and take care of her family, but Chen Jubai was a common research and discussion for hundreds of years, and there was no exception in all the schools of thought. The most powerful ability with a certain exemplary meaning is the study of Taoism, because “Tao” is actually too difficult to be “being philosophical”. “Laozi” opens the chapter saying “Tao can be told, but it is very Tao” (Chapter 1, in this article, only the title of the chapter is noted), it is clear that this “Tao” is not easy to understand. However, modern scholars have always been concerned about Lao Tzu’s “Tao”, and it seems that if they do not talk about “Tao”, they are embarrassed to say that they are discussing Lao Tzu. It is certainly good to study “Tao” with sincerity, but is it that difficult for Lao Tzu’s “Tao” to be “learned by philosophy”? Lao Tzu talks about “Tao” and thinks about it with great depth, especially the description of “Tao”, and the content is particularly single. SurroundedLao Tzu’s “Tao” study has always been involved in the most basic positioning competition. It is like materialism and idealism that were full of consciousness and form before, but later it was the innate discussion of the universe and the root, and even physical discussions and conceptual discussions, etc., which are all relatively controversial discussions. This is the characteristic of Lao Tzu’s own “Tao” theory that determines the embarrassment of being “being philosophical” and is the disobedience caused by the analysis of the framework of Eastern philosophy. Try to explain it from the examples of “Laozi”:
The Tao gives birth to one, two, two gives birth to three, and three gives birth to all things. All things are lying on the elbow and embrace the elbow, and think it is harmonious. (Chapter 42)
The Tao is the sacred life of all things. (Chapter 62)
The Tao is used and it may not be full, and it is as pure as the foundation of all things. Smash the splendor, resolve the splendor, harmonize the light, and be the same as the dust. It seems that there is some existence, but I don’t know who is the son, the first emperor of Xiang. (Chapter 4)
There are things mixed together, the world is born, silent and lonely, independent but not change, and pervasively but not in danger. You can be the mother of the whole country. I don’t know its name, but the name is Dao, and the name is Dao. (Chapter 25)
I can find many of my direct descriptions of “Tao” in five thousand words, and here are a few different lines. The word “Tao gives birth to one” in this place is like the following discussion “all things in the country are born from existence, and existence is born from nothing”, which is like offering to the ideal mind to prove. But “there are things mixed together” and “there are some things that exist” are like materialistic arguments. “The Tao gives birth to one, two, two gives birth to three, and three gives birth to all things.” This is actually a very clear universe innate theory, and it can be “the first of the emperor” or “the mother of Liuhe” or “the mother of Liuhe” can only express a root. As for “Tao” as it is just the highest entity, and if you still mention the highest concept, you can easily find your own discussions from the text of “Laozi”. To look at the Western perspective, Lao Tzu’s “Tao” theory is obviously full of ambiguity and indetermination. Using the framework of Western learning to analyze Lao Tzu’s “Tao”, no matter how many unsuitable it is, it may not be completely helpful to clarify some ideological contagions. But generally speaking, the influence of understanding Lao Tzu’s own “Tao” thinking is still infinite. Laozi retorts that “Tao is always nameless” (Chapter 32) or “Tao is nameless” (Chapter 41), discussing whether Laozi’s “Tao” is materialistic or idealistic, or perhaps physical or conceptual. This simply means reciting “Tao”. Rather than using Western thoughts to capture Lao Tzu’s “Tao” as a matter of what it is, it is better to abandon these frameworks of conception to try out the picture. What is Lao Tzu’s intention to discuss “Tao”.
The thing that Lao Tzu thought TC:
發佈留言