requestId:68499ae07b8927.22798689.
The comparison between the dissection of Confucian history and the meaning of Confucius
Author: Zhang Xiang (Deputy Director of the Institute of Civilization of Capital Teacher Fan, Professor)
Source: “History of Chinese Philosophy” 2019 Issue 6
Time: Confucius 2570 The year of the year, Ji Hai, Wu Zi
� For example, Eilmann had a profound discussion on European priests’ teaching and modern literature in China and Changzhou. He once pointed out that there were many interactive traces between scientific arguments and academic research in the late Ming and early Qing dynasties. For example, the Qing Dynasty’s conflict between ancient and modern concepts of late medicine and scholars in the Han and Song dynasties, “such as the ‘Five Sessions’ considering the inappropriate points in the modern Cheng-Zhu tradition by paying attention to the distant ancient learning.” [1] But he basically did not discuss the relationship between the Changzhou school’s rise and the interaction between Chinese and Western thinking triggered by the priests after they came to China.
Kang Youwei’s thoughts in the “Dire Army” of the Qing Dynasty were undoubtedly developed in the strong collision between China and extraterritorial thinking, but people also paid less attention to the ability of Kang Youwei’s thoughts in the modern literature and the collision between Chinese and foreign thinking. In the past, the study of Kang’s ideological linkage often emphasized the connection between him and the late Qing Dynasty Gong’s academic studies; the study of his large sources of thinking often focused on his reading of Oriental Utopian thinking. The research and discussion of these two goals is a summary of the friendship between each other: 1: There is less discussion on the relationship between Kang You’s development of common thinking and thinking schools since the late Ming Dynasty; there is less discussion on the analysis of Kang You’s acceptance of Oriental Utopian thinking, and less attention is placed on the network analysis of Kang You’s relationship with global thinking traffic collisions since the late Ming Dynasty.
In the process of studying Kang Youyi’s thinking on “the great common religion” and its modern connection, the traces of the collision between modern literary learning in the Qing Dynasty and the traces of the collision between Chinese and foreign thinking.
The Chinese books translated from the seventeenth century to the East
Kang You have experienced the development and change from “global righteousness” to “establishing education with great harmony”. The key cycle in this change is his reflection on China’s “study over the past two thousand years”. Its reflection has been experienced in both purposesThe process of change. First, in the late 1880s, it is not very certain that Kang Youyu’s disadvantages of “learning over the past two thousand years” should go back to when it was not very certain. Sometimes it was said “after Han”, and sometimes it started with the tyrannical Qin Dynasty. After meeting Liao Ping between 1889 and 1890, in the “New Study of Learning” published in the autumn of 1891, Kang You no longer traced the source of the problem to “Bully Qin” or “From the Han Dynasty”, but clearly confirmed that Liu Xin was planning to use Liu Xin to usurp Confucius’ Six Bibles. [2] Secondly, he did not think from the beginning that the important problem of “learning over two thousand years” was that he forgot Confucius’s moral integrity, which was the work before and after the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895. Before that, Kang You emphasized the neglect and even forgot about “high and low communication” and “advocating the common people”.
In the early 19th century, Kang Youwei’s modern literary framework was formed, and these two problem lines were integrated along the way. One question thread is a reflection on China’s “two thousand years of learning”, the periodic judgment of “two thousand years of learning” is related to criticism of “tyrannical Qin”, and the other question thread is the beginning of the basic discussion of modern literature (the “Peaceful World” problem). The two problem lines are related. The cause of the conflict between ancient and modern literature is related to the “burning books and burying scholars” and “tyrannical Qin”, but the two thought lines are not complete. In the past, Kang Youxin discussed in the context of the history of modern literary studies in the late Qing Dynasty. The key issue was whether Kang Youxin could copy Liao Ping and emphasized the importance of the “Liu Xin usurpation”. However, compared to Kang You, the evidence of “Liu Xin usurping” may not be more important, nor may it be that Song Wei began to fill out the form. A step to qualitativeness.
-17.jpg!article_800_auto)
Kang Youwei (1858-192Baobao.com dcard7) and Liao Ping (1852-1932)
These two thought lines each have their own historical connections, and they did not begin to merge here in Kang Youwei. They can all be traced back to the late Ming Dynasty. Through the change of the “Qin Fire Discussion on Split Discussion” since the late Ming Dynasty, two traces in this discussion can be sorted out. One is to describe Confucianism by using Qin Shihuang’s “burning books and burying scholars” as the point of cracking.To study history, the second is to draw the learning of Confucius from the beginning. In the process of these topic evolution, we can draw the development thread of the late Qing Dynasty’s modern literary studies from the beginning, and present a different ideological relationship picture. That is, compared with the question of “Liu Xin usurpation”, the question of “Shengping” should be more important and key, and the question of “Shengping” is given to Kang You for more people who are inspiring can have a deeper impact on Kang You.
Kang Youhui provided us with a main mechanism for exploring the process of thinking since the late Ming Dynasty. Although the connection between the collision of Chinese and foreign thinking and the development of modern literary science in the Qing Dynasty was ignored tomorrow, these traces were not obscure in the era when the late Qing Dynasty was first alive. For example, in the official letter of Yuan Shikai’s bureau responding to the question of “Making Confucianism as National Education”, we can see the commentary on these ideological development plots since the late Ming Dynasty. In September 1912, while citing Kang You’s statement on “the joint establishment of education” by the Ministry of Internal Affairs, it drew the changes in the “commercial trade” of the late Ming Dynasty: the evolution of Chen Chang, and the transition from time to time, seeking his words to be enough to cover the past and future, and the only one who can understand the past and present is Confucius. Confucius was born in the era of the specialized family and dared not pass the high-level academic academic practice. He often followed the instructions of the times. However, a large faction taught the past. His large-scale subtle statements were enough to build the model of the republican regime and establish the best of the whole world. … He emphasized the principle of Qin’s politics and burned Confucianism, so that Confucius’s righteousness and inheritance of peace could not be promoted because of the times. He only got the well-off school played by Xun Qing, which was in line with the specialist practiced alone in the world. During the 2000th year, King Kong, Cheng, Zhu, Ruan and Dai were the ones who were born in the Ming Dynasty, and the rest of the world passed by the emperor. The more precise he said, even if he had a similar meaning to the republic, it was even more contrary to the meaning of the same, and it was not the material of Confucius and Mencius. Since the trade, European and Eastern Europe have been studying in Dongzhou. A Qing Dynasty said that scholars at the beginning of a little understanding of what to change. King Huang Liu, Wei and others led the leaders of Zhang Wei’s words and followed the king of Yan Zeng. Therefore, Confucius promoted the order of peace and inherited the principle of peace and the same principle as the beginning of the sun and the moon, and the beginning of the Min. [3]
This article attempts to sort out the development of modern literature in the Qing Dynasty from the perspective of global history, and analyze the issues of the dispute between European priests such as Rima and other European priests in using modern literature, and then how the Chinese thinking world later stimulates the interaction and dialogue between European and American thinking and modern literature. In the modern context of global thinking and
發佈留言