requestId:684c3e47b342b0.54979821.
Why “Studying-Home”
——A Philosophy Eye
Author: Sun Xiangchen (Teacher from the School of Philosophy, PhD Instructor)
Source: “Philosophy Dynamics”, 2021 Issue 3
Abstract
When Chinese talk about “Home”, on the one hand, they have a kind feeling, and on the other href=”https://sites.google.com/view/sugargirl-story-share”>大官网平台文网址大官网平台文网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大官网址大There is a clear “perfection” in the modern “personal-subject” philosophy in the East. Therefore, there are a large number of arguments about “other” in contemporary philosophy to supplement the “perfection” of “personal-subject” philosophy. However, this “other” philosophy still has its shortcomings. The “trial” from Chinese philosophical tradition can put forward its own conclusions. This kind of “learning” philosophy provides energy for the tree to establish a “heating” world. .
Keywords:Home; individual; subject; others; parents
In Chinese civilization, “home” has become a paradigm for everyone to understand the world. If “home” is lost, it will become what Mr. Lu Xun said, “hive in nowhere.” The accumulation of history has also made “home” an incomparable burden, but in modern society, we still have strong “home” movements. Tomorrow, we will talk about “home” again. It is not simply to revive a family that was a social organization in human history, but to find a way to live in a more general sense, and to establish a “people live” method and stand in a “stop”.
1. Why do we have to face the “home” from the front
We have forgotten “home” for a long time. The new civilization movement represents the most conclusive criticism made by Chinese intellectuals of their own civilization traditions. Before famous disputes such as “questions and subjects” and “science and metaphysics”, there were disputes about individuals and family issues. The concept of “home” and “filial piety” as the focus of Chinese civilization tradition has been violently affected. The novels we are familiar with, such as “Home”, “Spring” and “Autumn”, most intuitively reflect the criticism of the traditional “home” civilization. In addition to the novels of Ba Jin, Lu Xun and others that “teaching” cannibalism, Fu Sinian also wrote an article called “The Source of All Evils” [1]. Even though he himself felt a little heard by others, he still pointed out that the Source of All Evils is China’s “family”; Wu Yu wrote the famous “Theory of Family Carving System as a Specialized Idea” [2], which was like a moment.I have found the foundation of civilization with a specialized meaning. There are so many negative comments in this type. Even in the 80th century, Sun Longji’s “The Deep-Level Structure of Chinese Civilization” still adopted a stance on the “family” civilization. [3] Since modern times, a strong “anti-family and not filial piety” establishment has been established in China. Although this criticality has its historical inference and justification, this also conceals a field with a deep bottom. During our 100-year-old period, we have adopted a calm attitude towards “home” in philosophy.
Since the new civilization movement, the fierce criticism of the “home” in history has not failed to replace our deep thinking about “home” as a philosophical problem. In addition to making profound criticism of “home” in the social-political level, can there be some “mechanism” in the deep level that has prevented our further thinking about “home”? The author believes that this is related to the modern understanding of Chinese philosophy. Rongyoulan once said: “To talk about the history of Chinese philosophy, one of its important tasks is to choose and describe the various academic questions in Chinese history, among which the Western philosophy can be named after it.” [4] In this way, we first have a philosophical framework, using the Eastern philosophical paradigm as this framework to understand itself from the beginning. After establishing such a philosophical framework, many profound sources of thought will be concealed. “Home” is such a philosophical concept. It is difficult for us to find the concept of “home” in Eastern philosophy, so it is difficult to give it a fair position in modern Chinese philosophy. The problem of “home” from the beginning seems to be a memory of Chen’s problem, which actually means that there is a new breakthrough in the “thinking framework” directed by Oriental Philosophy. Only with this “framework breakdown” can some of the most basic concepts be presented from the beginning.
The problems of “home” can be understood from many aspects, including social, ethical, political, preservative and energetic aspects. We are very familiar with some surfaces. Here we emphasize the philosophical level and understand the problem of “home” from a wider level. In the Chinese civilization tradition, the understanding of “home” clearly shows a kind of intrinsic theory. As descendants of modern homo sapiens, living on Earth with such a few intellectual conditions will face a series of similar preservation needs and challenges, so various appropriate methods will be developed in different civilization traditions. In this meaning, from the Axial Times, over the past two thousand years of development, China and the West have formed a mature civilization. From the perspective of civilization rejuvenation, the civilized rulers who have kept the old-fashioned since the New Civilization Movement have also made great efforts, from Liang Shuming to Tang Junyi, from Momo to Xu Fu, they all tried their best to defend the traditional value view.However, tomorrow we will discuss the meaning of “home” in the modern world, and it will never be solved from the perspective of civilization-centered theory. We need to have a more extensive philosophical breakthrough to highlight its more general meaning.
2. What does the “personal-subject” philosophy “improve”?
Modern sexual value concept emphasizes the individual’s unrestrained rights and emphasizes the unrestrained rights of individuals. Chen Chengxiu had already produced this in his 1916 “1916” published in 1916. [5] The New Civilization Movement’s criticism of the “family” and “family” in China’s traditional Chinese, and their critical tasks have moved several generations. The traditional “family” civilization has been truly organized in the historical development of the world, which has restrained and reduced “personality”. To create a vibrant modern civilization, we must correctly view and criticize these plots formed in history.
The emphasis on individuals being unrestrained, rights and respectful thinking are closely related to the source of modernity. It is expressed in philosophy as the birth of a “subjective” philosophy. From Descartes, Hobbes, Locke, Luxor to Kant, they all paid great attention to this problem, such as how to establish the starting point of “self”, how to establish the sameness between individuals, how to understand the unrestrainedness of individuals, how to construct the concept of “rights”, how to construct the concept of morality based on individuals, and how to finally construct a “self-sufficient” subject, the development of modern philosophy can be seen as the construction process of this “personal-subject” philosophical concept. Reading the literature of modern philosophy has already included a kind of criticism of “family”, so that the British legal historian Maine said that the difference between modern and traditional is to replace “family” with “individual”. [6] The determination of “individual” is a modern and broad life. The new civilization movement established the “personalism” to criticize “family” civilization with “personalism” is also a destiny for China to advance to modern society.
But Carol However, in this subjective philosophy, what seems to be “completed”? From a philosophical perspective, Descartes philosophy, which emphasizes the “self”, is lost in the problem of the “body-mind” duality at first. After establishing the subjectivity as “think”, it cannot be connected with the “body”. The duality of body and mind has become a move in modern philosophy, and the body is still shaking. For the major topics, from Gasandi, Spennosa and Lebniz have to face the challenge of this problem. In HobbsIn this case, the individual who seeks to “see” will lead to the natural state of “everyone opposes everyone”. The combination of self-interested individuals finally became a whole problem, from Locke to Lusso to ponder this problem. Kant’s philoso
發佈留言