Philosophical And Cultural Analysis Of Needham's Puzzle

Dr. Joseph Needham is synonymous with the Chinese history of science and technology to Chinese intellectuals. Many of them hold the firm belief in his conclusion that the Chinese history of science and technology had ever been in a leading position in the world for a long time and did not lag behind until in the modern and contemporary time. As a rule, the question why modern science did not arise in China is considered Needham's puzzle. In fact, Dr. Joseph Needham himself gave different expression of Needham's puzzle in different times. It is believed in academe that the most normative expression was originated in his article Science and Society in East and West. In the article he wrote, "In about 1938, I started conceiving a systematic, objective and authoritative work to discuss Chinese history of science, scientific thoughts, technology as well as medicine. One important question I noticed at that time was " Why modern civilization developed only in Europe instead of China (or India)?" and " Why Chinese civilization made more achievements in from A.D.1 to A.D.15 than the West in getting natural knowledge and applying them into actual human needs?"Needham's puzzle attracted many scholars once proposed, which inspired a wide and long dispute not only on how to give an answer but also the true and false of the puzzle itself. On one hand, many scholars both abroad and home are trying to give their answers. On the other hand, started from 1970s, Needham's puzzle has been being challenged in succession by some scholars, who think it is a false question and never exists. However, all these challenges were rebutted. Challengers and defenders are measure in measure, holding totally different attitude to Needham's puzzle. As a typical comparison example of east and west culture, Arguments on Needham's puzzle are of special significance. In fact, the trend of binary opposition of arguments on Needham's puzzle is popular in every field of humanities and social science. In law circles, law transplantation of the wholesale westernization and its opponent localization is measure for measure. In economics circles, there are liberalism and its opponents. In historical circles, there are westernization and its opponents.So what is the origin of such a universal and binary opposition? Is there any possibility that transcends this phenomenon? What is the transcending method? The dissertation is based on these questions.Both of the two opposite parties have their focusing points on Needham's puzzle; the defender emphasizes the universality of science while the challenger thinks that science is only one element of culture and different cultures are not comparable. The two opposite position, closely connected with arguments in cultural anthropology, actually represents the opposition of evolutionism and relativism in cultural anthropology. The universality of science as well as culture originated from cultural evolutionism. Cultural evolutionists think that psychology of all humankind is universally alike. Therefore, human culture is evolved from different stages, and these evolving stages of all different cultures over the world are quite similar. In other words, they think all cultures are developing towards the same evolving target. But due to some specific reasons, the different progress of evolution for different cultures causes different stages of the evolution chain where they are living, which caused the difference of advantage and lagging behind in different cultures. From this perspective of view, it is necessary and of significance to probe the causes of lagging behind. On the other hand, cultural relativists believe that every culture exist for some specific reasons and rationality, having their own different history, unique characteristics, dignity and view of values, which shows no difference of good or bad as well as superior or inferior. Every evaluation criterion is relative, and there is no absolute and universal criterion for culture evaluation. Based on this view of point, it is not logical and right to probe the issue of advance or lagging behind, and therefore, such a question is a false question.The opposing stands of cultural evolutionism and relativism caused the opposing trend in cultural comparison, and the opposition of these two stands itself is the outcome of separation of cultural time characteristics and nationality. Avery culture is integrity of characteristics and nationality. Cultural nationality means the overall characteristics and irreplaceable unique normativeness, and stands for the incommensurability between different cultures. Cultural relativists believe overlook the possibility of comparison between different cultures, and came to the conclusion that there is no generic criterion for different cultures, and that there is no difference of advance or lagging behind and good or bad between cultures, which is obviously the outcome of dogmatism of cultural nationality. Cultural characteristics are timeliness features during its different evolving stages, representing the different dimensionality, dimension and alternativeness during its evolution. Cultural evolutionism describes the culture as per the evolution mode of mechanical determinism and believes that every culture will repeat the absolute same developing track, which obviously takes time characteristics as the only perspective of culture review.In terms of noumenon theory of anthology, the dimensionality of cultural time characteristics reflects binary opposition of rationality and value. As for the real existing of human beings, rationality and value originate in living, reflecting respectively body existence and spirit existence of human, which somehow shows the noumenon theory of anthology. If you come back to the roots of cultural nationality and time dogmatism, you will find that the dogmatism of cultural nationality is actually that of value perspective of views and that the dogmatism of cultural time characteristics is actually that of value perspective of views. In other words, the dogmatism of cultural time characteristics and nationality is the outcome of the separation of rationality and value.There are two totally different methods to solve the binary opposition of rationality and value: internal transcending and outer transcending. The first is a zoetic method of "integrity—opposition—integrity", which starts and completes in a way of "self composing". The second method is an outer simple deny and is hostile to life. Post-modernism is trying to clear up rationality and metaphysics through "termination of philosophy", opposing noumenon theory, closing subject and object, solving opposition of rationality and value. This method, as romanticism does, is developing through an outer transcending method. They separate rationality and value as binary components, and then try to boil one down to the other through a reductive method, which cannot reach the integrity of rationality and value. The Marxism outlook of history is of inspiration to help transcending the opposition.The historical materialism of Marxism discovered two aspects of rationality and value, which is not a binary and compromising understanding, but committed to find a possibility to combine them historically. In Marx's view of point, human history is a process where rationality and value (representing history and moral) conflict from time to time and at the same time the conflict clears up. Marxism historical outlook sticks to ultimate interest in human value, and focuses on actual historical process. The opposition of rationality and value could not really transcended unless from an actual practical perspective. Also only in this way deputes on cultural comparison including Needham puzzle could be terminated. As a logistic idea, the integration of rationality and value is of absolute termination; as real history, it represents relative reality through human actual practice. The integration of rationality and value is only an idea status prior to the realization of "the real settlement of fight between individuals and group" as Marx said.Presently, cultural communication and shock in east and west are getting more and more obvious, however, the research field in China has been being overwhelmed by the opposition of westernization and localization for a long time. On one hand, western theories have been often used, and even applied into Chinese reality unreasonably. On the other hand, localization supporters are limited to experience research, and even consider them traditional Chinese civilization. Therefore, on one hand, localization is very popular, and on the other hand many western theories are considered as classable and front edged. With " Needham's Puzzle" as the discussing topic, this dissertation revealed the mental origin of the binary opposition of rationality and value by philosophy-cultural analysis of some relevant arguments, and found the mental resources to integrate the opposition—Marx's practice based historical outlook. Therefore, this dissertation is helpful in avoiding veil of views to one party by another in cultural comparison, in increasing both parties' theoretical self-discipline, and overcoming the current binary context to develop a proper attitude in cultural comparison.Some innovative points in this dissertation are as follows:The first innovative point is the subject. There are two treating dimensionalities about "Needham's puzzle", one is the attempt in find some solutions, and the other is analysis of the rationality of the question itself and to find some new methods that could help in culture comparison. About the two dimensionalities, this dissertation is not to solve the question and give a solution, but intends to take the question itself as the discussing subject, and to give a philosophy-cultural analysis of the question itself.Secondly, this dissertation revealed respectively culture and philosophy origins of arguments and opposition in cultural comparison, and clarified its connection-cultural evolutionism and relativism originated from split of rationality and value, and revealed the inspiration of integration of rationality and value from Marxism's historical outlook.Thirdly, the dissertation revealed the existing inevitability of the two parties in cultural comparison and their arguments from the perspective of Marxism's integrity of logical inevitability and historical relativism of rationality and value, avoiding veil of views to one party by another in cultural comparison, in increasing both parties' theoretical self-discipline as well as pointing out a development direction- "interjecting" the other party and combining subjects.Fourthly, this dissertation discussed Needham's metaphor that western science originated from ancient Greece and Oriental science originated from ancient China are two trains, analyzing the initiatives and incompleteness of integration of rationality and valued contained in this thought.