Modern Discussion On Confucian Transcendence Problem

Abstract:Both Lo Kuang and Mou Tzung-san have built complete philosophical systerms, and they are respectively representatives of the schools of "Neo-Scholasticism" and "New-Confucianism" in Hong Kong and Taiwan. This dissertation studies their views on transcendence problem as tipical cases to investigate the modern interpretation of Confucian transcendental theories. It compares their basic views, metaphysical foundations and theoretical sources to show their superiorities and negligences, and also reveals the complexity of Confucian transcendence problem itself.Chapterâ… examines the origin of the word "trancendence" and the histories of studying transcendence problem in eastern and western philosophy, and also Lo', Mou's courses of thinking this problem. Although the word "transcendence" origins from the west with a long history of studying this problem, it's not confined to the Western context. The transcendence problem is a fundamental problem of human philosophical thought, which is associated with the universality of philosophy through the particularity of western philosophy. Traditional Chinese philosophy emphasizes the transcendence problem without using the word "transcendence", it takes the problem as an important topic of ultimate concern, which is very close to western philosophy. In this sense, Eastern and Western philosophy could deepen their thinkings of the problem through mutual academic exchanges, and the theories of Lo and Mou are two typical cases trying this in modern Chinese philosophy.Chapterâ…¡analyses the theoretical content, metaphysical foundation and final realm of Lo Kuang's transcendental theory in "Metaphysical philosophy of life". Lo's ontology insists on realism standpoint to study "Being" from the "Existence of Life". In his opinion, human as the subject of transcending process is a self-developing, self-realizing "Life", and heaven as the aim is God of Christian Faith, therefore, the harmony of human and heaven depends on human's developing his nature consciously and God's salvation together. On this foundation, Lo's basic route of transcendence is to cultivate actural existence of life consciously to realize its metaphysical essence, and the final aim of it is God's realm.Chapterâ…¢analyses the theoretical content, metaphysical foundation and final realm of Mou Tzung-san's transcendental theory in "Moral metaphysics". Mou's ontology regards the creative noumenon of all things to be the principle of mind, and inherits Confucian wisdom to clarify the noumenon has "concrete universality" from moral practice. He thinks heaven is not a transcendent god but a "creative reality" which has intrinsic link with human mind, and the essence of human lies in his true moral mind's presenting the reality, therefore, the uniting of heaven and human is the process of human's presenting the principle of mind and attaining the creative reality. On this foundation, Mou's transcendental views are to emphasize the noumenon's ideal meaning as the value principle and verify the absolute universality of the principle of mind by concious moral practice, all of these are self-sufficient transcendental views.Chapter IV compares the basic views and theoretical origins of the two transcendental theories, and surveys their superiorities and negligences to prospect a possible direction of further discussion of Confucian transcendence problem in modern Chinese philosophy. In theoretical origins, Lo's views refer to Confucian School of Qi and western Scholastic Philosophy, while Mou's refer to Confucian School of Mind and German Classical Philosophy. The similarity of Lo and Mou is to affirm the subject of transcending process to be "life", which has automatic energy conciously. Their differences lies in the following two aspects:one is the difference between realism and idealism standpoints about the relations of phenomenon and noumenon, ideal and reality; the other is difference between Christian and the humanities religion on transcendence views, that is to depend on God or human themselves. To solve the transcendence question, Lo's theory comes across the problem of inner self-inconsistent because of its expectation to integrate Confucianism with Catholic Faith, while Mou's idealism results in failure about the power source of transcendence, that is, the principle of mind couldn't control actual life successfully. Nevertheless, they all have strong senses of mission for the modern transformation of Confucianism, thus they build their philosophy systems and the corresponding transcendence theories. Their thinkings show the complexity of Confucian transcendence problem, provide useful illuminations, and widen the road of further discussion. From their theories we know that further thinking of this problem should pay attention to its metaphysical foundation, fully explore the wisdom of Confucian School of Qi, and base on the history of traditional Confucian to judge the final aim of transcendence theory.