1Kiktenko, V
1A. Yu. Krymskyi Institute of Oriental Studies, NAS of Ukraine. 4, Hrushevskoho Str., Kyiv, 01001, Ukraine
Kitaêznavčì doslìdžennâ 2016, 1-2:18-29
https://doi.org/10.15407/chinesest2016.01.018
Section: History, philosophy and science of China
Language: ukrainian
Abstract: 

The article explores the peculiarities of the Chinese variant of pragmatism as the philosophy and ideology of China’s modern development, as well as the ideological connections of Chinese philosophy and American pragmatism. It is noted that between Confucianism and American pragmatism there are no cultural ties, but by means of comparative studies it is defined there is a lot in common between them. Long before the emergence of American pragmatism in classical Chinese philosophy, some ideas which have a pragmatic nature were formulated. The most important coincidence of traditional Chinese philosophy and American pragmatism is humanism, but based on definition of understanding a man as the supreme value of the universe and the fundamental difference between the essence of man and nature, but as a statement that philosophy is precisely determined by human life and aimed at its improvement. Chinese philosophy uses inclusive openness, which is very reminiscent of the fundamental pluralism of pragmatism. Confucianism and American pragmatism emphasize the influence of society, the importance of socialization and action in any particular social context, but the concept of Dewey’s democracy does not coincide with the family values of Confucianism. However, Dewey’s views on democracy and science allowed prominent Chinese intellectuals of the twentieth century (Hu Shi, Feng Yulan, Tao Xingzhi, Jiang Menglin, Guo Bingwen) to critically approach Confucian philosophy and traditional values. Nowadays in China, economic pragmatism has become the dominant trend of thought, which determines the socio-economic development and foreign policy of the country.

Keywords: Confucianism, empiricism, modernization, pragmatism, rationalism, science, tradition

Full text (PDF)

References: 
  1. Berry T. (1960), “Dewey’s Influence in China”, in Blewett, J. (Ed.), John Dewey: His Thought and Influence, Fordham University Press, New York, pp. 199-231.
  2. Bunnin N., Yu Jiyuan. (2001), Dictionary of Western Philosophy: English-Chinese, People’s Press, Beijing.
  3. Cao Q. (2001), “Selling Culture: Ancient Chinese Conception of “The Other” in Legends”, in S. Chan, P. Mandaville and R. Bleiker (Eds.), The Zen of International Relations: IR Theories from East to West. Basingstoke, New York, pp. 202-221. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230286429_10
  4. Chan G. (1999), Chinese Perspectives on International Relations: A Framework of Analysis. Palgrave Macmillan UK, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230390201
  5. Chang F. (2002), “The problem of the public: John Dewey’s theory of communication and its influence on modern Chinese communication”, in X. Lu, W. Jia, & D. R. Helsey (Eds.), Chinese communication studies: Contexts and comparisons, Greenwood Publishing Group, Westport, pp. 47-63.
  6. De Bary W. T., Bloom I. (1999), Source of Chinese tradition, 2nd ed., Columbia University Press, New York.
  7. Dewey J. (1916), Essays in Experimental Logic, University of Chicago, Chicago. https://doi.org/10.1037/13833-000
  8. Dewey J. (1929), The Quest for Certainty, J. J. Little and Ives Company, New York.
  9. Dewey J. (1987), Art as Experience. The Later Works of John Dewey, 1925-1953. Volume 10: 1934, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, Illinois.
  10. Dewey J. (2000), “Search for the Great Community”, in Stuhr, J. J. (Ed.), Pragmatism and Classical American Philosophy, Oxford University Press, New York.
  11. Dewey J. (2008), “The Need for a Recovery of Philosophy”, in Dewey J. The Middle Works, 1899–1924. Vol. 10, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, Illinois, pp. 3-48.
  12. Eisenstadt S. N. (2003), Comparative Civilizations and Multiple Modernities, Vol. II, BRILL, Leiden.
  13. Grieder J. B. (1970), Hu Shih and the Chinese renaissance; liberalism in the Chinese revolution, 1917–1937, Harvard University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674284043
  14. Hall D. L., Ames R. T. (1987), Thinking through Confucius, SUNY Press, Albany.
  15. Hansen Ch. (1992), A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought: A Philosophical Interpretation, Oxford University Press, New York.
  16. Hsu C. (1991), “Applying Confucian Ethics to International Relations”, in Ethics and International Affairs, No. 5, pp. 15-31. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7093.1991.tb00228.x
  17. Hushi (1930), “Jieshao wo ziji de sixiang”, in Hushi wenxuan, Shanghai.
  18. Hu Shi wencun (1996), 4 vols, Huangshan shushe, Hefei. (In Chinese)
  19. Hu Shih (1962), “John Dewey in China”, in Charles Am Moore (Ed.), Philosophy and Culture – East and West, Honolulu, pp. 762–763.
  20. Hu Shih (2000), Diaries While Studying Abroad, Changsha.
  21. James W. (1981), “The Present Dilemma in Philosophy”, in Kuklick, B. (Ed.), Pragmatism, Hackett, Indianapolis.
  22. James W. (1982), The Varieties of Religious Experience, Penguin Classics, New York.
  23. James W. (2000), The Correspondence of William James, Vol. 8, University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville.
  24. James W. (2001), “The Continuity of Experience”, in Rowe S. (Ed.), A Pluralistic Universe, in The Vision of James, London.
  25. MacFarquhar R. (1997), The politics of China: The eras of Mao and Deng, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, New York. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511626098
  26. Michael F., Taylor G. (1956), The Far East in the Modern World, Henry Holt, New York.
  27. Nepomnin O. E. (2005), Istoriya Kitaya: epokha TSin. XVII – nachalo XX veka, Vostochnaya literatura, Moskva. (In Russian)
  28. Neville R. C. (2008), Ritual and Deference: Extending Chinese Philosophy in a Comparative Context”, SUNY Press, Albany, NY.
  29. Ni Peimin (2002), On Confucius, Wadsworth, Belmont.
  30. Perelomov L. S. (2000), Konfutsiy. “Lun’ yuy”. Issled., per. s kit., komment. Faksimil’nyy tekt “Lun’ yuya” s komment. CHzhu Si. Vostochnaya literatura, Moskva. (In Russian)
  31. Tao xing zhi quanji (1984), Di 2 juan, Hunan. (In Chinese)
  32. Quqiubai chuangjian xin wenhua de lilun yu shijian ji qi xianshi yi yi (In Chinese)
  33. Quqiubai wenxuan (2010), Sichuan. (In Chinese)
  34. Sim M. (2009), “Dewey and Confucius: On Moral Education”, in Journal of Chinese Philosophy, Vol. 36, No1, pp. 85-105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6253.2008.01506.x
  35. Shih C. (1993), China’s Just World: The Morality of China’s Foreign Policy, Boulder, CO and London.
  36. Shun, K.-l., Wong, D. B. (Eds.) (2004), Confucian ethics: A comparative study of self, autonomy, and community, Cambridge University Press, New York. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511606960
  37. Shusterman R. (2004), “Pragmatism and East-Asian Thought”, in Metaphilosophy, Vol. 35, No1/2, pp. 13-43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9973.2004.00304.x
  38. Shusterman R. (2006), “Philosophy in Global Dialogue: Between Pragmatism and Chinese Thought”, in Filozofia, Vol. 61, No3, pp. 208-230.
  39. Stephens D. J. (2009), “Confucianism, Pragmatism, and Socially Beneficial Philosophy”, in Journal of Chinese Philosophy, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 53-67. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6253.2008.01504.x
  40. Wen Haiming (2009), Confucian Pragmatism as the Art of Contextualizing Personal Experience and World, Lexington Books, Lanham, MD.
  41. “Xijinping: Renming dui mei hao shenghuo de xiangwang jiushi women de fendou mubiao” (2012), in Renmin wang, 2012 nian 11 yue 15 ri, available at: http://cpc.people.com.cn/n/2012/1115/c349998-19590510.html (In Chinese)