Kretov, P, Kretova, O
Kitaêznavčì doslìdžennâ 2021, 2:7-18
https://doi.org/10.51198/chinesest2021.02.007
Section: History, Philosophy, Science and Culture of China
Language: Ukrainian
Abstract: 

The article examines the problem of correlation of the philosophical tradition of Confucianism with the ideas of globalism in the context of the influence of ideology on the mass consciousness. The transformation of Confucianism into post-neo-Confucianism and the use of its separate versions in the discourse of power and the formation of worldview and value narratives are also considered. The ideologisation of modern neo-Confucianism is recognized as one of the reasons for terminological ambiguity in defining the philosophical meaning of this phenomenon. The defining traditional philosophers and concepts of Confucianism and neo-Confucianism (up to the XIX century), rethought by modern neo- Confucianism and post-neo-Confucianism and their role in the formation of philosophical foundations of public opinion are outlined. The potential of post-neo-Confucianism from the point of view of its understanding as a civil religion of the globalized “Greater China” has been clarified. The question of the paradoxical nature of the interaction of the ideas of globalism and post-neo-Confucianism is raised both at the formal-logical level of the development of rational discourse and at the level of the mythologized everyday mass consciousness. It is shown how the power discourse can monopolize the right to ethical judgment, leveling the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual in the Western tradition, while appealing to the ethnomental features of the national worldview, historical resentment and philosophical tradition of Confucianism. It is emphasized that the subjectivity of the individual in such conditions, dissolves in social interaction, which is fully regulated by the government in the reliance on the interpretation of the state as a natural fact. The way of functioning of philosophical concepts of post-neo-Confucianism in the information space, scientific and political discourses and their influence on the achievement of social consensus, which enables the implementation of economic and social reforms, is considered. It is pointed out that the specifics of the interpretation of the corpus of globalization ideas in modern China may take the form of contradictions regarding the Western understanding of the ideas of freedom and democracy. It is emphasized that one of the reasons for this is the extrapolation of reinterpreted globalization of ideas from the sphere of economic interaction of states and businesses to the sphere of general worldview knowledge, ethics and value systems. The paradoxical situation of the intersection of the Western concept of globalism as universalism with Confucian traditionalism, which is based on the model of collective consciousness, is outlined.

Keywords: Confucianism, ethics, globalism, Ideology, philosophy, post-neo-Confucianism, power discourse

Full text (PDF)

References: 
  1. Berger Ya.M. (2009), Kitayskaya model’ globalizatsii. Vek globalizatsii, Vyp. No. 1, Sotsionauki (In Russian).
  2. Gordon A.V. (2019), Transformatsiya konfutsianstva v natsional’nuyu religiyu sovremennogo Kitaya: vzglyady Tszyan Tsina. Sotsial’nyye i gumanitarnyye nauki. Otechestvennaya i zarubezhnaya literatura. Ser. 9, Vostokovedeniye i afrikanistika: Referativnyy zhurnal, No. 1, available at: https://bit.ly/3ekf5Kk (In Russian).
  3. Zinevych I. (2020), Mehatrendy Kytayu ta yikhnya transformatsiya: dosvid dlya Ukrayiny. Visnyk KNU im. T. Shevchenka. Ser. “Mizhnarodni vidnosyny”, No. 1 (51), S. 53–58, available at: https://bit.ly/3eQRfF4 (In Ukrainian).
  4. Kiktenko V.O. (2018), Ohlyad istoriyi analitychnoyi filosofiyi v Kytayi (XX – pochatok XXI stolittya). Skhidnyy svit, No. 2, S. 17–29. (In Ukrainian).
  5. Kobzev A.I. (2002), Filosofiya kitays’kogo neokonfutsianstva. Moskva: Vostochnaya literatura RAN. (In Russian).
  6. Lomanov A.V. (1996), Sovremennoye konfutsianstvo: filosofiya Fen Yulanya. (Predisl. i otv. red. M. L. Titarenko). Moskva: Vostochnaya literatura RAN. (In Russian).
  7. Mazur Û.V. (2015), Polìtična moral’ u kontekstì kul’turnih tradicìj krayin Shìdnoyi Azìyi. Civìlìzacìjnì činniki svìtobudovi: džerela pohodžennâ, potencìal vzaêmodìï ta vimìri konstruktivìzmu (krayini Azìï ta Afriki). Zb. nauk. prac’. Kyiv. S. 34–41. (In Ukrainian).
  8. Malâvin V. (2005), Kitaj upravlâemyj: staryj dobryj menedžment. Moskva: Evropa. (In Russian).
  9. Sitnik J. (2020), Ìdeologìčnì zasadi globalìzmu ta nacìonalìzmu: koncepcìyi, cìlì, ìnstrumentarìj. Ukrayins’kì studìyi strategìčnih doslìdžen’, 5 travnâ, available at: https://bit.ly/3nPauCW (In Ukrainian).
  10. Sumčenko Ì. (2013), Osoblivostì rozumìnnâ spravedlivostì v kitajs’kìj fìlosofìyi. Naukovì zapiski Nacìonal’nogo unìversitetu “Ostroz’ka akademìâ”. Fìlosofìâ. Vip. 14, S. 70–75. (In Ukrainian).
  11. Šter N. (2019), Informaciâ, vlast’ i znaniâ. Sankt Peterburg: Aletejâ. (In Russian).
  12. Bell D.A. (2008), China’s New Confucianism: Politics and everyday life in a changing society. Princeton: Princeton University press.
  13. Big data meets Big Brother as China moves to rate its citizens (2017), Wired, Oct. 21, available at: https://bit.ly/3nP4mdI.
  14. Chan J. (2011), Declaration toward a global ethic: Jiang Qing’s response. Renaissance of Confucianism in contemporary China; ed. Fan Ruiping, Dordrecht et all., Springer, рр. 153–162.
  15. China programs virtual youth icons to instill correct thinking into millennials (2017), Global Times, Dec. 17, available at: https://bit.ly/3elackc.
  16. Donelly D. (2021), An Introduction to the China Social Credit System. New Horizons, Apr. 15, available at: https://bit.ly/3b5ClK1/.
  17. Elstein D. (2015), Democracy in contemporary Confucian philosophy. New York: Routledge.
  18. Fukuyama F. (1995), Confucianism and Democracy. Journal of Democracy, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 20–33.
  19. Gartner’s, 2015. Hype Cycle for Emerging Technologies Identifies the Computing Innovations That Organizations Should Monitor, Gartner, 18 August, available at: https://gtnr.it/3xNyafk.
  20. Philosophy of Globalization (2018), Ed. by: C. Roldán, D. Brauer and J. Rohbeck. De Gruyter.
  21. 林安梧. 新儒学之后与“后新儒学”. 《东岳论丛》2019 年第 201911 期 第 86-95 页, available at: https://bit.ly/3ulS9Qv (дата звернення: 5.05.2021).
  22. 陈晋. 全面建成小康社会的历史意义和当代启示. 红旗文, 2020, 12.08, available at: https://bit.ly/3xJJVn8 (дата звернення: 4.05.2021).
  23. 黃卓越. 儒學與後現代視域:中國與海外(簡體書). 河南大學出版社, 2009.339 p.
  24. 黄玉顺. 思想视域问题—如何来研究现代新儒学?黄玉顺主编《现代新儒学的现代性哲学》中央文献出版社2008年2月第1版, available at: https://bit.ly/2RpZSyn (дата звернення: 5.05.2021).