ABSTRACT
An important development in Chinese philosophy during the twentieth century was the emergence of Xin-Ru-Jia (新儒家). Opinions differ as to which thinkers comprise Xin-Ru-Jia, and their identifying characteristics (Makeham 2003). In Fung Yu-lan’s History of Chinese Philosophy, ‘Xin-Ru-Jia’ refers to the philosophy of the Cheng brothers and Zhu Xi, and this has been translated as ‘Neo-Confucianism’, a term which in Western scholarship came to include both the Cheng-Zhu and Lu-Wang schools of Song and Ming dynasty Confucianism; this is distinct from the twentieth-century philosophy we will be examining in this chapter, which some refer to as contemporary (dang-dai 當代) or modern (xian-dai 現代) Neo-Confucianism or New Confucianism. ‘New Confucianism’ is brief and avoids confusion, but ‘contemporary Neo-Confucianism’ registers continuity with Song-Ming Confucianism. Liu Shu-hsien (劉述先) recently suggested reserving ‘contemporary Neo-Confucianism’ for the philosophical movement initiated by Xiong Shili (熊十力), further developed by his students Mou Zongsan (牟宗三), Tang Junyi (唐君毅), and Xu Fuguan (徐 復觀), with Liu himself and Tu Wei-ming (杜維明) as the third generation. ‘New Confucianism’ is a more appropriate translation for ‘Xin-Ru-Jia’ when, as in New Confucian studies (xin-ru-xue 新儒學) in the People’s Republic of China, it identifies a larger group, including Xiong Shili, Liang Shuming (梁漱冥), Ma Yifu (馬一浮), Zhang Junmai (Carsun Chang 張君勱), Fung Yu-lan (馮友蘭), He Lin (賀麟), Qian Mu (錢穆), and Fang Dongmei (Thomé Fang 方東美) in the first generation, Mou Zongsan, Tang Junyi, and Xu Fuguan in the second generation, and Liu Shu-hsien, Tu Wei-ming, Cheng Chung-ying (成中英), A.S. Cua (Ke Xiong-wen 柯雄文), and Yu Ying-shih (余英時) in the third generation (Liu 2003: 24-6). New Confucianism is less a school of philosophy than a trend of thinking produced by the intellectual crisis around the May Fourth period in China (Chang 1976). Confronting the challenge by Western modernity and the attacks on traditional Chinese culture, New Confucians are committed to promoting Chinese culture with Confucianism as its core; they believe in the perennial relevance and value of
Confucianism, and their strategy for reclaiming Chinese cultural superiority or at least equality involves creative transformations of Confucianism with the aid and criticisms of non-Confucian ideas, especially modern Western ideas such as those of science and democracy. Within this broad and still expanding trend of thought, we may discern a narrower meaning of ‘dang-dai-Xin-Ru-Jia’, which refers to a specific school of Chinese philosophy – exemplified by Xiong Shili, Mou Zongsan, and Tang Junyi – and is more appropriately translated as ‘Contemporary Neo-Confucianism’.1 These modern Chinese philosophers share a distinctive view of philosophy as primarily metaphysics; they believe that a (re)construction of Confucian metaphysics, based on Song-Ming study of heart-mind and nature (xin-xing-zhi-xue 心性之學), is the key to revive Confucianism and meet the challenges faced by Chinese civilization. Their philosophy actively engages Buddhism and Western thought, favoring German Idealism. Their borrowings and criticisms of Western philosophy mark important steps in the modernizing of Chinese philosophy in the twentieth century.
