requestId:68753bfeef0429.85362297.

Thinking and virtue: Two emotions that are beyond the inner and their knowledge and archaeological identification

Author: Tian Yan (provided by the Shandong Academy of Philosophy and Social Development)

Source: “Literature, History and Philosophy” 2023, No. 5

Abstract: Contemporary neo-Confucianism uses “inner beyond” to highlight the superiority of Chinese traditional civilization over Eastern civilization, that is, it is both internal and beyond, and the two can be combined into one. However, this concept itself needs to be defined in its application, otherwise it will be like some neo-Confucian applications, which contain itself inconsistent. Compared with Confucius and Aristotle’s related thoughts, we can find that the internal transcendence is not unique to Chinese civilization, and the Eastern civilization also emphasizes it. Moreover, the internal transcendence and internal transcendence are not clearly and completely opposite to the internal transcendence.

Keywords: Inner beyond; virtue; thinking; Confucius; Aristotle; 

Introduction

Yu Yingjun and others’ “inner beyond the argument” structures the difference between Chinese and Western thinking, especially a teaching that understands the ultimate concern of “stop at the highest good”. They believe that a significant feature and advantage of Chinese civilization relative to Eastern civilization is that the so-called internal excess or inward excess [1]. In the comprehensive view of Nazi, the highest way of heaven that people seek to explore in Chinese tradition is transcendent, but at the same time it is pulled into the inner world, and it is inseparable from the Japanese and mortals of man. The transcendents in the Eastern world, such as Plattu’s concept world, Christian gods, etc., are purely intrinsic and do not combine with Japanese and mortals like Chinese civilization. The criticism and reflection on this teaching has never ended: An Lezhe and Hao Dawei long believed that it is appropriate to apply the concept of transcendence in the East to explain Chinese civilization to the point of being different [2]; later, Zhang Rulun criticized Yu Yingshi and misinterpreted Schwarz’s thought of “transcending to the inside” of Chinese civilization. However, turning it into a “inner-oriented transcendence” that contradicts conceptually, it is believed that this is actually a misreading of Chinese civilization, because the inability to transcend is unified with the inner, and there are also strict transcendences in Chinese thinking, such as heaven and heavenly way, which are equal to the concepts of internalized mind and nature [3]. In recent years, this topic seems to have become a reflection hot point: Huang Yusong acknowledges the term and connotation of “inner beyond”, but reflects on the characteristics of humanism in its body, and believes that this internal excess is not more superior than internal excess. On the contrary, it will also lead to the collapse of the value system and the generation of impolite indecency [4]; Zhaofa students believe that internal excess is It is not impossible to fully realize the characteristics of Confucius and even Huaxia civilization. Confucius’s transcendence of the current height and the inside and outside are many dimensions, while what is beyond the inside is only the way of man and heaven, that is, the transcendence of the high and low levels. Moreover, Confucius’ transcendence of the high and low levels is actually different from the Sin and Meng School and the King of the King of the Sun. Confucius admitted that those who transcendence of the inner world are related to it.[5] of the level of inability to reach and cannot achieve complete knowledge.

The following criticism either believes that the concept of “inner beyond” has problems, or that even if there is a thought that exceeds the inner beyond, it represents the characteristics of Chinese civilization, it may not be more superior than the inner beyond the Oriental. This article continues to reflect on this teaching. First, I will recognize the term “inner beyond” through simple analysis and definition; then, under this definition, we will find the classic representation of inner beyond, that is, the inner beyond, which is raised by Confucius and Aristotle’s desire for the best, compare the two, and explore the differences. Finally, this article will point out that in fact, the inner beyond, which does not exist in the question of who is more superior than who, but has a place where one can learn and borrow from each other; and, in addition, there is no clear boundary between the outer and inner beyond.

1. Basic definition of inner beyond

Anatomically, the inner beyond conceptual requirements are suitable for the two most basic characteristics: a. Inner and b. Extraordinary. In the Chinese traditional realm, a can be used to concepts such as mind, nature, and human nature, while b can be used to heaven, god, and heavenly way. All scholars who support inner transcendence beyond concept advocate that a and b are united, just as the way of heaven is both inner and transcendent, although the literal meaning of these two words is opposite. The transcendent way of heaven can be internalized into the inner human nature and become a daily norm and guide for human nature. All the learners who criticize this concept (such as Zhang Rulun, etc.) insist on the strict meaning of the person who exceeds the meaning cannot be equal to the inner things.

I think the view of Zhang Rulun and others, and I believe that the strict meaning of the transcendent cannot be equal to the inner mind, but I think that there is a certain sensory desire within the subject itself that is closer to the inner one and actually exceeds itself. For example, if there is an inner person who exceeds A. A has a certain nature or activity p. There is also a p that is similar to A in the human world. However, human p is not as perfect as A’s p, so it is not difficult to have any problems. But people can still approach A by constantly doing p or through p. In this meaning I believe that there is an inner transcendent concept. Because there are internal transcendences here, and some people use the things inside themselves to actually exceed themselves by the fact that internal transcendences are similar to those inside themselves, so there is no place to conflict in concept. The p to be applied in this article is the sensory talents of Confucius and Aristotle, as well as the standardized activities generated by sensibility.

The differences between the Hong Kong New Confucianism, which advocates the internal transcendence of the inner transcendence of the Hong Kong Confucianism regards the inner transcendence of the Bible School and the King of the King of the Sun as the internal transcendence of the inner transcendence of the inner transcendence of the Hong Kong New Confucianism, I think Confucius will be a better metaphor [6]. Because after the transcendent is internalized, the transcendent nature of the transcendent in the heart will be weakened or lost. The Zheng Family once said in detail that a Taiwanese New Confucian scholar criticized: “The development of Confucianism in Song and Ming dynasties is based on internalization, and the value of transcendence is almost completely gone, while the “inner beyond” of contemporary Neo-Confucianism is followed by Confucianism in Song and Ming dynasties, and it is not guaranteed.It is not as good as the energy of Confucianism and Chinese civilization. ”【7】This article recognizes this group of comments, but does not recognize that the mind learning that Mou Zongsan and others are the correct ones of Confucius and Mencius. In fact, under the extreme development of the mind learning system, the transcendental surface of the core of Confucianism has been replaced by the internal metamorphosis.

However, when we return to Confucius, the source, we will find that The nature of the transcendent is still well preserved. The internal exploration of human behavioral norms has begun, and the test slowly dispels the dependence on the transcendent, but it must also be emphasized that the main nature of the transcendent cannot be ignored by Confucius, and the interpretation of the mind is not a unique development path. In order to eliminate it by the learning of mind Indeed, and the teaching that Yu Yingjun and others continued to discover, which is beyond the characteristics of the Chinese civilization, we need to return to the source and conduct fundamental governance assessments. This is a sufficient reason for this article to discuss Confucius’ case.

Mu Zongsan and Yu Yingjun both discussed Confucius The inner world of heaven and heaven is beyond thinking, and we all believe that this was the beginning and development of Confucius. But they also realized that the way of heaven was not completely transformed into the metaphysical realm of morality or principle. The inner world or the way of heaven is still irreplaceable. Although we cannot fully understand and understand it, we must still be respectful of it博官网. Although Confucius’s thinking can be a remnant of ancient witch civilization, its value-oriented effectiveness cannot be ignored. It is more than a complete and internalized mind system, which preserves the independent internal value reference mark and will not fall to the value-free or subjective concept. This little yellow jade in “Chinese Philosophy” The two teachings of “inner beyond” – Reflection on the Humanism [8] have d TC: