Volume 8, Issue 1

In this paper, I will present the experience gained in the two workshops—“Teaching Chinese Philosophy in Europe” (October 13–15, 2023) and “Global Chinese Philosophy: European Perspectives” (February 16–18, 2024)—held at Free Berlin University and organized by Prof. Fabian Heubel and Prof. Hans Feger. The argument will be divided, like the workshops themselves, into two directions. In the first part, I will present the activity of the Education Network of the European Association for Chinese Philosophy, my teaching activity with the specific perspectives, strategies, and peculiarities. I will also present two dream courses that well represent the peculiarities of my research path. In the second part, on the other hand, I will illustrate a research project on the human-nature relationship that is also an integral part of my university teaching activity. Starting from a definition of new trends in ecological discourse, I will trace the specific Chinese contribution of authors such as Wang Yangming, Wang Fuzhi, and Mou Zongsan to the global debate through a comparison with the post-turn Heidegger.

From the perspective of transcultural dialogues, this article takes Zhuangzi’s philosophy as a starting point, and combines it with Arendt’s political reflections to explore how the “spectator” takes up the responsibility of a global citizen to respond to the risk of a New Cold War of the twenty-first century. The “spectator” is not an indifferent observer, but rather a transcendental and worldly participant in public affairs as a global citizen with the perspective of philosophical tranquility and aesthetic reflection. Adopting but adjusting Lee Yearley’s interpretation of Zhuangzi , I describe the mode of Zhuangzi’s operation of the mind as “at once detached from the world and yet active in it,” while discussing the political thought of Huang Lao 黃老思想 in Zhuangzi to complement the worldly orientation of the “spectator.” Moreover, through the dialogue between Zhuangzi and Arendt, we hope that the dialogue between Eastern and Western philosophies can help to break away from the rigid dichotomy and think about the ways to cope with the de-globalization crisis from a transcultural perspective. In addition, the Daoist political perspective is conducive to the realization of Taiwan’s transcultural potential, and the ideal of Zhuangzi as an educator will help to realize a more inclusive society and promote transcultural understanding in the international community as a global citizen.

In this paper, I reflect on my way of teaching Chinese philosophy in non-philosophical settings. By starting from both common discourses and elements from Chinese indigenous psychology strongly rooted in traditional thought, I elucidate the deep-seated influences of Daoism and Confucianism in contemporary social phenomena. More particularly, I demonstrate the enduring relevance of mainly ancient Daoist concepts in modern therapeutic contexts by introducing some practical applications of Chinese philosophical teachings in everyday life settings and health contexts. I thereby zoom in on hybridized psychotherapies that illustrate the integration of Daoist principles with Western psychological techniques in mental health treatment. I also highlight the necessity of interdisciplinarity to critically investigate Chinese philosophy as dynamically informing contemporary discourses and practices. As a possible educational approach, I introduce a model of an interdisciplinary summer school on Daoism and healing practices that combines theoretical with embodied knowledge.

Heidegger’s “Being and Time” is the title of a remarkable masterpiece belonging to the philosophy classics of the past century. It paves the way for a new and more fundamental way of exploring the question of being—by questioning being in terms of time. Heidegger’s approach has not only influenced our understanding of Western philosophy, but it has also inspired scholars from other cultural and philosophical traditions, such as those from East Asia and Chinese traditions, to delve into the question of dao in light of a philosophical understanding of time and temporality. This is particularly important for inter-cultural studies of philosophy. This essay aims to provide a brief introduction to the study of “ dao and time” in the Laozi from an intercultural perspective. It highlights its importance in our understanding of philosophy, particularly Chinese metaphysics as “Xin-er-shang-xue 形而上學.” Our discussion will begin with a word that is missing in the Laozi .

In European universities, courses related to Chinese philosophy are usually offered in the Department of Sinology or the Department of China Studies. In recent years, the Department of Philosophy at Freie Universität Berlin has advocated the concept of “global philosophy” and has taken visionary actions to introduce courses like Chinese Philosophy, Indian Philosophy, and African Philosophy. In September 2019, I began to teach “Modern Interpretation of Chinese Philosophy” during the 2019–20 winter semester at Freie Universität Berlin, upon the invitation Prof. Stefan Gosepath from Germany’s Cluster of Excellence SCRIPTS-Contestations of the Liberal Script, and Prof. Hans Feger from the Department of Philosophy.At first, I had no idea how many students would come to listen to this seminar course designed for senior undergraduate students and postgraduate students. After all, many seminars at college are often attended by only three to five students. To my surprise, its attendance stayed at around 25 students (Including students who audit) throughout the semester, indicating that German students are interested in Chinese philosophy. Though I only taught for one semester, I still felt much about lecturing on Chinese philosophy at a European university. Apart from the differences between Chinese and Western cultures and between tradition and modernity, I gained a deep understanding of the complexity of exploring the significance of Chinese philosophy in a modern context.

Teaching Chinese philosophy requires moving beyond the perception of Confucianism as a singular ideological entity. It should instead direct students to understand its dual aspects: philosophical and political. Only through a profound internalization of these distinctions can we accurately assess what is often hastily labeled by many sociologists as a “meta-Confucian pattern”—a term that frequently overlooks the historical complexities underlying Confucian political and philosophical currents. This article demonstrates how the nuanced divide between political and philosophical Confucianism unveils fresh perspectives on both the ancient and contemporary Chinese context. Employing the transcultural sublation dialectic, it provides a more informed and integrative approach to these two facets of Confucianism. By sublating these two streams, the study proposes a re-evaluation of the traditional Chinese dichotomy between the transcendental and empirical self ( neisheng waiwang ), thereby encouraging a more culturally sensitive engagement with Chinese historical heritage, and contributing to the establishment of a global philosophical dialogue.

For students of Western philosophy, the Confucian li 禮, conventionally translated as “ritual”, arguably comes across as the weakest link in the Confucian philosophy qua philosophy. Students exposed to it for the first time may find it unattractive, antiquarian, and therefore entirely un philosophical. This essay suggests four helpful approaches to the introduction of li in the European classroom: 1. The “expiative,” emphasizing the much wider scope of li than implied in the conventional gloss “ritual”; 2. the “reassessed ritual,” providing a philosophical re-evaluation of the complex nature of “ritual” in light of relatively recent philosophical schools of thought; 3. the “internal critical,” analyzing the critical discussion of li by other philosophical schools of ancient China; and, lastly, 4. the “Confucian theory,” unfolding the sophisticated Confucian exposition of li as an integral aspect of personal cultivation and social integration, which may include and combine all other three approaches.

The present article elaborates on the author’s experience of teaching Chinese philosophy in Austria, Czechia, and Slovakia, putting this in the context of the wider Central European perspective. The first part of the article deals with the fact that the teaching of Chinese philosophy in Central Europe is largely not institutionalized, but primarily down to the will of individuals. The second part then focuses on the consequences of this, not just the lack of knowledge among European philosophers about key figures and concepts in Chinese philosophy, but also a certain inadequacy in the quality of the philosophical work of (some of) those engaged in Chinese philosophy. And the final section provides some introductory thoughts justifying the relevance of Chinese philosophy in Europe.

This article proposes two different approaches to teaching Classical Chinese philosophy based on the epistemic position of the students. One is a “ skill-based approach ” and the other is what I call the “ thinking through early Chinese philosophy approach .” The first approach is suggested for the students of Sinology, and it requires basic knowledge of Old Chinese. The emphasis is on reading philosophical texts in Old Chinese where a student enters into ancient Chinese thought by access to the medium through which it was written. This approach highlights the relationship between language and thought; the interplay between content and form; and involves the philological (or textual) and philosophical reconstruction of the text. By using the skill-based approach, students can critically analyze and interpret Chinese traditional texts on their own terms and appreciate the aesthetic dimensions of philosophical works. The interplay between content and form is an important aspect of early Chinese texts. The aesthetical dimension of the work is not only the exterior form of the argument shaped to make it more beautiful, but it is also the building part of the argument. The second approach (“thinking through early Chinese philosophy”) is discussion-oriented. In that approach, the focus is on exchanging and developing insights and ideas. This approach is advised to students without prior knowledge of Classical Chinese. Here, a special challenge is represented when a heterogeneous group of students, composed of students of Sinology and students with varying academic backgrounds attend the Chinese philosophy class together. In that case, a balanced approach that combines the two above approaches is suggested. These types of teaching I have used in the Free Study of Sinology at the University of Zagreb.

The article provides a philosophical interpretation of the practice of “contemplating mental activity” ( guanxin 觀心) in sixth-century Chinese Tiantai Buddhism and explains its relevance to the development of East Asian Buddhism in general. As the title suggests, the topic is about the philosophical question of the nonduality of representational and paradoxical thinking. According to Tiantai, representational thinking creates empty constructs; deconstruction reveals the unreal but does not eliminate it. Paradoxically, deconstructive contemplation recognizes that nothing real can be found in linguistic representations and therefore no “language” can be erased. From Tiantai’s soteriological perspective, the mind’s self-induced deceptions are inevitable but retain an instructive quality that must be disclosed by “contemplating the mind”. The perfection of contemplation can be achieved through the realization that construction can become deconstruction, just as deconstruction brings construction, as manifested in the textual transmission of Buddhist doctrine (Buddhadharma).

This paper examines the problems of studying and teaching early medieval philosophy in the framework of the three teachings, illustrated with examples from the writings of the 7th-century Daoist Cheng Xuanying. While in early medieval and medieval China the three teachings were institutionalized as separate entities, we find ideas and terminologies from all three teachings in Cheng Xuanying’s writings, like in other early medieval texts. This liberal use of ideas from all three teachings poses challenges to our teaching and understanding of medieval texts. I will address the issue with an image of labels and boxes, which allows me to illustrate the problems in our understanding and treatment of the three teachings and their interactions. I will also show how the same image of labels and boxes offers a constructive solution for engaging with medieval texts in the framework of the three teachings. 1

This essay attempts to show that the thesis of the absolute primacy of language over writing cannot be taken for granted in the Chinese context. Mainstream linguistics gives absolute priority to spoken language over written language. One of Humboldt’s key observations about the Chinese language is that, compared to Indo-European languages, its phonological system is relatively weak. To compensate for this “phonic poverty,” he noted that the Chinese language has developed the feature of “analogy of script” over millennia, using visual components in the “combination” and “derivation” of meaning. As a result, the Chinese script is not merely a “script of words” (Schrift der Worte) but also a “script of thoughts” (Gedankenschrift). Humboldt emphasizes this uniqueness by suggesting that the Chinese script has “embraced philosophical work within itself,” and that Chinese writing has evolved into an “inherent component” of the language. To understand Humboldt’s perspective, this paper first discusses the “ Lishu -transformation” (隸變), a crucial phase in the evolution of Chinese writing from its archaic styles to lishu (隸書), the classical forms we may easily recognize today. During this transformational process, many cognitive components of the original scripts have become blurred and distorted. Consequently, modern script forms often lack the clarity needed for accurate etymological analysis. This explains why, in our attempt to recover the cognitive content of the characters, we should not rely solely on the so-called “radicals” (部首), which result from the Lishu -transformation, but should supplement these “radicals” with “components” (部件), which reflect the original structure of the script. With this in mind, this paper examines a series of Chinese characters that are “abstract” to varying degrees, to see how they acquire their abstract meanings, which arguably consummate the richness of the Chinese world of meaning.

Vorbemerkung Die Mainstream Linguistik räumt der Sprache einen absoluten Vorrang gegenüber der Schrift ein. Diese Vorlesung versucht zu zeigen, dass im chinesischen Kontext diese These nicht als selbstverständlich angesehen werden kann. Wilhelm von Humboldt bemerkte zum Beispiel einmal, dass die chinesische Schrift über Jahrtausende hinweg zu einem „inhärenten Bestandteil“ der chinesischen Sprache entwickelt worden sei. Neben Humboldt werden in den Vorlesungen die Arbeiten der Linguisten Saussure, Jakobson, Benveniste und Chomsky sowie die der Philosophen Husserl, Heidegger und Merleau-Ponty aufgegriffen, damit die Thematik sprachwissenschaftlich wie auch philosophisch diskutiert wird.