![Sample our Communication Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, 2013 & 2014 volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5927/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Information-Science2.jpg"})
Abstract
In 1923 the emerging Chinese advocates for the development of science successfully launched a war against the so‐called “metaphysical ghosts,” who believed that science was inadequate to address the fundamental questions of human life. An important and far‐reaching spiritual effect of this “holy war” was to give rise to an attitude of religious zealotry toward the worship of science in China, a nation that had not yet experienced the baptism of science in the early twentieth century. This essay explores one profound source of this spiritual appeal by examining the campaign for science in the context of the Chinese tradition of Dao‐discourse and by viewing this campaign as an estimable effort to maintain this sacred form of discourse. This approach has implications for an ignored study of the rhetoric of scientific popularization in a cross‐cultural context.
Notes
Xiaosui Xiao is an Associate Professor of Communication Studies at Hong Kong Baptist University. Correspondence to: Department of Communication Studies, Hong Kong Baptist University, 224 Waterloo Road, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong. Email: [email protected]. The author thanks the editor and reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions. A portion of this paper was presented at the 1998 International Communication Association conference.
T. S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970); S. Toulmin, Human Understanding (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972); R. Merton, The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973); B. Barnes, Scientific Knowledge and Sociological Theory (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1974); B. Barnes, Interests and the Growth of Knowledge (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1977); D. Bloor, Knowledge and Social Imagery (Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1976); B. Latour and S. Woolgar, Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1979); G. Holton, The Scientific Imagination: Case Studies (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978). For an extensive overview of the contributions of these and other philosophers, sociologists, and historians to the rhetorical turn in science studies, see C. A. Taylor, Defining Science: A Rhetoric of Demarcation (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1996), 21–100. For a detailed account of the development of the rhetoric of science, see R. A. Harris, ed., Landmark Essays on Rhetoric of Science: Case Studies (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1997), xi–xlv. For a recent survey of scholarship in the rhetoric of science, starting with Philip Wander's 1976 definition, see also D. Gaonkar, “The Idea of Rhetoric in the Rhetoric of Science,” Southern Communication Journal 58 (1993): 258–95; P. Wander, “The Rhetoric of Science,” Western Speech Communication 40 (1976): 226–35. Harris provides a useful collection of landmark case studies within the field.
L. Prelli, A Rhetoric of Science: Inventing Scientific Discourse (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1989), 122; L. Gross, “On the Shoulders of Giants: Seventeenth‐Century Optics as an Argument Field,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 74 (1988): 1–17; J. Campbell, “Scientific Revolution and the Grammar of Culture,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 72 (1986): 351–76.
Scientific popularization is one of the prominent themes in rhetoric of science. For some important rhetorical studies of scientific popularization, see T. M. Lessl, “Science and the Sacred Cosmos,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 71 (1985): 175–87; G. Myers, “Nineteenth Century Popularizations of Thermodynamics and the Rhetoric of Social Prophecy,” Victorian Studies 29 (1985): 35–66; G. Myers, Writing Biology (Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1990); C. Bazerman, Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science (Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1988); K. Rowan, “Moving Beyond the What to the Why: Differences in Professional and Popular Science Writing,” Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 19 (1989): 161–79; S. Shuttleworth and J. R. Christie, eds., Nature Transfigured: Literature and Science 1700–1800 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1989); J. Lyne, “Bio‐rhetorics: Moralizing the Life Sciences,” in H. W. Simons ed., The Rhetorical Turn: Invention and Persuasion in the Conduct of Inquiry (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990), 35–57; M. W. McRae, ed., The Literature of Science: Perspectives on Popular Scientific Writing (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1993); A. G. Gross, The Rhetoric of Science (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996); J. T. Battalio, The Rhetoric of Science in the Evolution of American Ornithological Discourse (Stanford, CT: Ablex, 1998); L. Ceccarelli, Shaping Science With Rhetoric: The Cases of Dobzhansky, Schrodinger, and Wilson (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001).
E. A. Burtt, The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Science (Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press, 1952; original work published 1924).
See Chan Wing‐tsit, ed. and trans., A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1963); A. Watts, Tao [Dao]: The Watercourse Way (New York: Pantheon, 1975); A. Waley, Three Ways of Thoughts in Ancient China (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1982); A. C. Graham, Disputers of the Tao [Dao]: Philosophical Argument in Ancient China (La Salle, IL: Open Court, 1989).
A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy, 26. Lao Zi traditionally was considered an older contemporary of Confucius; however, scholars have found convincing evidence to suggest that Daode jing was written after Confucius and that Lao Zi probably lived during the fourth century B.C.E. See Fung Yu‐lan, A History of Chinese Philosophy, trans. Derk Bodde, vol. 1 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983).
Zhuang Zi, “Tian Dao,” Zhuang Zi (Changchun: Wenshi, 1993), 250–72; Liu An, “Yuan Dao xun,” Weinan Zi (Beijing: Huaxia, 2000), 1–22; Yang Xiong, “Wen Dao pian,” Fayan (Jinan: Shandong Youyi, 2001), 51–68; Guo Xiang, “Tian Dao zhu,” Zhuan Zi Guo Xiang zhu (Taipei: Xinxin, 1965), 5, 11; Ge Hong, “Dao yi,” Baopu Zi (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1985), 151–67; Wang Tong, “Wang Dao pian,” Zhong shuo, SPPY ed., vol. 354 (Taipei: Zhonghua, 1965), 1–7; Han Yu, “Yuan Dao,” Han Yu xuanji (Shanghai: Guji, 1996), 263–77; Zhang Zai, “Tian Dao pian,” Zhang Zai ji (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1978), 13‐5; Wang Tingxiang, “Dao Ti pian,” Wang Tingxiang ji, vol. 3 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1989), 751–55; Wang Fuzhi, “Tian Dao pian,” Zhang Zi zhengmeng zhu (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1975), 49–59; Jin Yuelin, Lun Dao (Shanghai: Shangwu, 1940); Feng Youlan (also romanized as Fung Yu‐lan), Xin yuan Dao (Chongqing: Shangwu, 1945); Tang Junyi, Yuan Dao pian, 3 vols (Hong Kong: Xinya, 1973).
Zhang Liwen and others, Dao [The Way] (Beijing: Zhongguo Renmin Daxue, 1989), 4–10.
Cited in A. F. Wright, “The Chinese Language and Foreign Ideas,” in Studies in Chinese Thought, ed. A. F. Wright (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1953), 268–303; cited material, 302, n. 8.
See, for example, Chen Shaoming, Shan Shilian, and Zhang Yongyi, Bei jieshi de chuantong: Jiandai xixiangshi xinlun [An Interpretation of Tradition: A New Approach to the Modern History of Thought] (Guangzhou: Zhongshan, 1995); Liu Dachun and Wu Xianghong, Xinxue kulu: Kexue, shehui, wenhua de dazhuangji [A Painful Journey to New Learning: A Clash Among Science, Society, and Culture] (Nanchang: Jiangxi Gaoxiao, 1995); D. W. Y Kwok, Scientism in Chinese Thought 1900–1950 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1965).
Zhang Junmai, “Renshengguan [A View of Life],” in Kexue yu renshengguan [Science and a View of Life, hereafter KYR], ed. Zhang Junmai and Ding Wenjiang (Shanghai: Yadong, 1923; original work published in Qinghua Zhoukan, February 1923), 1–13 (4–9). For translation, see C. Furth, Ting Wen‐chiang [Ding Wenjiang]: Science and China's New Culture (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1970), 100.
Ding Wenjiang, “Xuanxue yu kexue [Metaphysics and Science],” in KYR (original work published in Nuli Zhoubao, April 1923), 1–30.
At the end of 1923, the bulk of the voluminous literature of the debate was collected into Kexue yu renshengguan [Science and a View of Life; KYR]. The collection, over 250,000 words, is the main source of my study. This collection is noteworthy because its compilers adopted an approach fashionable in earlier times in China and simply collected the relevant articles from the original sources and reprinted them without repagination.
Hu Shi, “Yinianban de huigu [A Review of the Past One and a Half Years],” in Hu Shi wencun, vol. 2, ed. Huangshan Publishing House (Hefei: Huangshan, 1996; original work published 1923), 359–64 (pp. 362–3).
Ding, “Xuanxue yu kexue,” 1.
Li Zehou, “Ji Zhongguo xiandai shanci xueshu lunzhan [On the Three Intellectual Debates in Modern China],” in Zhongguo xiandai sixiangshi lun, rev. ed. (Taipei: Fengyun, 1990), 55–103 (p. 65).
L. Laudan, “The Demise of the Demarcation Problem,” in But Is It Science?, ed. Michael Ruse (New York: Prometheus Books, 1996), 337–50 (p. 342).
Chen Duxiu, “Benzhi zuian zhi dapian shu [A Reply to the Charges Against Our Journal],” in Chen Duxiu zhuzuo xuan, vol. 1, ed. Ren Jianshu, Zhang Tongmo, and Wu Xinzhong (Shanghai: Renmin, 1991; original work published 1919), 442–43 (p. 443).
See, for example, Lin Yu‐sheng, “Minchu ‘kexue zhuyi’ de xingqi yu hanu [The Rise of Scientism and Its Meaning in the Early Days of the Republic of China],” in Zhongguo chuantong de chuangzaoxing zhuanhua, ed. Lin Yu‐sheng (Beijing: Sanlian, 1988), 264–8; Yan Bofei, “Lun ‘Wusi’ shiqi zhongguo de zhishi fenzi dui kexue de lijie [On the Chinese Intellectuals' Conceptions of Science in the May Fourth Era],” in Wusi: duoyuan de fansi, ed. Lin Yu‐sheng (Hong Kong: Sanlian, 1989), 198–214.
Li, “Ji Zhongguo,” 65.
Kwok, Scientism in Chinese Thought, 159.
Hu Shi, “Preface,” in KYR, 1–33 (p. 2).
Daode jing (also Tao Te Ching, Chinese classical text), in A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy, ed. Chan Wing‐tsit, trans. Chan Wing‐tsit (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1963), 139–76 (pp. 146, 150).
Kuan‐tzu [The Book of Master Guan; Chinese classical text], trans. W. Allyn Rickett (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1965), 168.
The I Ching or Book of Changes (Chinese classical text), trans. Cary F. Baynes, 3rd ed. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977), 138, 546.
Cited in Fung Yu‐lan, A History of Chinese Philosophy, vol. 2, 542–3.
Wang Fuzhi (also romanised as Wang Fu‐chih, 1619–1692), great Confucian philosopher of the seventeenth century, is representative of this view. See A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy, 694–6.
For example, Wang Fuzhi, Zhangzi zhengmeng chu [Commentary on Master Zhang's Correcting Youthful Ignorance] (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1975; revision of the 1865 ed.), 1–28. See also I. McMorran, “Wang Fu‐chih [Wang Fuzhi] and the Neo‐Confucian Tradition,” in The Unfolding of Neo‐Confucianism, ed. Wm. Theodore de Bary (New York: Columbia University Press, 1975), 432–50 (p. 438). For a historical account of the rise of empirical scholarship (kaozheng) as a dominant form of Confucian discourse in the seventeenth and the eighteenth centuries, see B. A. Elman, From Philosophy to Philology: Intellectual and Social Aspects of Change in Late Imperial China (Cambridge: Council on East Asian Studies, Harvard University, 1984), 37–85.
Note, for example, the following famous sayings of Liu Zongzhou (also romanized as Liu Tsung‐chou, 1578–1645), Huang Zongxi (also Huang Tsung‐hsi, 1610–95), and Dai Zhen (also Tai Chen, 1723–1777): “Everything in the universe is filled by a single Ether [Qi]…. Heaven, by obtaining it, thereby becomes Heaven; Earth, by obtaining it, thereby becomes Earth” “In the great process of evolutionary change there is only the single Ether [Qi], which circulates everywhere without interruption” “Tao [Dao] is like ‘movement’. The evolutionary operations of the Ether produce and reproduce without pause. That is why this process is called the Dao.” Cited in Fung, A History of Chinese Philosophy, vol. 2, 640–53. Compare the neo‐Confucian Zhu Xi, who said: “There is only one principle [Li] in the universe. Heaven receives it to become Heaven, Earth receives it to become Earth, and all those born in the universe receive it to become their nature…. The evolutionary operation of principle is omnipresent.” Zhu Xi, “Du daji [On Reading ‘Great Principle of the Universe’],” in Zhuzi daquan, vol. 70, ed. Gao Shixian and Wu Rulin (Taipei: Zhonghua, 1985; reprinted from the 1532 ed.), 5b–7a (p. 5b).
Wei Yuan (1794–1856), a compelling speaker of the School of Practical Statecraft, made it explicit: “In all ages there is wealth and power without the kingly Way, but there is no kingly Way without wealth and power.” Wei Yuan, Mogu [A Silent Beaker], in Wei Yuan ji, vol. 1, ed. Wei Yuan's Works Editorial Board (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1976; revision of the 1878 edition), 1–81 (p. 36).
Professional statecraft and the institutional approach received early emphasis in the eighty‐volume Huangchao jingshi wenpian [Compilation of Qing Essays on Statecraft]. The essays selected cover a variety of technical subjects such as the salt gabelle, grain transport, canal shipment, water control, military system, maritime defense, and the like. See He Zhangling and Wei Yuan, eds., Huangchao jingshi wenpian [Compilation of Qing Essays on Statecraft], in Jindai Zhongguo shiliao congkan, vol. 731, ed. Yunlong Shen (Taipei: Yunha, 1966; original work published 1826–1827).
Zhang Zhidong, “Preface to Quanxue lun [Exhortation to Learning],” in Zhang Wenranggong chuanji [Collected Works of Duke Zhang], vol. 5, ed. Wang Shunan (Taipei: Wenhai, 1980; original work published 1898), 14433. For a somewhat dated translation, see Zhang Zhidong, China's Only Hope: An Appeal, trans. Samuel I. Woodbridge (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1900), 21–5.
Xiao Xiaosui, “China Encounters Darwinism: A Case of Intercultural Rhetoric,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 81 (1995): 83–99.
Xiao Xiaosui, “From the Hierarchical Ren to Egalitarianism: A Case of Cross‐cultural Rhetorical Mediation,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 82 (1996): 38–54.
For a general review of the rising sentiment of scientism in China of the early twentieth century, see Kwok, Scientism in Chinese Thought, 1–30.
Liang Qichao, You ou xinying lu [Reflections on a Trip to Europe] (Hong Kong: Shanda, 1964; original work published 1920), 17–22. The translation is basically Kwok's, see Kwok, Scientism in Chinese Thought, 137.
Zhang, “Renshengguan,” 8. Throughout this essay, the translation of cited Chinese texts into English is mine unless otherwise noted.
Zhang Junmai, “Zai lun renshengguan yu kexue bing da Ding Zaizhun [Further Discussion of a View of Life and Science, With a Reply to Ding Wenjiang],” in KYR, 1–98 (pp. 89, 92). Here Zhang made an allusion to one of the most profound teachings of the sage kings: “The human mind is precarious. The moral mind is subtle. Have absolute refinement and singleness of mind. ‘Hold fast the Mean’.” Shu jing [Book of history; Chinese classical text] (Shanghai: Guji, 1990; reprinted from the 1867 ed.), 53. According to Zhu Xi, the profound meaning of this famous saying constitutes the core of the learning of the Dao. “This is what Shun transmitted to Yu…. Since their time, one sage after another has handed down the tradition [of the Dao].” Zhu Xi, “Zhongyong zhangju xu [Preface to the Commentary on the Doctrine of the Mean],” in Zhuzi daquan, vol. 76 (Taipei: Zhonghua, 1985; reprinted from the 1532 ed.), 21b–23b (p. 21b); cf. Chan Wing‐tsit, Chu Hsi [Zhu Xi]: New Studies (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1989), 321.
Zhang, “Zai lun renshengguan,” 35, 19, 20, 22, 24.
Ding, “Xuanxue yu kexue,” 1. Translation from Kwok, Scientism in Chinese Thought, 143.
Wu Zhihui, “Yige xin xinyang de yuzhouguan ji renshengguan [A New Belief and Its View of Life and the Universe],” in KYR, 1–165 (pp. 22–34); Hu, “Preface,” 18–21.
Wu, “Yige xin xihyang,” 27–8. Cf. E. J. Urwick, “Note to the Second Edition,” A Philosophy of Social Progress (London: Methuen and Co., 1920), vi.
Wu, “Yige xin yang,” 27–8.
Hu, “Preface,” 23.
Wu, “Yige xin xinyang,” 35. Translation based on Furth, Ting Wen‐chiang, 120.
Wu, “Yige xin yang,” 101–3. Other defenders of science took a similar view. See particularly Ding, “Xuanxue yu kexue,” 14–5; “Xuanxue yu kexue, da Zhang Junmai [Metaphysics and Science, With a Reply to Zhang Junmai],” in KYR, 1–49 (pp. 40–2); Tang Yue, “Yige yiren de shuomeng [Dream‐talks of a Derelict: Is Sentiment Above Science?],” in KYR, 1–10; Wang Xinggong, “Kexue yu renshengguan [Science and a View of Life],” in KYR, 1–18 (pp. 14–5). For their opponents' views on intuition, see Zhang, “Renshengguan,” 5–6; “Zai lun renshengguan,” 31–9; Fan Shoukang, “Ping suowei ‘kexue yu xuanxue zhizheng’ [A Critique of the So‐called ‘Debate on Science and Metaphysics’],” in KYR, 1–24 (p. 17).
Wu, “Yige xin yeng,” 31. Wu's words on the weight of the brain and the number of cranial nerves were hypothetical.
Wu, “Yige xin yeng,” 32.
Wu, “Yige xin yeng,” 7–9, 40. Cf. Daode jing, ed. Chan Wing‐tsit, chap. 5.
Wu, “Yige xin yeng,” 7–12, 10–12.
Wu, “Yige xin yeng,” 14–23.
Ren Hongjun, “Renshengguan de kexue huo kexue de renshengguan [A Science of the View of Life or a Scientific View of Life],” in KYR, 1–10 (p. 7); Hu, “Preface,” 28; Wang, “Kexue yu renshengguan,” 16.
Ding, “Xuanxue yu kexue,” 3, 20; “Xuanxue yu kexue, da Zhang,” 12. According to Ding, “The omnipotence of science … lies not in its subject matter, but in its method” (p. 20).
For other related accounts of the scientific method, see Wang, “Kexue yu renshengguan,” 4–10; Tang Yue, “Kexue de fanwei [The Scope of Science],” in KYR, 1–8 (p. 2), Ren, “Renshengguan,” 7–8. For a comment on Ding's insensitivity to the theoretical side of science, see Furth, Ting Wen‐chiang, 111–2.
Ding, “Xuanxue yu kexue,” 27.
Ren, “Renshengguan,” 6.
Tang, “Yige yiren,” 3; cf. Liang Qichao, “Renshengguan yu kexue [A View of Life and Science],” in KYR, 1–14 (pp. 8–9). Although Liang Qichao, who was responsible for the prelude to the debate, tried to mediate between the two parties, he insisted that human sentiments, especially the sense of beauty and love, could not be analyzed scientifically (pp. 8–9).
Tang, “Yige yiren,” 3.
Tang, “Yige yiren,” 6–9; cf. Liang, “Renshengguan,” 9.
Wang, “Kexue yu renshengguan,” 11–3.
See in particular Zhang, “Zai lun renshengguan,” 50, 59–60.
Ding, “Xuanxue yu kexue, da Zhang,” 14.
Zhu Jingnong, “Du Zhang Junmai lun renshengguan yu kexue de liangpian wenzhang hou suo fasheng de yiwen [Some Questions After Reading Zhang Junmai's Two Essays on a View of Life and Science],” in KYR, 1–8 (pp. 2–4).
Ding, “Xuanxue yu kexue, da Zhang,” 11–2.
Ren, “Renshengguan,” 8.
Hu, “Preface,” 13–4.
Ding, “Xuanxue yu kexue,” 13.
Wu, “Yige xin xinyang,” 35.
Tang, “Yige yiren,” 5–10.
Wu, “Yige xin xinyang,” 150–1.
Ding, “Xuanxue yu kexue,” 21. Based on the translation by Kwok, Scientism in Chinese Thought, 147.
See Hu Shi, Ding Wenjiang zhuan [Biography of Ding Wenjiang] (Haikou: Hainan, 1993), 71–2; also see Zhang, “Zai lun renshengguan,” 117; Lin Zaiping, “Du Ding Zaizhun de Xuanxue yu Kexue [Having Read Ding Wenjiang's ‘Metaphysics and Science’],” in KYR, 1–40 (pp. 32, 36). According to Hu (pp. 71–2), Ding regarded this passage as the most interesting part of his “Xuanxue yu kexue” [Metaphysics and a Science]. Zhang Junmai and his sympathizer Lin Zaiping also cited this passage and believed that it represented one of the key arguments made by the pro‐science group. Zhang, “Zai lun renshengguan,” 117; Lin, “Du Ding Zaizhun,” 232, 236.
Ren, “Renshengguan,” 6.
Isaac Newton, quoted in S. D. Brewster, Memoirs of the Life, Writings, and Discoveries of Sir Isaac Newton (New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1965; original work published 1855), 407.
The present version is my own translation. Ren cited Joseph J. Thomson's words in the Chinese language without indicating the source. The English version must appear somewhere before 1923 when Ren quoted it. To date I have been unable to locate the source, but I have found that the idea expressed in the quotation was a recurrent theme of Thomson's writings, where he had repeatedly expressed similar ideas on later occasions. For instance, “[I]t is the charm of Physics that there are no hard and fast boundaries, that each discovery is not a terminus but an avenue leading to country as yet unexplored, and that however long the science may exist there will still be an abundance of unsolved problems and no danger of unemployment for physicists.” J. J. Thomson, Beyond the Electron (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1928), 9. “A great discovery is not a terminus, but an avenue leading to regions hitherto unknown. We climb to the top of the peak, and find that it reveals to us another higher than any we have yet seen and so it goes on.” Quoted in G. P. Thomson, J. J. Thomson: Discoverer of the Electron (Garden City, New York: Anchor Books, 1966), 198. The author George Thomson footnoted the origin of this quote as follows: “Listener, January 29, 1930.”
Wu, “Yige xin xinyang,” 29–30, 100, 14.
Ding, “Xuanxue yu kexue, da Zhang,” 30–5; cf. Zhu, “Du Zhang Junmai,” 5–8; Tang Yue, “Xinli xianxiang yu yinguolu [Psychological Phenomena and the Laws of Causation],” in KYR, 1–15 (12–3); Hu, “Preface,” 22–3.
Tang Yue, “Du le ‘Ping suowei Kexue yu Xuanxue zhi Zheng’ yihou [Having Read ‘Critique of the So‐called Debate on Science and Metaphysics’],” in KYR, 1–10 (p. 9); cf. Wu, “Yige xin xinyang,” 161; Ding, “Xuanxue yu kexue, da Zhang,” 31; and Hu, “Preface,” 27. This dynamic view of the self was first discussed in Hu Shi's widely read essay entitled “Buxiu, wo de zongjiao [Immortality, My Religion],” in Hu Shi xuanji, ed. Ming Hu (Tianjin: Renmin, 1991; original work published 1919), 68–77.
Wu, “Yige xin xinyang,” 161; Hu, “Preface,” 27.
Hu, “Preface,” 27.
Tang, “Du le,” 9.
Wu, “Yige xin xinyang,” 47–9; cf. 91, 145.
Ren, “Renshengguan,” 6–7.
Wu, “Yige xin xinyang,” 137.
Ding, “Xuanxue yu kexue, da Zhang,” 38; cf. Hu, “Preface,” 27. Ding (p. 38) defined religion as the “natural impulse” to sacrifice the self in the interest of the entire human race.
Ding, “Xuanxue yu kexue, da Zhang,” 39–40.
Wu, “Yige xin xinyang,” 23–4.
Ding, “Xuanxue yu kexue,” 1, 4, 16. One participant in the debate noted the overweening tone in these statements and said they read like “the clamor of a punitive expedition.” Lin, “Du Ding Zizhun,” 3–4.
Wu, “Yige xin xinyang,” 7–12.
J. Campbell, “Scientific Revolution” L. Gross, “On the Shoulders of Giants.”
L. Prelli, “A Rhetoric of Science.”
For example, Chen Duxiu, “Da Shizhi [A Reply to Hu Shi],” in KYR, 33–42; “Preface,” in KYR, 1–11; Deng Zhongxia, “Zhongguo xianzai de sixiang jie [The Current Tendencies of Chinese Intellectuals],” Zhongguo Qinnian 6 (November 1923): 2–6; Qu Qiubai, “Ziyou shijie yu biran shijie [The World of Freedom and the World of Necessity],” in Qu Qiubai wenji, political theory ed., vol. 2, ed. Qu Qiubai's Works Editorial Board (Beijing: Renmin, 1988; original work published in Xin Qinnian Jikan, December 1923), 294–309.
Chen, “Preface” “Ch'en Tu‐hsiu's [Chen Duxiu's] Argument for Historical Materialism, 1923,” in China's Response to the West: A Documentary Survey, 1839–1923, ed. Ssu‐yu Teng and John K. Fairbank (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979), 249–51.
Chen, “Da Shizhi,” 33–42; “Preface,” 1–11.
Chen, “Da Shizhi,” 34–5.
Hu Shi, “Duo yenjiu xie wenti, shao tan xie zhuyi [Study More Problems, Talk Less of ‘Isms’],” in Hu Shi xuanji (Original work published 1919), 93–7 (p. 97).
Chen, “Da Shizhi,” 36–7; “Da Zhang Junmai ji Liang Rengong [A Reply to Zhang Junmai and Liang Qichao],” in Chen Duxiu zhuzuo xuan, vol. 2, ed. Ren Jianshu, Zhang Tongmo, and Wu Xinzhong (Shanghai: Renmin, 1991; original work published in Xin Qinnian Jikan, August 1924), 685–96.
Liu Shao‐chi [Liu Shaoqi], On the Party, 5th ed., vol. 1 (Beijing: Foreign Languages Press, 1954), 9. This cited work was originally Report on the Revision of the Party Constitution delivered by the author in May 1945 to the Seventh Congress of the Communist Party of China. The author was then Mao's political associate. This report is credited with providing by then the most “scientific” account of the scientific character and superiority of Mao Zedong thought. According to Liu, “[Mao Zedong thought] has been formulated through the application of the Marxist world outlook and social outlook—dialectical materialism and historical materialism. In other words, it has been formulated on the solid foundation of Marxist‐Leninist theories, by taking into account China's national traits, by profiting from the exceedingly rich experiences of modern revolutions and those of the Chinese Communist Party in directing the revolutionary struggle of the Chinese people, and by making a careful and scientific analysis of such experiences. It is the theory and policy for achieving the emancipation of the Chinese nation and people. It has been developed on the basis of the interests of the proletariat and consequently the interests of the entire people, by applying the scientific method of Marxism‐Leninism and by synthesizing China's history, social conditions, and all her revolutionary experiences. It is the only correct theory and policy to guide the proletariat and all the working people of China in their fight for emancipation” (p. 32).
Ma Wanxiang, “Ren ting Mao Zhuxi de hua, luzi jiuting ren de hua,” Liangning Ribao (28 January 1966); Zhou Dazhi, “Wo ting Mao Zhuxi de hua, mianhua jiuting wo de hua,” Hunan Ribao (27 January 1966); Bao Sien, “Mao Zedong sixiang shi wanling de jinyaoshi,” Zhejiang Ribao (4 June 1966); Li Suqing, “Mao Zhuxi de shu yong dao nali nali ling,” Shanxi Ribao (30 May 1966); Zhao Yulin, “Mao Zedong sixiang gei le wo wuqiongwujin de liliang,” Yejin Bao (4 June 1966); Wu Zirong et al., “Shei zhangwo Mao Zedong Sixiang shei jiushi zhenzheng quanwei,” Shanxi Ribao (28 May 1966); Yu Donghai, “Huoxuehuoyong Mao Zhuxi zhuzuo jiuneng gongwubuke zhanwubusheng,” Jilin Ribao (10 July 1966).
For example, Editorial Board, “Zai Mao Zedong sixiang de daolu shang shengli qianjin [Successfully March on the Road of Mao Zedong Thought],” Hongqi 11 (August 1966): 19–21; Editorial Board, “Zai Mao Zedong sixiang de dadao shang qianjin [March on the Broad Road of Mao Zedong Thought],” Hongqi 13 (October 1966): 4–6; Editorial Board, “Yanzhuo Mao zhuxi kaipi de geming hangdao qianjin [Forge Valiantly Ahead and Keep to the Channel Opened up by Chairman Mao],” Jiefangjun Bao (26 July 1966); Zou Guozhen, “Huoxuehuoyong Mao zhuxi zhuzuo, yanzhuo geminghua dadao qianjin [Creatively Study and Apply the Doctrines of Chairman Mao, and March Along the Broad Road of Revolution],” Dagong Bao (10 August 1966); Wang Xiulan, “Mao zhuxi zhuzuo zhiyin wo zoushang geming dadao [The Works of Chairman Mao Show Me the Way of Revolution],” Ningxia Ribao (6 August 1966).
Xing Bisi, “Zhexue de qimeng he qimeng de zhexue [The Enlightenment of Philosophy and Philosophical Enlightenment],” Renmin Ribao (22 July 1978): 5. For critical discussion of this view, see V. Schwarcz, The Chinese Enlightenment: Intellectuals and the Legacy of the May Fourth Movement of 1919 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986), 298–9.
Zhou Yang, “San ci weida de sixiang jiefang yundong [Three Major Thought Emancipation Movements],” Guangming Ribao (8 May 1979), 3. Zhou Yang was propaganda chief of the Chinese Communist Party before the Cultural Revolution (1966–1976).
For some important collections of these critical inquiries, see Feng Chi and Wang Yafu, eds., Wusi fansi [The Reflection on “May Fourth”] (Shanghai: Huadong Shifan Daxue, 1989); Lin Yu‐sheng, ed., Wusi: Duoyuan de fansi [The May Fourth Movement: Pluralistic Reflections] (Hong Kong: Sanlian, 1989); Tang Yujie, ed., Lun chuantong yu fanchuantong [On Tradition and Anti‐Tradition] (Taipei: Lianjing, 1989); Ju Xi, Zhongguo de kexue jingshen [The Chinese Spirit of Science] (Chengdu: Sichuan Renmin, 2000).
For example, Guo Luoji, “Sixiang yao jiefang, lilun yao chedi [Liberate Our Thinking and Have a Thorough Understanding of Theory],” Hongqi 3 (March 1979): 33–41; Ma Zhongyang, “Kang Sheng de ‘fazhan lun’ yu xiandai mixin [Kang Sheng's ‘Developmental Theory’ and Modern Superstition],” Hongqi 18 (September 1980): 23–27; Zhao Ziyang, “Zai jianshe he gaige de xinshidai jinyibu fayang wusi jingshen [Carry Forward the May Fourth Spirit in the New Age of Construction and Reform],” Qiushi 10 (May 1989): 2–5; He Zuoma, “Gaoju kexue qizhi, hongyang kexue jingshen [Hold High the Banner of Science, Carry Forward the Spirit of Science],” Qiushi 9 (May 1999): 5–9. See also Xing, “Zhexue de qimeng” Lin, Wusi; Feng and Wang, Wusi fansi; Tang, Lun chuantong.