On the Amphibian Nature of Thought

Abstract

For several days in late January of this year, the Department of Philosophy of Peking University conducted a symposium on some historical problems of Chinese philosophy. Speakers touched on the difficulty of affixing identification labels to Chinese philosophers. Idealism and materialism constitute a basic distinction in philosophy. Confucius is universally recognized as a great philosopher, but does he belong to idealism or materialism? In his Lun-yü [Analects] we can find evidence that he is an idealist, as well as evidence that he is a materialist. The philosophical systems of Wang Ch'ung and Fan Chen are obviously materialistic, but occasionally they reveal their fatalistic thinking. Chu Hsi's Neo-Confucianism is obviously objective idealism, but on the one hand he places principle before material force; on the other hand, however, he also speaks of investigation of things and the application of this knowledge. All philosophies have class origin; idealism is always in the service of the progressive class. There are exceptions in China. It would be difficult to deny that Chu Hsi, Wang Yang-ming, and others like them, barring their idealistic tendencies, are concerned about the people's good. Tung Chung-shu's world view may be considered the most reactionary, but he is also the first to advocate the equal distribution of land. Taoist thought is basically materialistic, but ever since the Han Dynasty the Taoist school has been continuously serving the forces of reaction. From this we can realize that the camps to which Chinese philosophers belong are complex. In the past several years some historians of Chinese philosophy have adopted a simplistic method that labels many philosophers and places them, as it were, in one of two tightly sealed boxes — as if to say that the line between the idealistic and the materialistic groups can be clearly drawn, and that groups of a nonmaterialistic persuasion are of necessity politically reactionary. Ever since the "Let a hundred flowers bloom" period this simplistic method of labeling and boxing has created suspicion and dissatisfaction — a proper reaction to vulgar sociology and dogmatism.