Abstract
In this present paper, I give attention to paradigm shifts having to do with the study of Chinese philosophy in the West. I first describe the original exclusionist paradigm for studying Chinese philosophy. This paradigm treated Chinese thought as not real or true philosophy and marginalized Chinese texts and thinkers excluding them from the discipline and activity of Western philosophy itself. Next, I turn to a substantial shift away from the exclusionist model and toward the comparative philosophy paradigm. A new generation of scholars did not assume the superiority of Western philosophy, but actively engaged Chinese philosophy as a corrective to Western traditions and as a viable content for dealing with philosophy’s fundamental questions. Finally, I conclude by describing an emerging third paradigm which I call constructionist philosophy. I argue that this third paradigm is not directed toward some new theory that unlocks all the riddles or solves all the quandaries arising from comparative philosophical work. Instead, the goal is to create a different sort of philosopher. These new philosophers bend language and culture and draw richly from both Chinese and Western philosophical traditions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Allinson, R. (2001). The myth of comparative philosophy or the comparative philosophy malgre lui. In B. Mou (Ed.), Two roads to wisdom? Chinese and analytic philosophical traditions (pp. 269–292). La Salle: Open Court.
Ames, R. (2011). Confucian role ethics. Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.
Balfour, F. (1975 [1894]). Taoist texts: Ethical, political and speculative. New York: Gordon Press.
Balslev, A. (1997). Philosophy and cross-cultural conversation: Some comments on the project of comparative philosophy. Metaphilosophy 28(4), 270–359.
Behuniak, J. (Ed.). (2019). Appreciating the Chinese difference: Engaging Roger T. Ames on methods, issues, and roles. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Carr, K. and Ivanhoe, P. (2010). The sense of anti-rationalism: The religious thought of Zhuangzi and Kierkegaard. Charleston: CreateSpace.
Clarke, J. (2000). The Tao of the west: Western transformations of Taoist thought. London: Routledge.
Cleary, S. (2016). Chinese philosophy in the English-speaking world: Interview with Bryan Van Norden. Blog of the American Philosophical Association. http://blog.apaonline.org/2016/05/17/chinese-philosophy-in-the-english-speaking-world-interview-with-bryan-van-norden/.
Cline, E. (2013). Confucius, rawls, and the sense of justice. New York: Fordham University Press.
Collie, D. (Trans.). (1828). The Chinese classical work commonly called the four books. Malacca: Mission Press.
Connolly, T. (2015). Doing philosophy comparatively. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection. London: John Murray.
De Groot, J. (1892). The religious system of China, its ancient forms, evolution, history and present aspect. Manners, customs and social institutions connected therewith. Vol. 1, Book 1, Part 1. Funeral Rites. Leiden: Brill.
Faber, E. (Trans.). (1877). Die Grundgedanken des alten chinesischen Socialismus, oder die Lehre des Philosophen Micius, zum ersten Male vollstandig aus den Quellen dargelegt. Elberfeld: R. L. Friderichs.
Fingarette, H. (1972). Confucius: The secular as sacred. New York: Harper.
Forke, A. (1922). Me ti des Sozialethikers und seiner Schuler philosophische Werke. Berlin: Kommissionsverlag der Vereinigung Wissenschaftlicher Verleger.
Garfield, J. and Van Norden, B. (2016). If philosophy won’t diversity, let’s call it what it really is. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/11/opinion/if-philosophy-wont-diversify-lets-call-it-what-it-really-is.html.
Giles, H. (1889). Chuang Tzu: Mystic, moralist and social reformer. London: Bernard Quaritch.
Graham, A. (1989). Disputers of the Tao: Philosophical argument in ancient China. LaSalle: Open Court.
Hall, D. and Ames, R. (1995). Anticipating China: Thinking through the narratives of Chinese and Western culture. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Hall, D. and Ames, R. (1998). Thinking from the Han: Self, truth, and transcendence in Chinese and Western culture. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Harper, E. (2019). The early modern European (non)reception of the Zhuangzi text. Journal of East-West Thought 9(4), 23–37.
Hegel, G.W.F. (1996 [1892]). Lectures on the history of philosophy. E. Haldane (Trans.). New York: Humanities Press.
Huang, Y. (Ed.). (2020). Michael Slote encountering Chinese philosophy: A cross-cultural approach to ethics and moral philosophy. London: Bloomsbury Press.
Ivanhoe, P. (2002). Whose Confucius? Which Analects? In B. Van Norden (Ed.), Confucius and the Analects: New essays (pp. 119–134). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ivanhoe, P. (2012). Understanding traditional Chinese philosophical texts. International Philosophical Quarterly 52(3), 303–314,
Ivanhoe, P., Flanagan, O., Harrison, V., Sarkissian, H. and Schwitzgebel, E. (Eds.). (2018). The oneness hypothesis: Beyond the boundary of the self. New York: Columbia University Press.
Johnston, I. (Trans.). (2010). The Mozi: A complete translation. New York: Columbia University Press.
King, R. and Schilling, D. (Eds.). (2011). How shall one live? Comparing ethics in ancient China and Greco-Roman antiquity. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Kirkland, R. (2008). Hermeneutics and pedagogy: Methodological issues in teaching the Daode jing. In G. DeAngelis and W. Frisina (Eds.), Teaching the Daode jing. New York: Oxford University Press.
Komjathy, L. (2003). Daoist texts in translation. Centre for Daoist Studies website. www.daoistcenter.org/advanced.html.
Krishna, D. (1988). Comparative philosophy: What it is and what it ought to be. In G. Larson (Ed.), Interpreting across boundaries: New essays in comparative philosophy (pp. 71–83). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kupperman, J. (2002). The purposes and functions of comparative philosophy. APA Newsletter on Asian and Asian-American Philosophers and Philosophies 2, 26–29.
Lach, D. (1965). Asia in the making of Europe. Vol. 1. The age of discovery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Larson, G. and Deutsch, E. (Eds.). (1988). Interpreting across boundaries: New essays in comparative philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Legge, J. (Trans.). (1861a). The Chinese classics, the works of Mencius. Oxford: Clarendon.
Legge, J. (Trans.). (1861b). Confucian analects, the great learning, and the doctrine of the mean. The Chinese classics. London: Trubner.
Legge, J. (Trans.). (1891). The texts of Taoism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Leibniz, G. (1994). Leibniz: Writings on China. D. Cook and H. Rosemont (Trans.). La Salle: Open Court.
Li, Q. (2011). Of golden lilies and gentlewomen: Constructions of Chinese women in early modern European travel narratives. In Q. Li and R. Sachdev (Eds.), Encountering China: Early modern European responses (pp. 49–74). Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press.
Li, Q. and Littlejohn, R. (2021). Chinese and western philosophy in dialogue. Educational Philosophy and Theory 53(1), 10–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2019.1701386.
Littlejohn, R. (2018). On what it means to “let a text speak for itself”: Philosophizing with classical Chinese texts. In S. Tan (Ed.), The Bloomsbury research handbook of Chinese philosophy methodologies (pp. 75–91). London: Bloomsbury.
MacIntyre, A. (1984). After virtue. Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press.
MacIntyre, A. (1988). Whose justice? Which rationality? Notre Dame: Notre Dame Press.
Makeham, J. (2004). Transmitters and creators: Chinese commentators and commentaries on the analects. Cambridge: Harvard University Asia Center.
Makeham, J. (2006). A new hermeneutical approach to the early Chinese texts: The case of the Analects. In C. Cheng and L. Pfister (Eds.), Hermeneutical thinking in Chinese philosophy (pp. 95–109). Oxford: Blackwell.
Marshman, J. (Trans.). (1809). The works of Confucius: Containing the original text, with a translation. Serampore: Mission Press.
McArdle, M. (2016). NYT Op-ed: Supremacy of western philosophy “hard to justify”. NewsBusters. http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/culture/mairead-mcardle/2016/05/12/nyt-op-ed-supremacy-western-philosophy-hard-justify.
McGarvey, Robert. (2016). There’s a reason western philosophy is dominant. Troy Media. http://www.troymedia.com/2016/05/16/reason-western-philosophy-dominant/.
Mei, Yipao. (Trans.). (1929). The ethical and political works of Motse. London: Probsthain.
Mei, Yipao. (1934). Motse. The neglected rival of Confucius. London: Probsthain.
Meynard, T. (2015). The Jesuit reading of Confucius: The first complete translation of the Lunyu published in the West. Leiden: Brill.
Mou, B. (2010). On constructive-engagement strategy of comparative philosophy: A journal theme introduction. Comparative Philosophy 1(1), 1–32.
Mungello, D. (1977). Leibniz and Confucianism: The search for accord. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Mungello, D. (1979). Some recent studies on the confluence of Chinese and Western intellectual history. Journal of the History of Ideas 40(4), 649–661.
Mungello, D. (1999). The great encounter of China and the West, 1500–1800. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Neville, R. (2001). Two forms of comparative philosophy. Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 1(1), 1–13.
Ni, P. (2006). Traversing the territory of comparative philosophy. Society for Asian and Comparative Philosophy Forum 23, 17–34.
Peone, K. (2016). Yes—Let's call philosophy what it really is. Weekly Standard. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/weekly-standard/yes-lets-call-philosophy-what-it-really-is.
Pfister, L. (2006). Hermeneutics: Philosophical understanding and basic orientations. In C. Cheng and L. Pfister (Eds.), Hermeneutical thinking in Chinese philosophy (pp. 3–23). Oxford: Blackwell.
Pigliucci, M. (2006). On the pseudo-profundity of some Eastern philosophy. Rationally Speaking. https://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.com/2006/05/
Raphals, L. (2015). Body and mind in early China and Greece. Journal of Cognitive Historiography 2(2), 134–182.
Rosemont, H. (1986). Kierkegaard and Confucius: On finding the way. Philosophy East and West 36(3), 201–212.
Rosemont, H. (1991). Rights‐bearing individuals and role‐bearing persons. In M. Bockover (Ed.), Rules, rituals, and responsibility (pp. 71–102). La Salle: Open Court.
Rosemont, H. (2004). Whose democracy? Which rights? A Confucian critique of modern Western liberalism. In K. Shun and D. Wong (Eds.), Confucian ethics: A comparative study of self, autonomy, and community (pp. 49–71). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rosemont, H. (2015). Against individualism: A Confucian rethinking of the foundations of morality, politics, family, and religion. Lanham: Lexington Books.
Shen, V. (2003). Some thoughts on intercultural philosophy and Chinese philosophy. Journal of Chinese Philosophy 30(3–4), 357–372.
Sim, M. (2007). Remastering morals with Aristotle and Confucius. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Slingerland, E. (2014). Trying not to try: Ancient China, modern science, and the power of spontaneity. New York: Broadway Books.
Smid, R. (2009). Methodologies of comparative philosophy: The pragmatist and process traditions. Albany: State University of New York.
Solomon, R. (1995). The cross-cultural comparison of emotion. In J. Marks and R. Ames (Eds.), Emotions in Asian thought (pp. 253–300). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Struhl, K. (2010). No (more) philosophy without cross-cultural philosophy. Philosophy Compass 5(4), 287–295.
Tan, S. (Ed.). (2016). The Bloomsbury research handbook of Chinese philosophy methodologies. London: Bloomsbury Press.
Van Norden, B. (1996a). An open letter to the APA. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 70(2), 161–163.
Van Norden, B. (1996b). What should Western philosophy learn from Chinese philosophy. In P. Ivanhoe (Ed.), Chinese language, thought, and culture: Nivison and his critics. LaSalle: Open Court.
Van Norden, B. (2017). Taking back philosophy: A multicultural manifesto. New York: Columbia University Press.
Von Glasenapp, H. (1954). Kant und die Religionendes Osten. Kitzingen-Main: Holzner Verlag.
Whitehead, A. (1938). Modes of thought. New York: Free Press.
Wittgenstein, L. (1969). On certainty. E. Anscombe and G. vonWright (Eds.), E. Anscombe and D. Paul (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Wong, D. (1989). Three kinds of incommensurability. In M. Krausz (Ed.), Relativism: Interpretation and confrontation (pp. 140–158). Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Wu, Wanwei. (Trans.). (2016). Philosophy, without diversity, is only worthy of being called European and American philosophy. 哲学若无多样性, 只配称为欧美哲学. Aisixiang. http://www.aisixiang.com/data/99575.html.
Yearley, L. (1990). Mencius and Aquinas: Theories of virtue and conceptions of courage. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Littlejohn, R. (2022). Three Paradigms for Studying Chinese Philosophy. In: Hua, S. (eds) Paradigm Shifts in Chinese Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-8032-8_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-8032-8_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-16-8031-1
Online ISBN: 978-981-16-8032-8
eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)