The Need for Solid Theory in Social Studies: Confucianism and Modern Scientific Study - 中欧社会论坛 - China Europa Forum

The Need for Solid Theory in Social Studies: Confucianism and Modern Scientific Study

Authors: Wang Jian

Abstract: Is Confucianism a religion? The controversy surrounding this question developed in two contexts: firstly, during the Rites Controversy under the Ming (1368-1644) and Qin (1644-1911) dynasties, and more recently in the late 1970s as part of the ideological debate led by Ren Jiyu, who considered that Confucianism was indeed a religion. This articles focuses on the second context. Over the 20 years it lasted, Ren’s debate went from being less about ideology and more about scientific and other issues, and attracted increasing attention. Researchers, with differing perspectives and arguments, have yet to reach a conclusion. According to the author, the main points of this debate and the ideological fields it applies to must be clearly defined to reach a beneficial cultural consensus.

Two things are essential: First an examination of modern Chinese culture to determine what ails it. Reconsidering traditional Confucian-based culture is necessary in order to identify a new cultural system that embodies both the national and universal. Indeed, everyone wants to establish a dialogue that can steer different points of view towards consensus. Second, researchers must be aware of the problems at hand and adopt a serious, scientific attitude to avoid dogmatism and build theories based on solid scientific evidence.

The scientific community has already reached a consensus on the first point. However, certain researchers, have - intentionally or not - neglected the second point. This has a negative effect not only on research, but also on contemporary understanding of traditional Confucian principles and Chinese cultural development. For the author, The History of Chinese Confucianism is a typical example of scientific recklessness and theoretical negligence. History and existing literature (The Analects, Book of Rites etc.) would suggest that Confucius’s thoughts are rational, and emphasise respect for ancestors and the social order. This book’s fundamental error is to explain Confucian history in terms of a deity, thus reducing the age-old spiritual history of China to a simple allegory about Gods and Demons, and an account of God-inspired social behaviour, at the expense of China’s unique spiritual heritage.

Page translations: