requestId:68518652a614c3.55937026.
The “Energy Humanistic Issue” Parliament
Author: Huang Yushu
Source: The author authorized by Confucianism. Originally published by “Academic World” No. 3, 2023
[Summary] Teacher Du Weiming, Professor Du Weiming, has proposed the concept of “Energy Humanistic Issue” in recent years. The “energy” or “energy” here is not simply relative to “materiality” or “materiality”. In its statement, what is opposite to the “spiritual humanistic theory” are these two existing humanistic ideas: one is “inner humanistic theory”, that is, “materialism”; the other is “moral humanistic theory”, that is, “scientificism”, which actually refers to the sensualism of the sensual meaning of things. In other words, the humanistic spirit of energy has these two levels of thinking: one is the inner nature of energy and the inner nature of matter; the other is the mundane nature of energy beyond sexuality and sensibility. The concept of “energy humanistic” is very innovative on the one hand, but on the other hand, it also leaves many questions that can be discussed.
[Keyword] Du Weiming; Energy Humanism; Peaceful Discussion
[Note] This article is a speech of the Confucian humanistic forum held by the author on August 15, 2022 in the middle of Confucianism in the Mountain World
“Spiritual Humanism” is a concept proposed by Mr. Du Weiming. Teacher Du proposed this concept, and some reports said it was in a lecture at Zhongshan University on November 12, 2014. [1] In fact, in February, Teacher Du had published a formal essay “Constructing Energy Humanism” [2]. Later, Teacher Du, Teacher Du, published a series of related articles and interviews, and a series of responses appeared in the academic community. This article plans to focus on and deeply explore several basic problems touched by the “spiritual humanistic theory” based on the basis of discussion in the academic community.
1. Introduction
Some scholars secretly expressed that they did not take it as a matter of nature, but said doubtfully: “Is the ‘energy’ humanistic? Is there any ‘objective humanistic theory’?” This is related to the legal issue of the concept of “energy humanistic theory”. According to this doubt, “energy” is a concept that is relatively to “material”. This is a model structure and thinking method that Chinese students are more versatile. It has its own reasons, but it does not fully conform to the concept of “spirit” or “spirituality” of Teacher Du.
The focus problem here is: What does Mr. Du say about the concept of “energy” or “energy”?未分The first report of the “Energy Humanism” meeting said: “Indian scholar R. Balasubramanian suggested to Mr. Du that Confucianism should be regarded as an energetic humanism and differentiated from the secular humanism. Initiated by this, Mr. Du focused on the energy value of Confucian benevolence, especially Si Mengxin, and proposed the “Energy Humanism.” [3] According to this, “Energy” is a concept that is corresponding to “secular”. Of course, this is not unfounded, but it is still not completely consistent with Teacher Du’s concept of “energy” or “energy”.
For this reason, we should first carefully analyze the formal and declarative essays of Mr. Du, who were mentioned just now. The following inclusive pipeline is the “focus” of this paper:
At present, people lack knowledge and practice of civilization. On the one hand, this does not pay attention to the ultimate energy, and on the other hand, it is the behavior of materialism and scientificism. Specifically speaking, the former represents the internal humanistic notion of the inner subject, while the latter represents the mundane humanistic notion. These are still the mismatches formed by the impact of Eastern civilization over the past century, and have formed the contradiction and breaking between ancient and modern Chinese and Western countries. To fight against these lacks, develop the value of humanistic energy, and make Chinese civilization a knowledge of the world with global meaning, we need to explore the inner world of human beings, and to prove the focus value of “benevolence” that makes people human beings, and to connect with personal cultivation and social activities. This kind of humanistic concept is an energy-oriented humanistic concept that can fight against the lack of internal humanistic concepts and ordinary humanistic concepts. The value of the energetic humanism lies in that it can not only enhance the inner value of a person, not be differentiated by external objects, but also improve the talents of the inner world, provide practical energy support, and integrate internal and external harmony, realizing the further development of China and even the entire human category. [4]
Surely, “energy humanism” is consistent with two existing humanisms since the initiation of the Movement: one is “external humanism” (external humanism), that is materialism; the other is “moral humanismsecular humanism, that is, scientific theory. It is easy to see that the humanistic spirit of energy has two levels of thinking: one is the inner nature of energy and the inner nature of matter; the other is the mundane nature of energy beyond the gender and science (the “science” here actually refers to the sensibility of things, detailed).
The statement of Teacher Du is not very clear about whether science or sentiment is based on the inner or the inner model.OK, sometimes it is in it, sometimes it is in it. Above, we analyze and discuss the two dimensions of energy humanism.
2. The first humanistic theory criticized by Teacher Du is “inner humanistic theory”, that is, “materialism”. Here, the concept of “energy” by Teacher Du is corresponding to “inner” and “material”.
(I) Energy and Materials
Regarding this problem, Teacher Du has the following levels of thoughts:
1. Evaluation of the spiritual state of modern humans
Teacher Du said: “The most important thing about social domination now is secular humanistic theory, including materialism, consumerism, and post-modernism criticized by post-modernism.”[5] Teacher Du’s meaning is obviously that the basic mental state of modern humans is: advocating material desires and lacking energy desires. The author understands that Teacher Du does not mean that modern humans only need to seek material things and have no energy. He just said: materialism is the “most domination” aspect of modern humans. Of course, this can be discussed:
(1) It should be admitted that the materialistic phenomenon pointed out by Teacher Du does exist. However, is this the most important aspect of modern human beings? This is something to be discussed. For example, it is easy to see that modern humans have strong desires for values such as “unrestricted” and “equivalent”. Can these be concluded as material requirements? If you can’t get enough, which one is the “most important” request?
(2) Some value requirements of modern humans, such as the requirement of “human rights” or “rights”, are actually difficult to simply regard “material demands” or “energy demands”. They are obviously both energetic and material.
(3) Teacher Du does not want to deny any material demands; he just believes that not only the material demands and energy demands should be balanced, and energy demands should be better than material demands. We understand that compared with previous modern society, one of the prominent characteristics of modernity is the determination of value for material quality. This kind of concept has long appeared in Confucianism. The most classic thing is Dai Zhen’s determination of the “desire” of “blood”, believing that “desire comes from nature” and “blood and lust are all caused by nature” [6].
2. Expression of the spiritual state of modern humans
Teacher Du said: “In the modern society of materialization and scientificization, the internal system has become extremely large. We have become accustomed to making ourselves suitable for the world of objectivity. We believe that making external objects adapt to their own spiritual movements is not only incapable, but also disagreement.”[7] The meaning here is that the broad mental state of modern humans is: noIt is to “let external things adapt to their own minds”, but to “let themselves adapt to the world of sight”. This is also a question worth discussing:
(1) Should we “let ourselves into a suitable world of objectivity”? This cannot be discussed in general. Whether facing the natural environment or the social environment, we sometimes need to adapt to it, and sometimes we need to change it. This is as Teacher Du said: “In fact, things are determined in a comprehensive manner between inside and outside. Inclusive network Then, there are two method
發佈留言