From Noosphere to Theosphere: Cyclotrons, Cyberspace, and Teilhard's Vision of Cosmic Love

Two theme–setting quotations introduce this essay—that of Yeats's falcon, deaf to the falconer's call, adrift in space above the blood–dimmed tide, counterpoised to Pierre Teilhard de Chardin's call to abandon old nationalistic prejudices and build the earth. With primary references to the thought of Teilhard, along with, among others, to Ewert Cousins, Andrew M. Greeley, Karl Jaspers, Marshall McLuhan, Ilya Prigogine, Karl Rahner, Leonard Swidler, David Tracy, and Alfred North Whitehead, I argue that the most crucial intellectual paradigm shift of the twenty–first century will challenge humanity to take the turn from uncritical attachment to rigid absolutism or atomistic fragmentation toward a sense of open–ended, off–centered centeredness and fluid connections—from a static to a dynamic model of reality. Central to my argument is the Teilhardian reinterpretation of the Christian metaphors of creation, fall, incarnation, salvation, and the eschaton in the evolutionary terms of the emergence of cosmic consciousness from the chrysalis of the world of the past—from chaos to order, from biosphere via noosphere to theosphere. Facilitated by the exponential growth of populations, collaborative research, science, technology, and global communication (most dramatically manifested by the Internet), this emergent understanding of what it means to be human can, first, foster the awareness that in humanity evolution has become conscious of itself, and then, gradually, precipitate the formation of “the global village” (the mystical body of Christ), as respectful dialogue replaces diatribe and the dualistic pugilism of Samuel Huntington's “Clash of Civilizations” is gradually transformed into a nonadversarial mentality that values shared humanity and a common purpose. Thus, eons hence, empowered by love–energy, the transmutation of the human into the ultra–human can take the ultimate quantum leap into a yet higher dimension where spirit/energy is no longer in need of flesh/mass, and Earth can be safely left behind.     

论中国文化的情理精神

“情理”这一特殊范畴表达了儒学与中国化中一种情理交溶,以情为源和本,以理为鹄和用的特有化精神。基于传统社会的情理精神与现代理性精神是相冲突的,建立在情理精神基础上的人治传统更可能对现代社会的法治起到巨大的破坏作用。     

从陈荣捷和杜维明看儒学研究的世界化

文章通过回顾陈荣捷和杜维明对儒学世界化所作的贡献,讨论了在儒学研究世界化过程中儒学的"原汁原味"与"新的色香味"的关系问题、儒学的独特性问题等,试图以点见面,从个案研究中窥视儒学的世界价值。     

"好人"如何一生平安?——走出"德福悖论"的怪圈

德福悖论现象一直是道德生活中所面,临的重大问题之一,为历代思想家所关注。在市场经济时代,“好人”虽不再是一个不言“利”的主体,但他能否“一生平安”,德福之间能否统一,关键在于“好人”是否处于一个“有道”或公正的社会制度里。     

Dialoguing Height Psychology into a life of interconnectedness: Response to commentaries by Hwang,Bhawuk, King & Hodgetts,Kashima, and Xie,Su, & Zhong

Liu (Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 000, 000) attempts to articulate an epistemology for the aspirational practice of Height Psychology as a human science informed by Kantian epistemology in dialogue with other philosophies, especially Confucianism and Taoism. Height Psychology is a framework or metatheory for the practice of teaching, research, and service rooted in Kantian epistemology, in dialogue with other philosophies. It provides a holistic philosophy for social scientists responding to wicked problems unfolding over long periods of time. In responding to commentaries, I suggest a corollary to Shweder's (Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 3, p. 207) ‘One mind, many mentalities’: ‘Many indigenous psychologies, interconnected by one epistemology’. Height Psychology is about holding to an invisible moral centre. The practical postulates are foundational to the moral and ethical practices of human societies: they are for doing, their value is ontological. Human agency, proscribed by natural science epistemologies takes centre stage in Height Psychology by facilitating social scientists to act reflexively from multiple positions (from basic to action research) to benefit society. Height Psychology is dedicated to articulating and actioning the moral and ethical basis of a human science that can assist present and future generations of social scientists to meet the grave situational futures facing us in different parts of the world.     

论儒家道德的产生机制

道德的中心问题是善。在儒家文化体系里,善、仁与圣都具有这一含义。善何以可能这一道德哲学的问题,在儒家思想体系里,也就演变为仁、圣何以可能的问题。仁的本义是爱亲人,因此,爱亲人的孝自然成为儒家思想的基础。而将仁爱上升为博爱众生,则为圣。因此．圣不仅是道德理想,同样也是政治理念。仁与圣的实现,在孔子那里,依靠忠恕,推己及人;在孟子那里,则为推恩。以自我的情感为基础发生的情感转移,休谟称之为同情。因此,聚合理念与生理因素的同情是孔、孟善何以可能的基础。同时,这也揭示了道德发生的机制。     

论鹆冠子的教育思想

鹃冠子有关教育的思想主要有以下几方面：关于人性论他认为古今人性相同,趋利求安。关于政治教育,他认为明君主应不断提高精神修养,以神化天下。关于伦理教育,他主张官员推行教化,百姓提高道德修养。关于军事教育,他要求明君平素训练军队。关于知识教育,他提出九道说。这些看法在先秦教育思想史上很独特。     

《观》卦的祭祀内涵与儒家哲学的关系

《观》卦卦爻辞记述的是古代祭祀的情景。在后来的学术流变中,儒家学者不断把自己的哲学思想附加进去,对这一祭祀活动做出种种合乎人伦哲理的解释和分析,从而使之成为儒家思想培育的沃土。这一理论阐释的发展变化过程,不仅体现了儒家哲学学术思想发展流变的理趣,更显示了儒家思想和宗教祭祀之间的密切关系。     

The Role Dilemma in Early Confucianism

Recently, Sean Cordell has raised a problem for Aristotelians who seriously consider social roles: When the demands of the role conflict with the demands of morality, which norms ought one follow? However, this problem, which I call the role dilemma, is not specific to Aristotelians. Classical Confucians face a similar problem. How do Confucians resolve conflicts between the demands of humaneness (ren 仁) and the demands of social roles and the social norms (li 礼) that govern these roles? Confucians who favor humaneness, maintaining that other demands are defeasible, offer an externalism about roles. This response is similar to the Aristotelian argument that the demands of human excellence trump other demands. Consequently, Confucian externalism collapses into a virtue ethic. Confucians who favor the demands of li offer an internalism about roles. However, internalism is undesirable because it implies relativism and condones oppressive social institutions. The Confucian role ethicist must offer a tenable solution that steers clear of the pitfalls of both externalism and internalism. Although I do not advance a solution here, I believe a tenable alternative exists. The goals of this paper, instead, are to demonstrate that classical Confucians face the role dilemma and to initiate a discussion about the theoretical apparatus required of Confucian role ethics in order to distinguish it from other ethical theories. I conclude with some programmatic remarks about additional questions and problems that ought to be addressed.