NTU Philosophical Review

The forum of debate between Huang Zong-Yi and Chen Chien-Chu is a major publicly known archive in the transformation of Philosophy during the lastof Ming Dynasty and beginning of Ching Dynasty. It also represents the beginning of the transformation of the Confucian Learning of Song and Ming Dynasty transition to the practical Confucians of Ching Dynasty. In the studies by recent generations, they have either eye the thoughts of Chen Chien-Chu too much higher by thinking that the final years of thoughts of Huang Zong-Yi was changed by the effect from Chien-Chu or have eye the thoughts of Chien-Chu too much lower by thinking that it is equal to the tradition of born with Nature by Gau-Tze. Similarly, the studies by recent generations are also vague in defining the thoughts of Huang Zong-yi and can not give him a reasonable and pertinent status.Many Scholars have used the four rewrites of Huang Zong-Yi on the Mu-Ze-Ming by Chen Chien-Chu as their subject of studies or to stand with the first three view points of Huang Zong-Yi criticizing Chen’s thoughts being “Desire oriented”. Or to use the view point of the fourth rewrites on Mu-Ze-Ming of Huang Zong-Yi to think that the thoughts of later years of Huang Zong-Yi has leaned toward Chen Chien-Chu.I do not agree to that, my personal view point is that within the first three rewrites of Mu-Ze-Ming by Huang Zong-Yi he has misunderstood the thoughts of Chen Chien-Chu to think that Chien-Chu has denied the Confucians thoughts of Song and Ming Dynasty and become the tradition of later learning ofShun-Tze and Gau-Tze.In the fourth rewrites of Mu-Ze-Ming, he then clearly sees the theory of justice of exertion and fulfillment in Chen’s thoughts. Therefore I will not criticize it, but it can also be seen that Chien-Chu’s thoughts were not from the authentic Gi-San Learning. It has his own set of upright theory of justice, nevertheless this is not likely to become the later learning of Shun-Tze and Gau-Tze and will not degrade to the fallen scholarship either.

This paper begins with an analysis of Kant’s concept of “transcendental”, and proceeds to discuss some theoretical problems of transcendental cognition.Transcendental cognition refers to a kind of a priori cognitions about the faculty of cognition itself, which include the distinction between sensibility andunderstanding as well as their spatiotemporal and categorial forms. Although Kant’s transcendental philosophy aims to account for the possibility of objectiveexperience and knowledge by investigating into our faculty of cognition, the theoretical status of transcendental cognitions itself is rather unclear. On the onehand, they cannot be cognitions of the phenomenal self through inner sense, because these empirical cognitions could never serve as a foundation for thetranscendental philosophy. On the other hand, Kant also criticizes traditional rational psychology, rejecting the possibility of a priori cognitions of the noumenal self through reason alone. It is true that Kant denies every possibility of a priori self-cognition, but he does allow a kind of intellectual self-consciousness, i.e., the pure “I think” or “transcendental apperception”. Transcendental apperception is not cognition, but through transcendental reflection, we can analyze the structure of cognition. Yet, transcendental cognition is not primarily about the cognitive mechanism of human beings as a species. Kant’s transcendental philosophy is not cognitive science or transcendental psychology, but rather a kind of conceptual analysis of the structure of cognition of the finite rational being as such.

Suffering the problem of Ming-Shi-Xiang-Yuan（名實相怨） in Pre-Qin era, Zhu-zi （諸子）, which include Kong-sun Long, are thus paying more attentions tothe notion of Ming（名）. The principle of Yi-Shi-Zheng-Ming（以實正名） purposed by him, however, meets with no acceptant of contemporaneous Zhu-zi.The repulsion of Xun Zi, which argues that “making a delusory usage of Ming, could disturb (the orders of) Sh（i 實）(we have recognized)”, refers to the practiceof Kong-sun Long. Provoking criticism universally, the theory of Kong-sun Long is of so distinctive objective, that differs from the general notions of philosophy in that period. In short, the two diversions of Ming（名）, to which Kong-sun Long refers, are on one hand to signify (on certain individual), the “Wu Ming”; while on the other hand to refer (the nature of the individual itself), the “Shi Ming”, are discovered by Kong-sun Long. The value and doctrine of which highlighted by him is obviously the later, which overlooked in that period, would rather be regarded as Metaphysical rather than logical. It is even significant to discover and elaborate of philosophy of Kong-sun Long, while comparing with the thoughts of contemporaneous Zhu-zi and the other philosophers in the process of development of latter Chinese philosophy.

This essay explores Confucius’ hermeneutical method through his speeches, referencing, reading and discussion of the “Book of Odes”. It has the followingsections: 1. Preface 2. Clarification of terms in “poetry or odes”, the “Book of Odes” and “three hundred stanzas of the “Book of Odes” 3. The Pre-Confucianformation and use of the text 4. Confucius’ hermeneutical method with regard to the “Book of Odes”, and 5. Conclusion.The discussion focuses on (the hermeneutical method of) (1) The teachings of the “Book of Odes, (2) The analyses of Zhou dynasty musical lyrics which refer to the “Book of Odes”, and (3) Confucius’ references and readings of the “Book of Odes”. There are two stages of Confucius’ hermeneutical activity. First, the early years, based upon the Zhou Book of Odes stored in the court of Lu. Second, the later years, when Confucius re-edited the text to spread the‘philosophical principles of an ideal king’.The essay shows that Confucius’ hermeneutical method consists of taking passages out of context, the use of analogies, and the goal of developing the chivalrous and virtuous person. His hermeneutical activity combines historical and practical elements, and the use of theoretical implications.

The focus of this paper is on life as an academic concept and philosophy of life as a body of knowledge or a discipline, defining, clarifying, and examining relevant concepts or questions.The structure of this paper is divided into eight sections in terms of definition, clarification, questioning, and examination. The first section, “Introduction,” points out the theme and gives a general outline of the theme. The second section, “What Is Life?”, brings forward in the forms of list and succinct definition the most common definitions of life as organism in academic cycle. In order to develop a better definition of life, this paper makes a critical review of the above and, in a non-fixated and open manner, defines life as “a coherent base, mechanism, or principle which manifests life as such a process of life.” Such a definition not only avoids the deficiencies of narrowness, fixation,and closure but also makes it a suitable foundation for investigating philosophy of life, philosophy of religion, or Buddhist philosophy. The third section, “Clarifying Life and Related Concepts,” makes a distinction among human life, living creature, living entity, phenomena of life, livelihood, living, and death in order not to confuse life with these related concepts. The fourth section, “What Is Philosophy?”, concisely indicates what philosophy means from the light of philosophy as a professional field. The fifth section, “What Is Philosophy of Life?”, follows to define philosophy of life after discussing the concepts of life and philosophy. Philosophy of life is “the study of life with life as its main concern and philosophical inquiry and reasoning as the method.” The sixth section, “The Relation of Life to Philosophy,” discusses the relation between life and philosophy in terms of life to philosophy and philosophy to life respectively. The seventh section, “Clarifying Philosophy of Life and Related Disciplines,” makes a proper clarification among philosophy of life, biology, philosophy of human life, life studies, life-and-death studies, and thanatology. By means of contrast, this section makes the definition of philosophy of life clearer and more intelligible. The eighth section, “Conclusions and Prospects,” summarizes the key points of this paper and anticipates future discussions.The main objective of this paper includes at least the following two points. One is to offer a more rigorous and complete outline for the concept of life and philosophy of life by way of philosophical writing. The other is to present philosophy of life as less narrow than conducive to be connected with philosophy of religion and Buddhist philosophy, open to the religious way of life practice, and contributing to understanding the close relationship between theory and practice on the topic of life.