/zyw/n 194/ca 1 10930 . htm
/admin/list.asp？ id= 14 16
Confucianism and Two Views of Freedom
Confucianism is the main body of China's traditional culture, and freedom is the basic idea of modern western culture. The relationship between Confucian tradition and the concept of freedom is one of the focuses of the debate between political liberalism and cultural conservatism in China in the 20th century. During the May 4th Movement, liberals highlighted the tension between freedom and Confucianism, and emphasized that the criticism of Confucian ethics was the premise of constructing the concept of freedom, so they took a tough negative attitude towards Confucian tradition. Generally speaking, cultural conservatives represented by modern neo-Confucianism do not reject the concept of spiritual freedom, but their strong position of defending morality in the cultural field makes it difficult for Confucian tradition to be compatible with the concept of freedom. However, a noticeable trend in the second half of the 20th century is that some figures have appeared in liberalism and cultural conservatism, who are committed to seeking the modern connection between the Confucian tradition and the concept of freedom in order to get rid of the extreme views since the May 4th Movement. Their efforts are of great significance in the history of thought, but from a theoretical perspective, the theoretical construction of the modern relationship between Confucianism and freedom is still very weak. The resulting question is, how to make a deep theoretical analysis of the relationship between Confucianism and the concept of freedom, so as to promote the modern relationship between them? I think distinguishing the meaning, category and cultural characteristics of the concept of freedom will be the premise of discussion.
In the Spanish context, although the meaning of the concept of freedom is complicated, Hublin, a famous British thinker, divided negative freedom and positive freedom, which provided an important analytical framework for grasping the concept of freedom. Berlin believes that the concepts of negative freedom and positive freedom are related to two different groups of problems: the former involves the scope of control and the latter involves the source of control. Based on the answers to these two different questions, negative freedom and positive freedom have different conceptual connotations. The connotation of negative freedom is; Individuals have the space to make choices and activities independently of others' control; Freedom itself cannot be restricted by law, because there is a value equal to or higher than the value of freedom; The minimum freedom must be preserved, so the restriction of public power on freedom itself cannot but be restricted. In this sense, the essence of the concept of negative freedom is that individual freedom should have a minimum range that no monism can infringe, so a marginal boundary should be drawn between individual freedom rights and social public power. This is what Yan Fu said: "Groups have positive bounds". On the other hand, the concept of positive freedom stems from the individual's desire to be his own master. Its connotation is that I hope my life and choice can be decided by myself, not by any external force; I hope to be my own will, not a tool of others' will; I want to be a positive person, able to make choices for myself and be responsible for my choices.
The above two concepts of freedom not only have different meanings and connotations, but also belong to different category systems. Negative freedom involves the relationship between individual rights and public power, and deals with social and political issues, which belongs to the category of social and political theory; It basically does not involve the question of freedom of will and does not belong to the category of moral philosophy. Therefore, in On Freedom, J·S· Muller pointed out at the beginning that the freedom he wants to discuss "is not the so-called freedom of will, … but civil freedom or social freedom, that is, to explore the nature and limits of the power that society can legally impose on individuals." ① Positive freedom involves individuals "pursuing moral dignity and the meaning of creation with free will"; ② Based on free will, it leads to the conclusion of moral freedom, and then leads to the discussion of political and social freedom. Therefore, positive freedom is mainly the category of personal ethics and moral philosophy.
In the author's view, these two concepts of freedom not only have different meanings and categories, but also have different cultural characteristics. As a social and political concept, negative freedom confirms and protects the basic freedom rights of individuals and prevents the infringement of freedom by public power, which embodies the historical requirements of market economy and civil society in modern western countries, has distinct characteristics of modernity and is a typical value concept of western civilization. As a category of moral philosophy, positive freedom is different. As far as its emphasis on freedom, autonomy and self-discipline of moral will is concerned, it can obviously not be regarded as a unique ideological resource of western civilization.
Based on the analysis of the above two views on freedom, the following will examine the relationship between Confucianism and freedom from two levels.
two
As early as 1895, when Yan Fu, an enlightenment thinker, compared the differences between Chinese and Western cultures in his famous On the Rapid Change of the World, he already pointed out the fact that China's traditional culture, represented by Confucianism, lacked free thinking resources: "The freedom of a husband was really feared by the ancient sages of China and never thought of being a teacher." (3) Yan Fu, who is familiar with the western tradition of freedom thought and translated Mill's On Freedom, is based on the concept of negative freedom in the above social theory. The question is, from this concept, what is the main basis for judging the lack of negative and free ideological resources in Confucian tradition?
From the point of view of value system, Confucian tradition attaches importance to human relations order. For example, the father's kindness, son's filial piety, brother's kindness, brother's kindness, husband's righteousness, woman's listening, long benefit, young obedience, gentleman's benevolence and minister's loyalty in the Book of Rites are called the ten meanings, and Mencius also has the so-called five-LUN theory: "Father and son are related, monarch and minister are righteous, and husband and wife are related." (Mencius Teng Wengong) Human relations order strengthens ethical norms and moral obligations, rather than the right consciousness in the political and legal sense. Under the cover of Confucian ethical order, obligation is the concept of the first order, and people's right consciousness has been compressed and dissolved under the concept of obligation. With the compression and dissolution of people's right consciousness, the scope of freedom cannot be confirmed, because the scope of freedom is essentially the scope of people's rights.
As far as political thinking is concerned, from the perspective of Confucianism, there is no boundary between politics and ethics, and political life is only an extension of ethical order. "In the political field, the king or emperor is naturally the center of interpersonal order. Therefore, any political improvement must proceed from the value consciousness of this central point. This is the theoretical basis of "inner saints and outer kings". The so-called "respecting the right and wrong of the monarch", "benevolent heart and benevolent government" and "sincere heart" are just constraints and norms on the ethics of those in power. This ideological tone has always prevented the Confucian tradition from forming a set of concepts that systematically use laws and systems to restrain and balance political power. The lack of this concept is another important sign that the Confucian tradition does not have the concept of negative freedom, because one of the basic essentials of the concept of negative freedom is to prevent political power from infringing on the scope of freedom through legal and institutional constraints.
As far as social function is concerned, since Dong Zhongshu put forward the idea of "ousting a hundred schools of thought and respecting Confucianism alone" in the Han Dynasty, the social function of Confucianism has gradually positioned itself as a theoretical demonstration of the political legitimacy of traditional China. Dong Shi's "Three Outlines of King Way" (the basic meaning of the story of Spring and Autumn Annals) opened the prelude to the legitimacy demonstration, and Confucianism began the historical process of Confucian classics. From the study of Confucian classics in modern literature and ancient prose to the study of Confucian classics in Song Dynasty, the evolution of Confucian classics has not changed the social and political functions undertaken by Confucian scholars. Historical experience shows that Confucianism, which undertakes the legitimacy argument, supports the autocratic regime centered on imperial power. Therefore, at the level of social and political functions, Confucianism and the spiritual concept of negative freedom have formed a high degree of tension and sharp conflict, because the concept of freedom in the social and political sense is precisely the opposite of authoritarian regime. This is also the basic reason why the Confucian tradition was denied and criticized by political liberals during the May 4th Movement.
It should be pointed out that the above analysis is mainly not a value judgment, but a description of the historical facts of the lack of negative free thinking resources in Confucian tradition. The purpose of stating this historical fact is to show that the ancient Confucian tradition is far from the modern social and political ideas. Therefore, the negative concept of freedom can neither come directly from the Confucian tradition in one direction, nor simply connect in two directions. The modern connection between Confucianism and the concept of negative freedom must go out of the misunderstanding of ideological and theoretical deduction and be based on the cultivation of social soil conditions. This means that the modern connection between Confucianism and negative freedom view needs to construct corresponding social premise, and the realization of the spirit of negative freedom view is based on the operation of the system, and its foundation is rooted in the market economy. This is because negative freedom is not only an ideological system, but also an institutional framework to protect people's basic rights and a check and balance mechanism to prevent public power from infringing on freedom. At the same time, negative freedom, whether as an ideological concept or an institutional structure, itself is the product of market economy, in other words, market economy is the fundamental supporting condition of negative freedom concept and system. Under the condition of non-market economy, because the state, as a public power, is the main monopolist of social resources and the only provider of various services and employment opportunities, it has "unlimited coercive power" and negative freedom is out of the question. Only when the corresponding social soil conditions, such as the construction and cultivation of institutional structure and market mechanism, can the negative concept of freedom gain a solid foundation and Confucianism communicate with this modern concept.
Contact can find the support of reality. From this point of view, the modern connection between Confucianism and the concept of negative freedom can not be solved by theoretical deduction at the conceptual level, but is a social evolution process of gradual adjustment between the three points (market economy and the corresponding social and political mechanism-negative freedom concept-Confucianism).
Although Confucian tradition lacks negative free thoughts in the sense of social and political theory, it contains extremely rich resources of positive free thoughts in the sense of moral philosophy. This ideological resource is embodied in the expression of the proposition of "benevolence for oneself", and its essence is to confirm and highlight the freedom of individual moral will. "China discovered the freedom of moral will from Confucius and realized its importance. This is indeed a very important discovery in the history of China. After this discovery, people can tell their true self, human dignity and be their own masters. " ⑤
Judging from the history of Confucian tradition, it is a main line running through the development of Confucianism to confirm and strengthen the autonomy and freedom of individual moral will choice. Confucius repeatedly emphasized "I want to be kind to myself" (The Analects of Yan Yuan), "I want to be kind, I can be kind to myself" (The Analects of Wei Linggong) and "I want to be responsible to my teacher". Mencius expanded his self-seeking for "benevolence" into an active choice for "righteousness": "Life is what I want; Righteousness is also what I want. You can't have both, and those who give up their lives are also righteous. " In the Song Dynasty, the Neo-Confucianists further recognized benevolence as a "natural principle" and raised it to the height of ontology, emphasizing the conscious experience and practice of the natural principle of benevolence, as well as the self-abandonment and suppression of selfish desires: "A benevolent person has a complete morality in his heart. ..... the whole virtue of the heart is not right, but it is also desirable; Therefore, if you are a benevolent person, you must return to the ceremony by defeating selfish desires, then everything will be justified and the virtue in your heart will be restored to me. " (Zhu: The Analects of Confucius Volume Yan Yuan) From the pre-Qin Dynasty to the Song Dynasty, advocating the moral self-discipline of the subject and establishing the solemnity and greatness of human ethical subjectivity constituted valuable spiritual resources in the Confucian tradition.
Confucianism highlights the subject's moral autonomy and moral self-discipline, which not only shows universal positive significance at the moral and ethical level, but also plays a special normative function at the social and political level. If the universal meaning of the former refers to each individual, then it advocates that everyone is Yao and Shun, a gentleman and a moral person; Then the special function of the latter is mainly aimed at rulers, asking them to improve their self-morality, self-discipline and become saints. Therefore, on the one hand, only those who become saints and virtues can be kings, and the way of nourishing qi and peace constitutes the normative model S for those who acquire and master power. On the other hand, "To govern the country, one must cultivate one's morality with the right heart" (Zhuzi Language 108), and the rulers should be strict with themselves and treat others with sincerity. Only integrity can be integrity. "its body is right, but it does not make; His body is not right, although he does not obey. " (The Analects of Confucius Lutz) Rulers should always reflect on themselves, and review themselves: "Those who are not good at their affairs will seek their own benefits", so that they can "return to the world in an upright manner" (Mencius Li Lou I). Obviously, the moral self-discipline of power holders is highly emphasized. "This is the advanced realm that Confucian political ethics philosophy can achieve." From this point of view, the rich ideological resources of positive freedom in the sense of moral philosophy in Confucian tradition do have its positive functions and significance in the political field, because moral self-discipline has always been an indispensable and important aspect of restraining those in power.
However, as mentioned above, the Confucian tradition always confuses the marginal boundary between ethics and politics, moralizing political ethics, which leads to the double consequences of the application of its positive and free moral resources in the political field: on the one hand, the internal moral self-discipline embodied by positive freedom, as a moral constraint on power, will be softened and eventually fail. Because the historical experience of China's traditional politics shows that it is totally useless to talk about self-cultivation and moral self-discipline to tyrants and corrupt officials. On the other hand, as the embodiment of positive freedom, moral self-discipline means self-denial and self-denial in the Confucian discourse system, that is, becoming a saint. But the problem is that saints should not only establish people, but also establish people, not only to be themselves, but also to be things. Self-cultivation is the virtue of self-cultivation, and self-cultivation is the merit of serving the world and teaching people. From being a man to being a man, from being a man to being a man, it is a transformation process from being a saint inside to being a king outside. This transformation endows the holy king with the function of moral domination and moral education in social life, that is, Song Confucianism said, "enlighten the ignorance of all beings and get rid of their coma." Under the moral control of the holy king, the individual has completely lost the freedom to make any moral choice, and only has the obligation to "uphold justice and eliminate human desires" and completely obey. In order to ensure the individual's obedience and the absolute domination and rule of the holy king, criminal law and enlightenment have become two indispensable ruling means of the holy king: "the holy king is governing, the punishment is the same, and enlightenment is good and vulgar." (Volume II of "The Letter of Yu Fa") The former kills people by punishment and hard control, while the latter kills people by reason and soft restraint. In this way, the transformation from a saint to a saint king is actually a process in which a saint's moral autonomy is alienated into a dual dictatorship of morality (education) and politics (punishment): the positive freedom of morality eventually moves towards the opposite of freedom in the social and political fields.
It can be seen that the positive and free ideological resources in Confucian tradition are like a double-edged sword: on the ethical level, it holds high the freedom of will of moral subjects, strengthens its moral self-discipline and moral perfection, and has the normative function of political ethics; But at the social and political level, it eventually leads to the opposite of moral and political autocracy and freedom. The author believes that the key to solve this double-edged nature is to set the marginal boundary between positive and free ethics, that is, to locate the significance and function of positive and free ethics in the individual and ethical fields. In this way, on the one hand, it can ensure the freedom of individual moral choice, and it is also conducive to the political and ethical function of moral self-discipline. Under this condition, the positive and free ethical resources in the Confucian tradition, such as self-discipline, self-discipline, self-cultivation and paying attention to honesty, will play a positive role in shaping political personality in modern life. On the other hand, it is to avoid the confusion between the choice of personal moral will and social and political issues, so as to win an independent space for the construction of negative freedom concepts. Because the above-mentioned conceptual analysis shows that negative freedom belongs to the social and political category, refers to the social and political field, involves the political and legal system guarantee of individual basic freedom rights, and has nothing to do with individual freedom of will and moral choice referred to by positive freedom. In the words of Confucianism, negative freedom is the scope of "governing the people" and positive freedom is the field of "self-cultivation". Confusing "self-cultivation" with "governing the people" will not only weaken and damage the ethical significance of "self-cultivation", but also hinder the system design of "governing the people" (politics and law). In short, only by dividing the boundaries (ethics and political law) and positioning functions (individual and society) can the positive and free ethical resources in the Confucian tradition gain modern significance, and the construction of the above-mentioned negative concept of freedom can win independent development space.
Based on the above analysis, the conclusion of this paper is: at the social and political level, the traditional Confucian society must introduce the concept of negative freedom and put its spirit into the operation of the system, and its foundation is rooted in the market economy. Under this condition, the modern connection between Confucianism and negative freedom view can be supported by reality; On the ethical level, Confucian traditional culture needs to be connected with its positive and free ideological resources, positioned as an individual, and set ethical boundaries for it to play its political and ethical significance. These are two indispensable aspects of the modern connection between Confucianism and the concept of freedom. The organic combination of the two will lead to mutual support and two-way complementarity between negative freedom and positive freedom, politics and ethics, modernity and (Confucian) tradition.
note:
[1] John Mill, England: On Freedom, translated by Cheng Zhonghua, Commercial Press, 1982, p. 1.
② Yu-sheng Lin: Creative Transformation of China Tradition, Joint Publishing Company, 1988, p. 73.
[3] Yan Fu Ji, Volume 1, edited by Wang, Zhonghua Book Company, 1986, p. 3.
④ Yu Yingshi: Modern Interpretation of China's Thought Tradition, Jiangsu Sanlian Bookstore, 1995, p. 33.
⑤ Wei: Family and Modern China, Shanghai People's Publishing House, 1990, p. 83.
[6] Li Jinquan: "China Confucianism and Push the West on the ideological characteristics of interpersonal relationships", "Philosophical Research" 1987 No 9.