I learned from a friend that Mr. Li Zehou passed away at 1 1.2 local time in the United States. Although I know that Mr. Li is old and accidentally fell down two years ago, and his physical condition is getting worse, I still feel a little surprised and at a loss when I learn the news. Perhaps this is because deep down in my mind, I am neither willing nor prepared to accept the fact that there is no Li Zehou in the world.
The first time I learned Li Zehou's name was 1979, which was my second year in East China Normal University. I remember one day this year, a book "Philosophy" in the bookstore caught my attention. Although I knew something about Kant before, this book gave me a refreshing feeling with its unique views, meaningful words and profound theories. Since then, The Course of Beauty, On the History of Modern Thought in China and On the History of Ancient Thought in China have been published one after another. For a time, Luoyang paper was expensive, and scholars argued endlessly for Li Zehou. The academic circles have said a lot about this grand occasion, so I won't go into details here. Of course, although Mr. Li Zehou's works were in hand at that time, they seemed out of reach. As a veteran of academic circles at that time, he seemed to be the object of looking up.
However, in the summer of 1985, when discussing Mr. Feng Qi's works on the history of China philosophy in Lushan, I had the opportunity to get in close contact with Mr. Li Zehou. During the meeting, Mr. Li Zehou still maintained his independent academic style. Although discussing Mr. Feng Qi's works, he bluntly expressed different academic positions, which is in sharp contrast with some scholars' tendency to praise and cater to such occasions. Although I don't fully agree with his point of view, I am deeply impressed by this academic orientation that is not easily echoed. I also had some conversations with Mr. Li Zehou when I visited the scenic spots and cultural landscape of Lushan Mountain. I was Mr. Feng Qi's doctor at that time. Before that, my master's thesis was about the relationship between Ganjia School and Hu Shi, and made some research on the academic changes in Qing Dynasty. At the same time, I have always been interested in history. I have already read through the works such as Zi Tong Zhi Jian, and this historical background naturally penetrated into the conversation. I remember when we were talking, besides Mr. Li Zehou and I, there was a young man named Ma from "",who seemed to have just graduated from Nankai University. Mr. Li Zehou seems a little surprised at my "literacy" in history, and casually says, you know a little history. At that time, when I was young, I was a little complacent when I heard this comment.
1985 during the Lushan meeting, Li Zehou (middle) and (left) took photos with the reporter named Ma.
After the Lushan meeting, my brief relationship with Mr. Li Zehou was also interrupted. Almost 18 years later, in 2003, we were able to meet again. Of course, Li Zehou has long forgotten his first encounter with Lushan Mountain, and I have no intention of "renewing the frontier". After 1992, Li Zehou moved to the United States, but he went back to live for a period of time almost every year. In the second half of 2003, in the name of China Institute of Modern Thought and Culture of East China Normal University, I expressed my intention to invite Mr. Li Zehou to visit East China Normal University through American friend Catherine Lynch. Mr. Li readily agreed and took his wife with him that winter. At this time, I am no longer a young student and have dabbled in the history and fields of philosophy, so I have more theoretical topics with Mr. Li Zehou. At that time, my academic work "Being and Being-A Study of Moral Philosophy" was published soon. When I met him, I specially presented a book and asked him to correct me. I don't know if he read this book later, but every time I meet him and talk about related philosophical topics, he always says: You are a scientist, or: You study science, that is, I mainly study science, which makes me feel a little helpless. I can't remember many specific contents of the conversation, but when it comes to learning, I especially mentioned the significance of Hume's philosophy, especially in the understanding of moral motives. I think Kant is motivated by formal reasons, and it is difficult to provide a reasonable explanation for the occurrence of moral behavior, which requires Hume's affirmation of moral feelings. These views have also been discussed in my book Being. The reason why Hume was not emphasized in the conversation was mainly because Mr. Li Zehou mainly praised Kant at that time and basically ignored Hume. By the way, Mr. Li Zehou later had some ideas about Hume, which was somewhat different from the previous discussion of Kant instead of Hume.
In 2003, Li Zehou visited the School of Thought and took a photo with Yang Guorong.
During his visit to East China Normal University, Mr. Li Zehou gave a public academic speech. The lecture was originally held in the conference room of the liberal arts building, but there were too many people, so we had to temporarily move to the lecture hall of the library. Although the space has expanded a lot, it is still crowded. I gave a lecture that day, and Li Zehou's topic was "Talking about Emotional Ontology", which may be the first time he publicly raised this topic in the form of a speech. After the lecture, it was originally planned to publish the recorded contents in the compilation "Thought and Culture" of the Institute of Thought. However, after reading the recorded manuscript, Mr. Li Zehou felt that the content was too thin and refused to publish it. We respect his opinion and can only give up what we love. Indeed, according to my impression at that time, compared with his research on the history of China's thoughts, his speech on "emotional ontology" did not seem to be very rich. In fact, although he mentioned this topic repeatedly later, on the whole, there are still too simple problems. In the relationship between emotion and reason, Li Zehou often seems entangled: he often wants to refuse and welcome "reason"; For "love", I often want to satisfy and refuse.
After my visit in 2003, I had more frequent conversations with Mr. Li Zehou. Sometimes he will call and talk about related issues. I remember attending a meeting in Ningbo when Mr. Li Zehou suddenly called. To be exact, he has forgotten. When he comes, we often talk for a long time, sometimes for almost an hour. In my impression, Mr. Li Zehou compared the academic situation in China. Because he lives abroad, he also needs to know the academic trends in China through different channels. At the same time, he is more concerned about his position or degree in domestic academic circles. 2/kloc-0 At the beginning of the 20th century, few people in China talked about Li Zehou, and if they did, it was always negative. Some people often criticize Li Zehou to show their new progress or "cleverness", but in fact, such critics are often far behind the objects they criticize in terms of vision, academic support and specific opinions. Of course, in my conversation with Mr. Li Zehou, I can often feel his lonely mentality at this time, and I will take the above viewpoint (critics are far less than the criticized) as his academic defense. Later, with Mr. Li Zehou appearing frequently in different ways, especially putting forward some new academic opinions from time to time, he gradually gained a new reputation in domestic academic circles. In a sense, even after the 1980s, there was a second Li Zehou fever.
In 2005, Mr. Li Zehou visited Shanghai again at the invitation of Shanghai. In the meantime, I had an academic dialogue with him, mainly involving transcendence, rationality and emotional ontology. Conversation record was approved by Mr. Li Zehou and published in Academic Monthly (No.1 2006). From 2006 to 2007, as a rich scholar, I did academic research at Stanford University for nearly one year. During this period, in addition to contacting the inviter Rorty, I often talked with Mr. Li Zehou of Colorado for more than an hour. The content not only covers the philosophy at that time, including analytical philosophy and phenomenology, but also covers China's academic trend. In my impression, although Mr. Li Zehou is in North America, his focus is always at home. He has no intention of "integrating" into the philosophical circle, nor does he pretend to be an overseas Chinese. Deep in his mind, he is still a China scholar. This can also be seen from the fact that he has always held a China passport without naturalization in the United States. If we make a comparison, it is not difficult to see that Mr. Li Zehou's position is obviously different from that of Yu-sheng Lin and other overseas scholars: as Chinese naturalized in the United States, they mainly study China culture and China history on the one hand, and write as Chinese or overseas scholars on the other. Although the two may go hand in hand in form, in essence, cultural identity and identity (identity) obviously cannot be completely distinguished. As a scholar who has not given up China's identity in culture and history, Mr. Li Zehou transcended the above and made his statement more coherent. Although Mr. Li Zehou felt lonely in his later years because he lived in a foreign country (in fact, loneliness may accompany his feelings for a long time), he could not see the sadness overseas.
In 2022, after many invitations, Mr. Li Zehou visited East China Normal University again to offer learning-oriented courses. This is Mr. Li Zehou's first public speech in decades, so he has received more attention. As an inviter, I should have given it once, but unfortunately I was in Guangdong at that time, so I gave it a second time instead. In this lecture, Li Zehou also called me an "expert" in science and thought that I had "speaking priority", while I put forward some opinions in the spirit of "obedience". After the lecture, I had a talk with Li Zehou about going to school. Conversation record, like the last one, was specially given to Mr. Li Zehou for examination and approval. Afterwards, excerpts from the conversation were published by China Reading News, and then the full text was published in Science (No.9, 2022). The conversation involved Li Zehou's theory of two virtues, the relationship with virtue, power and goodness, and turning knowledge into wisdom.
In 2022, I experienced a major change in my life and then flew to Boston. In the meantime, I also talked with Mr. Li Zehou many times. After learning about my situation, he expressed great concern and appreciated my relatively calm attitude towards life. In a later email, Mr. Li Zehou wrote: "My brother's study has become a kind of self-cultivation practice, not just empty meaning, including dealing with life situations, taking his time, and doing his best to resign himself to fate, which is admirable." Of course, these words are somewhat flattering. The topic of our conversation still revolves around China's philosophy and philosophy. At that time, I was thinking about rights and obligations, the core of Confucianism and other issues, and our discussion also involved these aspects. Compared with face-to-face debates, China's dialogue is more about mutual understanding and communication. In the understanding of Confucianism, we have more knowledge than differences, and the construction of contemporary philosophy expresses a different approach from analytical philosophy and phenomenology. I remember chatting once and commenting on Mr. Li Zehou's students. Of course, Mr. Li Zehou himself rarely makes specific comments on his students as usual. I casually mentioned a student who has always been very influential in the academic field, thinking that he has a high intelligence, but his scholarship has two problems. First, he is slightly teasing and joking academically, not as serious as Mr. Li Zehou. Second, he is somewhat contemptuous and not very interested in the history of philosophy. Mr. Li Zehou agreed with this, but did not comment more. In my opinion, philosophical thinking needs not only intelligence in the sense of awareness, but also profound and sincere wisdom, and Mr. Li Zehou himself seems to be close to this point.
In 2022, Li Zehou was in East China Normal University.
Of course, as a man of flesh and blood, Mr. Li Zehou also has his own personality characteristics. Maybe we can mention something related to the academic talk we had in 2022. After the full text of Science was published, Mr. Li Zehou included it in his Dialogues (Li Zehou's Dialogues, Zhonghua Book Company, 2022). In 2022, after I returned to Shanghai from Boston for medical treatment, a student told me that the end of our conversation was somewhat puzzling. I didn't see this conversation before, so I asked Zhonghua Book Company for it. After reading it, I found that I added two lines that I didn't have before, to the effect that Mr. Feng Qi turned knowledge into wisdom and expounded great wisdom, but he (Li Zehou) "never understood it" and thought that I "needed to bring my own Aokang razor". As mentioned above, this conversation record has been examined and approved by Mr. Li Zehou (his revision of the transcript is still preserved), and it is based on the final version of the first trial when Science was officially published. In this case, it is obvious that the addition of words does not conform to the original manuscript or violate the specific scene of the dialogue. I was surprised and confused at that time, so I wrote to understand the relevant situation. Mr Li Zehou replied as follows: "Brother Guo Rong, your letter has been received. This sentence is the product of special circumstances. Although the content was told to you elsewhere, it did not conform to the facts of the conversation at that time. I should apologize. This letter can also be published. " After receiving this email, I thanked him for his understanding, but also specifically mentioned: "I am curious and presumptuous, but I don't know what this' special situation' is." Please pray for it if it is convenient. In this regard, Mr. Li Zehou's reply is: "Special circumstances cannot be made clear by email. I'm sorry I can't satisfy my brother's curiosity for the time being. "After this communication, I have basically got rid of this matter. I have no intention of delving into the details of the new words in the dialogue set. I just follow Mr. Li Zehou's instructions, and this letter can also be published to the public, and forward our related mail to Dr. Shen Zuohong, the responsible editor of Zhonghua Book Company. Looking back, the text of the academic conversation ended with a long speech. Judging from the content and structure of the conversation, it not only implies a different academic orientation from Mr. Li Zehou, but also seems to make Mr. Li Zehou in a certain "subordinate" position in the dialogue, both of which may be difficult for him to accept. With some critical remarks, this situation can be changed. In fact, if these words appear in the actual dialogue process, obviously there is no problem at all. What I didn't understand at that time was that it was not an "academic norm" to "unilaterally" add something that didn't appear in the actual dialogue when the actual dialogue had ended and the transcript of the dialogue had been published. On the eve of New Year's Day in 2022, Mr. Li Zehou wrote again and mentioned it again: "I wonder if you are still angry with me. If the book is reprinted, it will be regarded as disrespectful remarks. It's too late to regret it. Apologize again. Take care of yourself. "After receiving this email, I can't help but feel very moved: Mr. Li Zehou is my senior both in age and academically, but he has repeatedly apologized for adding words, which makes me feel a little embarrassed.
In February this year, I saw a headline in the newspaper, quoting Mr. Li Zehou. Out of respect for him, I immediately wrote a letter, which mentioned: "Today, I saw the following words in the introduction of Li Zehou's collected works, that is, Li Zehou has lifted the title of' self-styled person'. At such a time, I failed to open it. Personally, I feel that this kind of address and formulation seems to be detrimental to Mr. Wang's image, and I feel obliged to mention it to Mr. Wang. If something goes wrong, I will still pray for Han Hai. " After receiving the email, Mr. Li Zehou immediately replied: "Gray is evil. My brother's advice is really hard to get. Thank you for your advice. " Mr. Li Zehou's actual thoughts on this matter are not clear now, but the reason why I wrote to remind him is based on his research methods and contributions, and in essence he can't leave. I have also expressed the idea to relevant scholars that if I leave, Mr. Li Zehou will move closer to the Confucianism of Kant, Rawls or Mou Zongsan, which is an indispensable part of Li Zehou's thought and the fundamental reason why Mr. Li Zehou is different from Kang, Luo and Mou. 1848, and he mentioned "wandering in Europe". Nearly two hundred years later, another scene can often be seen in the ideological field around the world, which may constitute the historical background of Mr. Li Zehou's attempt to decouple. But later, it seems that Mr. Li Zehou didn't insist on cutting again. Whether this is related to my letter reminder is unknown.
In my conversations with scholars such as Mr. Li Zehou, I mentioned more than once that in the second half of the 20th century, there were two philosophers in China who deserved special attention, one was Feng Qi and the other was Li Zehou. Feng Qi's wisdom theory is unique, and his philosophy combines China's philosophy and philosophical wisdom. Li Zehou's ideological composition also shows some similarities. But Feng Qi pays more attention to the general process of knowing the world and himself, while Li Zehou gives some priority to historical ontology. On the formal level, Feng Qi inherited the Tsinghua School represented by Jin, and always showed the logical rigor of philosophical thinking, while Li Zehou always showed his theoretical insights with the intuition close to the poet while paying attention to revealing the truth with beauty.
In his later years, Li Zehou's academic focus changed. Previously, he was famous for his research on aesthetics and the history of China's thoughts. /kloc-The Course of Beauty, published in the 1980s, was circulated in academic circles. However, after entering the 2 1 century, his academic interest turned more to philosophical theory, and the so-called view that "China's philosophy should appear" also showed this point. 20 13 When I recommended the Ape Award, I had planned to include "Beautiful Journey" in the shortlist and ask for his advice. Mr. Li Zehou's reply is: "Art class is 30 years old, so don't be included in the candidate, it will make people laugh." Thank you for your kindness. "The self-evaluation of this book is naturally modest, but it can also be seen that he is not satisfied with his early research in the field of aesthetics. Although Mr. Li Zehou did not publish academic masterpieces in his later years, he often put forward his own unique views on philosophical theories, including science. In fact, as mentioned above, Mr. Li Zehou always has profound insights in different fields of philosophy, and his views are often concise and thought-provoking. Of course, in my opinion, philosophical research should distinguish between system construction and system investigation. The system always pursues all-inclusive forms, but at the same time it often digs deep into the roots and looks for the so-called ultimate fulcrum or origin. This systematic method often inevitably falls into speculative philosophy and will eventually be deconstructed. Mr. Li Zehou obviously does not try to make efforts in this regard. However, although it is not necessary to pursue systematic construction, philosophy should also be systematically studied, that is to say, the proposed viewpoints and related viewpoints need to be demonstrated from different aspects, and why and how it is possible should be systematically explained, rather than just putting forward some ideas. For various reasons, the systematic exposition of Mr. Li Zehou's philosophical thoughts in his later years seems to be somewhat inadequate. Of course, the spark of thought may appear trivial or even boring, which is obviously incompatible with Mr. Li Zehou's academic style. Perhaps this is one of the reasons why Mr. Li Zehou disdains to make a systematic exposition. However, from the perspective of academic evolution, some of his important viewpoints have not been fully developed, which is somewhat regrettable.
Mr. Li Zehou is full of optimistic beliefs about the future. In his contact with him, he repeatedly mentioned that China had a bright academic future, but he always had high hopes for the younger generation. Whenever I talk about this, I always say that historically, there are always important philosophers. Although contemporary and later generations are far ahead in academic conditions and material conditions, there may not be an original philosopher like him. This is certainly not flattering, but what I really think.
There is no Li Zehou in the world. This is not so much an expression of temporary sadness as an expression of endless thoughts.
165438+20221October 3rd
Editor in Charge: Huang Xiaofeng
Proofreading: Zhang
The above is related to the luck of the sheep boy in 2003, and it is about the sharing of philosophical research. I read the monthly fortune of sheep in 2003 and 2022, I hope this will help everyone!