Social Sciences in China (Chinese Edition)

No.4, 2017

 

From the “Argument of Form and Body” to the “Argument of Body and Reason”: The Transmutation of the Intellectual Paradigm of Classical Chinese Philosophy

(Abstract)

 

Gong Hua’nan

 

Following the shift from “form” (形) to “metaphysics”(形而上, or what is above forms), the “form” paradigm established in the pre-Qin era evolved into the paradigm of “body (体).” The juncture of the Wei and Jin dynasties saw a resurgence of new philosophers of “form and name” (形名) who exalted form (name). In response to these ideas, others thinkers, starting from Confucianism and Daoism, used “body” to correct “form.” Wang Bi divided form and body into two levels: “form” was what it was, while body was “reason” or what made it so. “Form” was thus rendered totally insignificant; ultimately, “body” consciously took the leadership in the “argument of body and reason.” Song NeoConfucians used the integration of “possible existence” (未尝无), “existence” (见在底), and “what should exist” (合当底) to interpret and define “body” to develop the corresponding thinking. At the same time, they elevated “reason” (理)into the union of “what is so” and “what should be so.” The “body,” as the reasonable state or “what should be so,” could be used to describe people but not things, thus curtailing its descriptive function. In this way, “reason” suppressed “body” and was set up as a new intellectual paradigm. From the “argument of form and body” to the “argument of body and reason,” the conscious evolution of the three paradigms of “form,” “body,” and “reason” exhibits the holistic and systematic nature of the development of Chinese philosophy.