Gruop photo of attendees to the Second Sino-US High Level Scholarly Forum held at Wesleyan University

Co-hosted by Social Sciences in China Press (SSCP) and Wesleyan University, the Second Sino-US High Level Scholarly Forum was held at Wesleyan University on May 9th to 11th. Prominent Chinese and American scholars exchanged ideas on the theme “the Enlightenment from the comparative perspective.”

 

The relations between the intellectual forces unleashed in the European Enlightenment Movement in the 18th century and the rapid conceptual and material leaps the following century have long been the focal point of scholarly discussion on the relation between tradition, the Enlightenment, and modernity.

 

Speaking on the historical value of the Enlightenment Movement in his opening address, President of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) Wang Weiguang asserted that “the movement raised the Renaissance’s anti-feudal, anti-theology, anti-superstition, and anti-church flags high, and became the ideological and theoretical weapon for the bourgeois political revolution. The Enlightenment advocated the concept of democracy, equality, and freedom, and provided important theoretical support and inspiration for Europe’s development, North America's independence, and the progress of Western society”. President Wang emphasized that these are enduring themes which still exercise broad impact in the present-day situation. They are still a force “against feudal autocracy, dictatorship, and benighted forces ,” he concluded.

 

Understanding the Enlightenment

 

As the discussions ensued, the diversity of cultural and academic backgrounds led to a rich conversation and a multi-dimensional understanding of the Enlightenment.

 

Prof. Hayden White from the University of Stanford observed that while the Hegelian interpretation of the Enlightenment had profoundly influenced thinkers in the 19th century, the aesthetic or the aestheticist view had also once been popular among historians.

 

Vera Schwarcz, Mansfield Freeman Professor of East Asian Studies at Wesleyan University, noted that the idea of “Knowledge is power” in fact predated the 18th-century French Enlightenment thinking; its genesis was in a time before which rationality became wholly instrumental, where thought and spirit had not been completely separated and while faith in and uncertainty about what wisdom the great scientific discoveries would offer humankind still lingered simultaneously. When exploring other cultures and trying to rebuild their own in the 20th century, Chinese thinkers did not unequivocally import the intellectual and ideational lexicon of 18th-century Europe，Prof. Schwarcz explained. They looked to their own inheritance when defining “enlightenment” and “consciousness,” drawing upon exemplars of Chinese thought such as Huang Zongxi, Dai Zhen and Gu Yanwu.

 

Han Shuifa, a professor of philosophy from Peking University, asserted that the chief consensus of the European Enlightenment Movement was that reason is the highest principle in all the fields of natural knowledge and human affairs. This is the very essence of “enlightenment,” he affirmed.

 

Frances Ferguson, a professor from the University of Chicago, regarded skepticism toward religion as one of the most prominent characteristics of the European Enlightenment Movement. However, he clarified that the radical Enlightenment thinkers did not reject religion or refute it as an opposite, but rather gained a special inspiration in analyzing the Holy Bible, while developing a strong demand for reason when analyzing non-doctrinal sources.

 

Wu Genyou, a professor from Wuhan University, affirmed that historians and philosophers can glean a much more robust understanding of the Enlightenment in world history by tracing modern Chinese intellectuals’ interpretation and application of the Western concept of “enlightenment,” namely how its nebulousness lends it a great deal of variability in its manifestations.

 

Reflecting on and transcending the Enlightenment

 

While testifying to the achievements of Enlightenment thought, Wang Weiguang cautioned that it is not universally applicable to every nation, as it is essentially bourgeois. Today’s discussion of the Enlightenment should be predicated on historical and critical reflection—a vantage point from which scholars can re-examine and sort out the intellectual heritage of the Enlightenment Movement, he said.

 

Ma Depu, a professor from Tianjin Normal University, elaborated that pedestal upon which “reason” was placed in Enlightenment thought has had some ultimately negative backlash in China, leading to blind faith in scientific methods, Western experience and political principles.

 

Prof. Schwarcz also iterated the necessity of transcending superficial cosmopolitanist “enlightenment.” If we recognize the necessity of critical spirit at the present, we must overcome the arrogance of reason, she articulated.

　　

The Enlightenment and China

 

In his speech, Wang Weiguang maintained that through repeated inquiry and intellectual exploration over the course of more than half century after the Opium Wars, the Chinese people came to understand that for China to develop, it had to not only inherit the essence of the Enlightenment, but also determinedly explore its own path of liberation. It was in this particular context that Marxism and the Communist Party of China ascended onto the stage of Chinese history, having chosen the direction forward and the correct road with Chinese characteristics, he explained.

 

Qualifying that although it was not as complete as the 18th-century European movement, Prof. Ma Min, party secretary of Central China Normal University, affirmed that China did go through a process of enlightenment. In particular, professor Ma observed that the role of mercantilism and mercantilist thought was pivotal in China’s native intellectual enlightenment, laying the groundwork for the rise of capitalism and advent of industrialization. Despite of its limitations, it was a significant force in China’s modernization, and it can still provide a potent historical reference for the present day, he concluded.

 

Chen Lai, a professor of philosophy from Tsinghua University, noted that all the political, intellectual and cultural revolutions in 20th-century China were inextricably intertwined with the heritage of the Enlightenment Movement. For the present moment, he urged Chinese to foster a new understanding of the Confucian moral tradition and reflect on the unidimensional perception of the enlightenment thinking in order to rejuvenate China and rebuild its ethical and moral systems.

 

Sun Hui, an editor from SSCP, expounded that the Enlightenment filtered into modern China from the ground up, first influencing science and technology and then the political and cultural systems before reaching the level of the purely intellectual. To Sun, this historical sequence indicates that the various phases of learning from the West seemingly correspond to different ideological questions China grappled with as it progresses through historical stages. Having deep import still today, this is a question of constantly learning from experience and advancing toward new intellectual heights, Sun maintained.

 

The attendees at the forum are scholars from various disciplines including philosophy, historiography, literature, sociology and politics. Their cross-cultural and interdisciplinary discussion on the Enlightenment has a unique and purposeful significance in deepening mutual understanding and erecting a more equitable and congruous world order.

 

The Sino-US High Level Scholarly Forum is a small-scale, elite symposium attended by senior influential scholars from both countries. This bi-annual event is hosted by SSCP and Wesleyan University in turn. The third forum will be held in Beijing in 2015.

 

Chu Guofei is a reporter from Chinese Social Sciences Today.

 

The Chinese version appeared in Chinese Social Sciences Today, No. 449, May 13.

 

Translated by Jiang Hong