Traditional culture is divided into stocks, variables and increments

Author: HAO Tiechuan (Dean of Shen Junru Law School of Hangzhou Normal University, Professor of East China University of Political Science and Law)

Source: Originally published in Rule of Law Daily, March 16, 2022, Jiang Anjie edited the "Law School" edition

From the time I was involved in the discussion of traditional culture in the 1980s to today, I have been thinking about the change and invariance of traditional culture. Recently, I read some articles by Peng Kaiping, a professor at the Department of Psychology of Tsinghua University, who use psychological research methods to analyze traditional culture, and deeply feel that traditional culture is not only a relatively stable stock, so it is manifested as a type, but at the same time it is also a variable that is not absolutely stable, that is, some contents of traditional culture will disappear with the development of the times. Finally, some of the contents of traditional culture have been creatively transformed and innovatively developed by us, and it has become an increment.

First, traditional culture is a relatively stable stock. For example, Chinese emphasizes holistic thinking, it is easier to see the whole, to see the whole, to see a forest, to see all the correlations and changes; Westerners emphasize analytical thinking, it is easy to see the trees, it is easy to see the unique personality of each tree, the distinctive characteristics, and even its exclusivity.

So far, this difference between Chinese and Western ways of thinking has not changed, presenting a cultural stock. Professor Peng cites an example of his own experience (see Professor Peng's article "How Chinese Differ from Western Thinking" published in Liberation Daily on February 18 this year). In 1991, a Chinese student studying at the University of Iowa in the United States shot and killed five people, then committed suicide by drinking bullets. This incident caused a great shock in American society. Professor Peng knew the international student from Beijing, who had sought out a roommate in his wife's dorm roommate when he was in love. Peng said to his wife with great emotion that if the two of them had succeeded in their love, perhaps he would not have come to this point. The next day Peng also expressed this view to his American colleagues, but did not expect them to unanimously say to Peng: Really happy for your wife's roommate, if they are married, then it is likely that she will be killed. Why is there such a different view? Later, after thinking about it, Peng came to the conclusion that Chinese from the perspective of society as a whole, he believes that the environment and the people around him, including lovers and children, can change a person's behavior. But Americans are accustomed to starting from individual analysis, thinking that no matter who he marries, whether he has children or not, he will kill people, which is his natural decision. Later, Professor Peng also conducted a questionnaire survey and asked some counterfactual reasoning questions to Chinese students and American students. For example, if the international student is married, what is the probability of him killing people; if he is in China, what is the probability of him killing people; if he has children, what is the probability of him killing people? As a result, Professor Peng found that Chinese generally believed that if he was married, he would most likely not kill people, because his wife would take care of him; if he had children, he would not kill people, because the children would influence him. Therefore, Chinese are very good at finding causes from environmental factors and finding explanations for the problem. However, Americans are different. When an American student answers these kinds of questions, the answer is almost the same — if he's in China, he kills people; if he has children, he kills children; if he has wives, he kills wives. They speak entirely of personal causes and do not look for causes from other sources. Moreover, the difference between China and the West has become more and more obvious since the age of 12. In other words, most children under the age of 12 are attributed to individuals, and cultural differences are not obvious. As we get older, the cultural differences between China and the West are becoming more and more obvious. Therefore, Professor Peng believes that cultural differences in thinking are formed at about the age of twelve or thirteen. Professor Peng's research shows that different cultures have different logical thinking, and we can master the logical thinking of different cultures through learning in order to better adapt to the development of globalization. For example, when dealing with affairs, if you think that human behavior is mostly affected by the environment, then your focus is to change the environment and conditions; if you think that human behavior is mostly determined by individuals, then your focus is to change the individual.

Second, traditional culture is a variable that does not change. More than 100 years ago, the American missionary Arthur Smith came to China and lived in China for a long time. Based on his observation and experience of the daily behavior, life habits, and values of Chinese, he wrote a book called "The Character of Chinese". It puts forward 26 characteristics of Chinese, including saving face, frugality, hard work, politeness, disregard for time, disregard for precision, easy to misunderstand, twists and turns, obedience but not obedience, vague thoughts, unhurried, contempt for foreign nationalities, and so on.

However, Professor Peng recently used modern scientific methods to verify, and found that only 5 characteristics of modern Chinese are still maintained, and others no longer exist. For example, Smith said that Chinese is a frugal people, so is it true that we Chinese today to be frugal? Peng's research found that when there is no money Chinese is frugal, but after having money, Chinese is actually quite good at consumption. Professor Peng has also used modern psychology research to overturn many stereotypes about Chinese in the past. For example, in the past, scholars believed that Chinese were good at deductive thinking, and Westerners were good at inductive thinking, which was the difference between Chinese and Western ways of thinking. But in fact, this impression was proved wrong by Professor Peng's research on cultural psychology, Chinese is also good at inductive thinking. For example, in the past, Chinese was always cautious, but a closer analysis shows that this is not the case in Chinese today, and in the economic field, Chinese very adventurous. Think about it, the scrambling shareholders, the hot investors, the passionate entrepreneurs, and a large number of tide makers from all walks of life "hold the red flag in their hands" and become the Chinese's risk-taking spirit. Therefore, Professor Peng reminds people that our thinking should not stop at individual cases and old conclusions. In fact, today's Chinese has changed, and it is no longer the rigid, timid and fearful agricultural society of the past.

Coincidentally, Professor He Huaihong expressed a similar view in the article "What to do when surrounded by different voices" (published in the 14th edition of Liberation Daily on February 18, 2022). He pointed out that in traditional societies, whether in the East or the West, there is a general pursuit of some lofty values. For example, in the Western Middle Ages, the pursuit of a holy life like saints, while the ancient Chinese pursued the gentleman's morality advocated by Confucianism. It should be emphasized that the noble morality of traditional society encourages a small number of people to pursue, and it is a socially dominant value pursuit. Because the structure of traditional society is fundamentally different from that of modern society. Traditional society is a hierarchical society, ruled and governed by a few people, so it does not require all members of society to pursue nobility. Confucius once said, "The virtue of a gentleman, the virtue of a villain." In traditional society, noble moral requirements are aimed at a small number of people, and gentlemen set an example, lead by example, and then influence and influence ordinary people. There is also a saying in the West that "aristocratic behavior should be noble", that is, the nobility should not be too utilitarian and too materialistic, but should pay more attention to spiritual things - honor. However, modern society advocates that everyone is equal, and everyone's value pursuit is allowed without hindering or infringing on the equally reasonable value pursuit of others, even without distinction between high and low, and everyone can pursue happiness as he understands it. However, everyone understands happiness differently. Some people think that growing wealth is the greatest happiness, some people think that enjoying the joy of heaven is the greatest happiness, and some people think that artistic creation is the greatest happiness. This means that the values of modern society are pluralistic, and each value has its own certain rationality. Therefore, on the one hand, we must promote the main theme, and on the other hand, we must allow diversification. This is determined by the diversification of all production divisions, classes, employment patterns and lifestyles. On the one hand, we must draw the largest concentric circles and seek the greatest social consensus, and on the other hand, we must coexist with diversity.

Is it possible to draw the largest concentric circles and seek the greatest consensus? It now seems possible. Professor Peng's research shows that of the 26 features of the Chinese Smith summarized in the past, 5 are still preserved by modern Chinese. In addition, some scholars have sorted out the values of various peoples in the world and found that "do not do to others what you do not want" is the common belief of all ethnic groups, so it is called the "golden rule".

Third, traditional culture is an increment of creative transformation and innovative development. In this regard, I have conducted empirical research in the recent "Studies on the Chinese Legal System (Revised Edition)" published by the Commercial Press and "On the Creative Transformation of the Chinese Legal System" published in the first issue of Oriental Law this year. For example, in ancient China, starting from the concept of "peace is precious" and "no litigation", social disputes were resolved by mediation, and today it has been creatively transformed into a people's mediation system and creatively developed into an ADR system (that is, an alternative dispute resolution mechanism); in ancient China, starting from the concept of "benevolence to righteousness", it stipulated a system of beheading and hanging, which is creatively transformed into a system of suspended execution of the death penalty today.

Not only in the legal field can be creatively transformed and innovatively developed, but also in other fields. For example, in terms of dietary etiquette, the Western people's meal sharing system is more scientific, and the Chinese meal sharing system is more humane, and the result has evolved, and now there are chopsticks for their own use and common chopsticks; or two pairs of chopsticks for one person, one into their own mouth, one with sandwich dishes; small dishes are shared, other dishes are shared, and so on, these etiquettes absorb the length of Chinese and Western food etiquette, reflecting the wisdom of Chinese.

Therefore, we must analyze traditional culture dialectically, not to despise it, because it has become our gene; not to be superstitious about it, because it may disappear tomorrow with the changes in social production and lifestyle; to believe in it, because it is by no means a waste, it can be injected with new elements by the times and rejuvenated. There is often no waste in the world, and waste is likely to be misplaced energy.

Submissions are reproduced for illustration

This public name is not a non-profit and does not pay remuneration

Submission of the article shall be deemed to be an agreement to the reprinting and publication of the article under this public account