The online well-known overseas scholars who participated in the opening ceremony on the 26th came from the website of China Social Science Daily
The "Academic China" International Summit Forum, also known as the "Hundred Talents Forum", invites top scholars in the field of philosophy and social sciences at home and abroad to comprehensively display "China in Academia", "China in Theory" and "China in Philosophy and Social Science", making it an important platform for prospering Chinese scholarship, developing Chinese theory, and disseminating Chinese thought, and building it into an influential academic forum brand in the world.
The first "Academic China" International Summit Forum was held on October 14-15, 2021, with the participation of many guests in the lecture hall and the grand coverage of the lecture hall. From now on, we will continue to report the views of guests in Academic China in 2022 to listen to friends and readers. The first article is huang Ping, executive vice president of the China Academy of Academic Research in Hong Kong, "The Narrative Logic of Telling Theories and Building a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind" (see the link at the end of the article)
Qin Yaqing (former dean of the China Foreign Affairs University and chair professor of Shandong University) took a screenshot from the online
At present, knowledge production is indeed an important issue for China's intellectual circles and for China's international relations circles. It can be said that China's international relations have entered the academic field of international relations in the world in recent years, on the one hand, it has had a positive impact, on the other hand, it has also triggered a fierce debate, and the most fundamental debate topic is the issue of Chinese nature, which actually vividly shows that the development of China's international relations theory is a process of knowledge inclusion, and knowledge inclusion is an important path to the common knowledge of mankind. Therefore, I would like to address three issues in 15 minutes.
Knowledge inclusion: an important path for knowledge reproduction in multicultural civilizations
First, what is knowledge inclusion? In the simplest way, it refers to the process of social knowledge reproduction caused by the interaction between different cultures, absorbing and importing foreign learning, not letting go of the original knowledge of the nation, and integrating these two seemingly different knowledge systems in a middle-of-the-ordinary dialectical way. I personally hope to gradually develop this concept into a theory.
As we all know, the world is composed of a pluralistic practice community, and in the space of multi-practice knowledge interaction, exchanges, communication, debates, etc. between the practice communities are an important way to generate and evolve knowledge. Practical knowledge itself is formed through introverted and extroverted practical practice, and culture is the common practice of knowledge. Through such interaction, the two knowledge systems interact and merge with each other to generate new knowledge; After the emergence of a new knowledge system, it is also necessary to live endlessly through more in-depth implications, through speculation and mutual discernment, and reflection on evolution; Eventually it became an integral part of the common knowledge of mankind in the form of pluralism.
Therefore, knowledge inclusion points to an important path for the reproduction of social knowledge in the context of a multi-civilization world.
Single- and two-way, interactive: Self-culture and other cultures are integrated into common knowledge
Second, the stage and characteristics of knowledge inclusion. Hanhua is a process, not achieved overnight, but a process of knowledge exchange and exchange and fusion of different cultural communities to produce new knowledge. The premise of this process is the coexistence and communication of multiple forms of knowledge, characterized by openness and inclusiveness. It can be divided into three stages - one-way inclusion, two-way inclusion, and interactive inclusion, but they are not so diametrically opposed to each other, and sometimes overlap with each other.
One-way inclusion mainly refers to the knowledge of one cultural body entering and influencing the knowledge system of another cultural body. In other words, it is more of a one-dimensional knowledge influence, characterized by knowledge learning, such as Buddhism's early entry into China and its beginning to influence Chinese intellectuals and society, and finally the development of Zen Buddhism; The introduction of Chinese culture to Central Asia, and the entry of other ethnic groups or modern Western culture and knowledge into East Asia are some of these processes. The form of expression is often the reception of the dissemination. The early knowledge of international relations in the United States was mainly learned from Europe, and the knowledge of American international relations before the behaviorist revolution was mainly to learn traditional European international relations theory, diplomatic theory and history, which was a one-way implication. Through the efforts of scholars, one-way inclusion will develop towards two-way inclusion.
Two-way inclusion is that the one-way inclusion of knowledge begins to have a reflective effect on the receiving side, and he wants to exert his own active role, reproduce knowledge through reflective reconstruction, and produce self-cultural elements and meanings. For example, the evolution of Buddhism in China into Buddhism in China is such a process. Self-culture begins to seek knowledge reproduction through exchanges with other cultures, and may produce new products of knowledge with self-cultural implications. Therefore, the characteristic of two-way implication is theoretical innovation, which has original significance, and if it is not suppressed by the power of intellectual discourse and dies, the two-way influence will begin to have an effect. Two-way connotation excavates the knowledge elements of self-culture, and forms a product-oriented product orientation of knowledge reproduction and social theory pluralism in the dialogue with other cultural knowledge.
Interactive connotation is that self-culture and other cultures really go deep into each other's cultural core, forming a mutual integration relationship. The knowledge of the self and other cultures is still different, but it is a complementary difference, and the two sides of the unity of knowledge are opposites. Characterized by the convergence of knowledge, in the ideal mode of interaction, the plurality of knowledge promotes the prosperity of knowledge production, and the debate and dialogue between knowledge promote the sublimation of knowledge, with the ultimate purpose of building common human knowledge.
The common knowledge of mankind produced by interaction is based on the practical knowledge of multiple civilizations, and any local knowledge has the legitimacy of knowledge, but any local knowledge does not have a monopoly of knowledge, so the three stages of knowledge inclusion are interrelated, and one-way two-way and interaction are manifested as a logical premise relationship. One-way inclusion is the premise of two-way inclusion, and two-way inclusion is the premise of interactive inclusion.
At present, the field of China's international relations and the field of international relations in the world are in the early stage of two-way implications, Western international relations still occupy a dominant position, non-Western international relations theories have begun to sprout, and whether they can move forward after the knowledge is contained, the most fundamental question is whether the knowledge of non-Western international relations is premature or can be developed.
Does Chineseness in Chinese International Theory Lead to Cultural Substanceism?
Third, the development of China's international relations theory and the issue of Chinese nature. At present, the development of China's international relations theory is in the forefront of the non-Western world, has gone beyond the single connotation, and initially entered the stage of two-way connotation, marking the emergence of China's international relations theory. For example, the often mentioned "Tianxia system", "moral realism", "relationalism", "symbiosis" theory, etc., the common point of these theoretical innovations is that traditional Chinese culture is the basic knowledge resource, which has had a certain impact on the world international relations circles, and of course has triggered a fierce debate - specifically, Chineseness has become a major criticism of Western scholars.
Some scholars believe that this expresses cultural materialism, will lead to cultural centrism, and even form a binary split in the knowledge of international relations. In the stage of two-way implication, Chinese scholars have chosen traditional Chinese cultural thought as a knowledge resource for theoretical construction, laying the foundation for pluralism and diversity. Although there are identical and different ideas in different cultures, the discovery of differences is an important prerequisite for leading to innovation, even in one cultural body, otherwise international relations can only have one standard, one life. Therefore, the excavation of elements in the subcultural tradition that are conducive to the reproduction of knowledge and common human knowledge is not only a mistake, but a contribution.
If there is only one culture that can serve as a legitimate resource for knowledge, this culture becomes a monopoly of knowledge through the operation of power, and thus a terminator of knowledge; Allowing marginalized and silent knowledge to grow and develop is precisely an important way to subvert cultural materialism, subvert cultural centrism, and ultimately dissolve cultural materialism.
So does the use of traditional culture as a knowledge resource constructed by social theory inevitably lead to cultural substanceism and cultural centrism? My point is no, it can lead to three outcomes. The first is to adhere to cultural substanceism or move toward cultural centrism; The second is the assimilation and dissolution of dominant knowledge, which is a common scenario; The third is to broaden human experience and practical knowledge, so as to enrich human appearance knowledge, that is, academic knowledge system. It would do a better job of extending social theory to a global context and giving it true human significance. When using traditional culture as a construction and knowledge resource, it is necessary to prevent the emergence of academic nationalism from being triggered as cultural substanceism and cultural centrism, and to vigorously excavate traditional culture to make it create, so that traditional culture can produce innovative development and become part of the common knowledge of mankind.
Therefore, interactive connotation, as knowledge production, is precisely the key practical activity to dissolve cultural centrism and maintain the originality of social knowledge. In this process, there may be a certain practice activity and knowledge product that emphasizes self-culture, but this kind of thing should be strategic cultural substanceism, not essentially falling into substanceism. Therefore, because of this, China's international relations theory is of great significance to the reproduction of knowledge of global international relations in the true sense.
(Li Nian, according to the online recording, has not been reviewed by himself, and was originally titled "Interaction: Multi-Civilization and Common Knowledge of Mankind")
End-of-article link:
Huang Ping: Speaking about things and theories, the narrative logic of building a community with a shared future for mankind | Academic China 2022-1
Author: Qin Yaqing (Former Dean of China Foreign Affairs University, Chair Professor of Shandong University)
Editor: Li Nian