Please wait a minute...

Frontiers of Philosophy in China

Front Phil Chin    2011, Vol. 6 Issue (4) : 609-627
On the Problem of the Meaning of Life in “Chinese Philosophy”
DENG Xize()
School of Political Science, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610064, China
Download: PDF(279 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

The goal of “(modern) Chinese Philosophy” established during the period of the May 4th Movement is to reestablish the meaning of life for Chinese people. However, because it takes the approach of interpreting Chinese thinking through a Western lens, thus forming a discourse pattern of “Chinese A is Western B,” which is only capable of manifesting Western culture, “Chinese Philosophy” is made logically impossible as the ideological source from which modern Chinese thinkers could construct the meaning of life. The ideological source of the still lasting traditional lifestyle is Yili Xue 义理学 (The Learning of Righteousness and Principles); whereas that of modern life, which was established as an imitation of the West, is Western culture. Neither of them takes “Chinese Philosophy” as its ideological source. Therefore, “Chinese Philosophy” is excluded from the construction of the meaning of life, and falls into the dilemma of life meaning.

Keywords Yili Xue      meaning      ideological source      inquiry-response-action      interpretation     
Corresponding Author(s): DENG Xize,;   
Issue Date: 05 December 2011
 Cite this article:   
DENG Xize. On the Problem of the Meaning of Life in “Chinese Philosophy”[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2011, 6(4): 609-627.
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
Articles by authors
Related articles from Frontiers Journals
[1] NI Peimin. Toward a Gongfu Reconstruction of Confucianism —Responses to Comments by Huang Yong, Fan Ruiping, and Wang Qingjie[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(2): 240-253.
[2] CHEN Yajun. Between Darwin and Hegel: On Dewey’s Concept of Experience[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(1): 104-119.
[3] ZANG Fengyu. How to Construct Marxian Thoughts as a Political Philosophy?[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2015, 10(4): 601-614.
[4] Gerry Coulter. The Embrace of Radical Philosophical Emptiness as a Liberating Conceptualization of Thought in Roland Barthes and Jean Baudrillard[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2014, 9(2): 194-212.
[5] Heinrich Geiger. Sign, Image and Language in The Book of Changes (Yijing 易经)[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2013, 8(4): 607-623.
[6] Richard G. Heck, Jr.. Is Compositionality a Trivial Principle?[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2013, 8(1): 140-155.
[7] Jos de MUL. Horizons of Hermeneutics: Intercultural Hermeneutics in a Globalizing World[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2011, 6(4): 628-655.
[8] PENG Chuanhua. A New Discourse on Xunzi’s Philosophy of Language[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2011, 6(2): 193-216.
[9] ZENG Zhenyu. Semantic Criticism: The “Westernization” of the Concepts in Ancient Chinese Philosophy—A Discussion of Yan Fu’s Theory of Qi[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2011, 6(1): 100-113.
[10] CHEN Xiaoping. How Does Downward Causation Exist?—A Comment on Kim’s Elimination of Downward Causation[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2010, 5(4): 652-665.
[11] YU Hong. “All Things Are Already Complete in My Body”: An Explanation of the Views of the Taizhou School on the Human Body[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2010, 5(3): 396-413.
[12] WANG Jing. What kind of knowledge is necessary for the interpretation of language?[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2008, 3(3): 409-423.
[13] LI Cunshan. A differentiation of the meaning of “qi” on several levels[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2008, 3(2): 194-212.
[14] FAN Hao. The meaning-dialogue in mutual interpretation of ethical-economical concepts and its value dissimilation[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2008, 3(2): 254-266.
[15] LIN Cunguang. A new interpretation of Confucianism: The interpretation of Lunyu as a text of philosophical hermeneutics[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2007, 2(4): 533-546.
Full text