|
|
|
| Examining the Internal Unity of Chinese Civilization from the Differences between Chinese and Western Civilizations |
| LIU Zhi-gang |
| Party School of Jiangsu Provincial Committee of the C.P.C., Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210009 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract The differences between Chinese and Western ideas on the conflict of civilizations determine the different historical trends of Chinese and Western civilizations. In the history of Western civilization, although there was once the prosperity of ancient Greek civilization and the short-term unification of the Roman Empire, the historical norm of political division, ethnic division, religious and secular confrontation, geographical expansion is accompanied by the interruption of civilization, ethnic conflicts cannot be bridged, political communities are limited to local areas, and religion and secularity are mutually exclusive, reflects the logic of “division” of Western civilization. As the only civilization form that has been inherited for thousands of years and has never stopped flowing, Chinese civilization embodies the logic of “integration” because of its natural internal unity. Adhering to the common belief that “the land cannot be divided, the country cannot be chaotic, the nation cannot be dispersed, and the civilization cannot be broken”, Chinese civilization has not only shaped the national community of “one family under the world”, but also formed the national community of “Hua Yi Wu Wai”, the political community of “great unification”, and the cultural community of “pluralistic integration”. Because of its inherent unity, Chinese civilization, while maintaining the sense of geographical belonging and national identity of the Chinese nation, has accumulated the concept of national community of “Hua Yi unification” and the value criterion of “harmony is precious”; the great unification tradition of “Kyushu Coherence, Pluralistic Integration” and the eclectic spiritual temperament have cultivated the collectivism ethics of “home, country and world” of Chinese civilization.
|
|
Received: 11 September 2023
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] 钱穆. 中国历史研究法[M].北京:九州出版社,2012.113.
[2] (英)阿诺德·汤因比.历史研究(上卷)[M].郭小凌等译.上海:上海人民出版社,2010.190.
[3] (英)马丁·雅克.当中国统治世界:中国的崛起和西方世界的衰落[M].张莉,刘曲译.北京:中信出版社,2010.161.
[4] 潘岳. 中国五胡入华与欧洲蛮族入侵[J].中央社会主义学院学报,2021,(2):5-32.
[5] 吕文利.中国古代天下观的意识形态建构及其制度实践[J].中国边疆史地研究,2013,(3):1-11+147.
[6] 孙红梅. 中华民族共同体视域下的元代“中国”认同[J].陕西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2022,(4):74-87.
[7] (日)山本新等.未来属于中国:汤因比的中国观[M].吴栓友译.北京:世界知识出版社,2018.
[8] 中共中央党史和文献研究院.十九大以来重要文献选编(中册)[M].北京:中央文献出版社,2021.214-215.
[9] 费孝通. 中华民族多元一体格局[M].北京:中央民族学院出版社,1989.1.
[10] 萧枫主编:文白对照全注全译资治通鉴(第二卷)[M].西安:陕西师范大学出版社,1997.424.
[11] 石硕.胡入中华:“中华”一词的产生及开放性特点——东晋南北朝至隋唐胡汉融合与“中华”词义嬗变[J].清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2022,(4):128-136+225.
[12] 刘文明. 全球史理论与文明互动研究[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2015.161.
[13] 刘文明. 从全球文明观念史看中国式现代化[J].历史研究,2023,(2):18-29.
[14] 方素梅. 探寻中西方道路的文明逻辑[A].潘岳.中西文明根性比较[M].北京:新世界出版社,2022.307-308.
[15] 傅才武,严星柔.论建设21世纪中华民族文化共同体[J].华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2016,(5):63-74.
[16] 郑玄注,孔颖达疏.礼记正义·王制(卷12)[M].北京:中华书局,2009.2896.
[17] 费孝通. 中华民族的多元一体格局[J].北京大学学报(哲学社会科学版),1989,(4):3-21.
[18] 董仲舒. 春秋繁露[M].张世亮,钟肇鹏,周桂钿译注.北京:中华书局,2012.114.
[19] 韩愈. 五百家注韩昌黎集(卷11)[M].魏仲举集注,郝润华,王东峰整理.北京:中华书局,2019.675.
[20] 潘岳. 中西文明根性比较[M].北京:新世界出版社,2022.
[21] (英)佩里·安德森.从古代到封建主义的过渡[M].郭方,刘健译.上海:上海人民出版社,2016.81.
[22] (英)阿诺德·汤因比,(日)池田大作.选择生命——汤因比与池田大作对谈录[M].冯峰,隽雪艳,孙彬译.北京:商务印书馆,2017.
[23] (古希腊)伊索克拉底.古希腊演说辞全集(伊索克拉底卷)[M].冯金朋总主编;李永斌译注.长春:吉林出版集团有限责任公司,2015.122.
[24] (英)M.I.芬利.古代世界的政治[M].晏绍祥,黄洋译.北京:商务印书馆,2016.140.
[25] 青觉. 从政治凝聚到心灵认同:新时代各民族共有精神家园建设——基于国家的分析视角[J].西北师大学报(社会科学版),2021,(1):31-38.
[26] 习近平. 习近平著作选读(第一卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,2023.285.
[27] (英)凯伦·阿姆斯特.轴心时代——塑造人类精神与世界观的大转折时代[M].孙艳燕,白彦兵译.海口:海南出版社,2010.2.
[28] (英)伯特兰·罗素.中国问题[M].田瑞雪译.北京:中国画报出版社,2019.
[29] 田飞龙. 文明双峰之间的好奇与穿梭[A].潘岳.中西文明根性比较[M].北京:新世界出版社,2022.185.
[30] 尹志.中华文明具有突出的统一性——深刻把握中华文明的突出特性(三)[N].人民日报,2023-06-28(B09). |
|
|
|
2023, Vol. 40 
