|
|
|
| Logic behind Progress from Cultural Confidence to Cultural Identity |
| TANG Dai-xing |
| Institute of Ethics, Sichuan Normal University, Chengdu, Sichuan, 610066 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Cultural confidence entails not only a stance to guide and lead other cultures with our culture so as to civilize people, but also expectation of positive response from other others. Cultural identity is a prerequisite for the response effect of cultural confidence. With cultural confidence, we are assertive about our culture and aim to integrate with other cultures. Cultural confidence is built in the process from self-assertion to integration with others so as to achieve cultural identity as a result. This logic is mainly based on regional pride of culture, the subjectivity of culture and the fact that humans are similarly wired but widely different in habits and behaviors. The construction of this logic requires not only formal conditions such as commodities, institutions, education and rituals, but also substantive conditions such as belief, value, conservatism and openness, non-coercion and non-induction. The necessity of opening this logic highlights the nationality claims of humanism, the right claims of cosmopolitanism, the subject claim of boundaries, and action appeal for love and faith. The key to the progress from cultural confidence to cultural identity is the coexistence of individuals and the world, otherness and universality. It must follow the natural logic of culture with perpetual development as primary driving force, the logic of rights and the logic of the subject with equality as the core, pursuing the coexistence of individuals and the collective, nations and the humanity, and countries and the world. The progress from cultural confidence to cultural identity, should be based on honesty and faith, and aimed at achieving understanding sympathy and compassionate love. Only with credit and morality can we make the world a better place. Only when we transcend narrow nationalism and extreme patriotism can we coexist in harmony.
|
|
Received: 20 December 2021
|
|
|
| Fund:国家社科基金后期资助项目“以伦理为视角通解《论语》”（19FZXB025） |
|
|
|
[1] 中国大百科全书(社会学卷)[C]国大百科全书(社会学卷)[C].北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1991.409.
[2] (宋)朱熹.周易本义[M].北京:中国书店出版社,1994.50.
[3] 秦会朵,范建华.论民族文化资源开发利用的原则和模式[J].中华文化论坛,2021,(2):114-124.
[4] 唐代兴. 伦理学原理[M].上海:上海三联书店,2018.216.
[5] 杨建坡. 主客体世界关系的演变逻辑及其马克思的变革[J].哲学探索,2020,(1):209-211.
[6] B.Guralnik,ed.Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language[M].NewYork and Cleveland:The World Publishing Company,1972.696.
[7] A.H.Murray,HenryBradley,W. A.Craigieand,C.T.Onions,eds.The Oxford English Dictionary(Vol.VII)[M].Oxford:Clarendon Press,1989.620.
[8] 王宁. 文学研究中的文化身份问题[J].外国文学,1999,(4):48-51.
[9] 闫嘉. 文学研究中的文化身份与文化认同问题[J].江西社会科学,2006,(9):62-66.
[10] 蒋欣欣. 西方女性主义理论中的“身份/认同”[J].文艺理论与批评,2006,(1):97-102.
[11] 魏艳辉. 从“身份”研究到“认同”研究——后现代主义语境中“身份”的语义危机[J].哈尔滨学院学报,2012,(6):94-98.
[12] 王坤宇. 文明冲突与中国和谐社会——王治河教授访谈录[J].哲学探索,2021,(1):51-54.
[13] 张克成. 从地理决定论到结构主义:地缘政治研究方法的变迁[J].学术探索,2012,(3):34-36.
[14] (美)詹姆斯.地理学思想史[M].李旭旦译.北京:商务印书馆,1982.25-26.
[15] (法)孟德斯鸠.论法的精神(上册)[M].张雁深译.北京:商务印书馆,1961.
[16] 梁启超. 中国前途之希望与国民责任[A].饮冰室合集·文集(第26册)[M].北京:中华书局,1989.22-23.
[17] 梁启超. 地理与文明之关系[A].饮冰室合集·文集(第10册)[M].北京:中华书局,1989.106.
[18] 冯友兰. 三松堂全集(第6卷)[M].郑州:河南人民出版社,1989.123.
[19] (古希腊)亚里士多德.政治学[M].吴寿彭译.北京:商务印书馆,1983.4-6.
[20] 唐代兴. 生境伦理的人性基石[M].上海:上海三联书店,2013.7.
[21] 黄克剑. 论语疏解[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2014.372.
[22] (英)休谟.人性论[M].关文运译.北京:商务印书馆,1983.7.
[23] 唐代兴. 生境伦理的哲学基础[M].上海:上海三联书店, 2013.57-84.
[24] 高清海. 高清海文存(第2卷)[M].长春:吉林人民出版社,1997.
[25] (捷)夸美纽斯.大教学论[M].傅任敢译.北京:教育科学出版社,2004.24.
[26] (宋)朱熹.四书集注[M].长沙:岳麓书社,1995.256.
[27] 汪信砚. 全球化中的价值认同与价值观冲突[J].哲学研究,2002,(11):22-26.
[28] ErnestGellner.Nations and Nationalism[M].Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1983.7.
[29] (苏)斯大林.民族问题和列宁主义[A].斯大林全集(第11卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,1955.286.
[30] (美)本尼迪克特·安德森.想象的共同体:民族主义的起源与散布[M].吴睿人译.上海:上海人民出版社,2003. 46-55.
[31] (德)马克思.资本论(第1卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,1975.182. |
|
|
|
2022, Vol. 39 
