Abstract
Li Zehou yra vienas svarbiausių ir įtakingiausių šių laikų Kinijos filosofų, vienas iš nedaugelio Kinijos intelektualų, kurio darbai sulaukė gausių skaitytojų už Kinijos sienos. Jo interesų sritis apima protingo ir tinkamo būdo suderinti praeitį ir ateitį, tradiciją ir modernybę, Kiniją ir Vakarus paieškas. Tokiame kontekste jis mėgino sukurti ankstyvojo marksizmo ir klasikinio konfucianizmo sintezę. Straipsnyje kritiškai analizuojant šiuos bandymus atskleidžiamos tokioms pastangoms iškylančios teorinės problemos. Atsižvelgiant į tai, kad Konfucijaus ir Marxo filosofijos sąsajos yra šiuolaikinėje Kinijoje plačiai aptarinėjamas ir itin prieštaringas klausimas, šiuo straipsniu siekiama kiek praskaidrinti šią problemą.
Highlights
One of the main reasons for the recent decline of the normative authority of the Communist Party of China (CPCh) can be found in the fact that the values it asserts within its central ideologies are no longer in contact with social reality
Since Confucianism is an important part of the traditional Chinese intellectual heritage, a revival of its values seems to be an appropriate filling for this axiological void
We believe that the basic principles of Marxism must be tightly linked to the concrete reality of
Summary
One of the main reasons for the recent decline of the normative authority of the Communist Party of China (CPCh) can be found in the fact that the values it asserts within its central ideologies are no longer in contact with social reality. Tempt to reconcile Marxism with traditional Chinese philosophy, he appears to get caught in his own snare He believes that his new explanation of substance (ti) in the sense of social existence leads back to classical Confucianism as well as to classical Marxism and claims: “The question of how to connect these two ‘classics’ is the problem I want to elaborate on” (Li 2016a: 379). Just like substance represents the – material and ideal – basis of (everyday) life, function, which embraces material and ideal factors, is the concrete way of life, the modus vivendi, that is culturally, linguistically, historically, and environmentally conditioned It is doubtful whether the material base and ideational superstructure can truly be incorporated into Li’s model of substance, as some interpreters consider:. We will illuminate this question from two angles: first from the external viewpoint of the historical and ideational background that has necessarily influenced the shaping of his ideas, and, secondly, from the internal viewpoint of his own system
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
