requestId:684d911da83c04.45264051.

Save the “home” in the modern world – Response to the “home” philosophical discussion

Author: Sun Xiangchen

Source: The author authorized the Confucian network to release, original “Exploration and Contest” Issue 10, 2021

Abstract: When discussing the problem of “home”, “The Discussion” proposed the concept of “double body”, that is, personal body and relative. On the one hand, my work is absolutely sure the meaning of “individuals” to modern society; on the other hand, I highly value the discovery of Chinese civilization traditions for “individuals”. In terms of determining the “double body”, the two professors Zhang Xianglong and Zhang Zailin tried to further advance, either to return to the “home-oriented” or to emphasize the “self-oriented”. The author believes that the “double nature” that emphasizes the “double nature” has its needs in modern China, but further development tasks can also bring some limitations. Rescuing “home” in the modern world is a very broad domain. Only by exploring the “home”‘s energy can it form a “motivated body”. At the same time, “home” can it develop a civilization that combines life and a civilization that is warm in the world.

Keywords: Civilization; Personality; Dual Body; Personality;

Author Introduction: Sun Xiangchen, born in 1968, from Beijing. Professor and Dean of the School of Philosophy, and Director of the School of Philosophy, and Director of the School of General Education in Philosophy. Important academic and professionals include: Vice Chairman of the Chinese Foreign Philosophy History Association, Member of the Guiding Committee of the International Philosophy Group, and Director of the World Han Association. Important research areas include: Levinas Philosophy Research, Eastern Modern Philosophy, and Chinese and Western Philosophy. Using the perspective of “traditional and modern”, we evaluate the paradigm transformation of modern Eastern philosophy, especially focusing on the transformation of its thinking framework and the deep-level relationship between politics and religion, and published a series of related articles, published the book “Metaphysics of the Seventeenth Century” (co-authored, 2005); reflecting and criticizing “modernity” Read Levinas’ philosophy, pay attention to the modern transformation of Levinas’s ideological resources, and publish the book “Face to the Other: Levinas’ Philosophical Thought Research” (2008); discuss the unique thinking concepts in Chinese philosophy with the “circumcision of the East” method, and use an original and philosophical method to highlight the life, href=”https://blog-tw.net/Sugar/”>Baobao.comMy family, family, etc., published the book “Doctor: Personality and Class” (2019).

In the modern world of Sweetheart Garden, the concept of “home” has been under pressure and challenged by all aspects. How to save “home” has becomeFor an urgent problem. In social reality, phenomena such as non-marriage, childbirth, old age, singleness, and sexual marriage are constantly increasing; in terms of value concepts, modern society also regards itself as the center. On the one hand, “home” is the most extensive reality in social career; on the other hand, it has not received very profound reflections in theory. My work “The Annotator” [1] received widespread attention after its release. The book was printed for the second time within a year, indicating that society is more concerned about this problem. I would like to thank Teacher Zhang Xianglong and Teacher Zhang Zailin for their comments on my work. They all have profound oriental philosophy research and research landscapes, and at the same time they have also worked hard to re-interpret the traditional Chinese thinking and have profound academic results. This article will respond to the questions and thoughts raised by them and step up to find out the question of how “home” can be treated in the modern world.

Philosophical or social aspects

“Home” is a highly socially oriented topic. “Home” has many discussions in terms of ethics, society, and psychology. It is true that “home” is a social discussion topic and many aspects that can be explained. The important thing about the book “The Annotator” is to describe the problem of “home” from a philosophical perspective. After I made the book “Home”, I received many comments. One of them also believes that the “The Discussion” is philosophical. This view from the perspective of the intrinsic theory, and ignores the new problems encountered by “home” in modern society. [2] It is to propose that we should discuss the problem of “home” from the perspective of real life. Under what conditions does “home” have general theoretical value? The author believes that the following aspects are important.

First, the modern world is a comprehensive reflective society, a “post-vulgar” society. None of the inclusive pipelinesocial phenomena and social organizations will automatically obtain its compliance with laws because of their heritage. Therefore, the basic feature of modern society is to critically reflect on all aspects of society itself. In the conversation between society from tradition to modern times, there are indeed many philosophical theories, especially political philosophy and “family”. When society changes from components to contracts, from family to individuals, from natural power of home to unrestricted rights of individuals, “home” often reflects on a negative concept, and has no positive status of “home” in modern theoretical landscapes. This is due to historical changes, but a kind of “theoretical forgetfulness” has also occurred. The problem of “home” lacks comprehensive thinking in modern society, and lacks understanding and thinking from a certain perspective. If you do not make a comprehensive review of these problems in the philosophy, you will have the phenomenon of “head pain, foot pain, foot pain” and there will be a phenomenon of deviation in your social career, such as high divorce rate and sexual marriage.The appearance of the like, etc. Philosophical thinking and social phenomena seem to be very far apart, but in fact, there is a close relationship inside.

Secondly, “home” is a widespread phenomenon in which human species is preserved on the earth. Compared with other human civilizations, Chinese civilization particularly values ​​the tradition of “family”. From the most basic concept of Confucianism “birth” to “family”, from the ambition of “family training” to “cultivation and peace”, from the love of “all the world are brothers” to the metaphor of “one country”, we can see that the “family” civilization has very rich ideological resources in China. Is this kind of civilization tradition just some pre-modern thinking resources, 博官网 dcard or does it still have modern values ​​and meanings? If there are some words, then the meaning of “home” in modern society is here? Is it just a natural reproduction demand, or is it a profound picture of “human life”? How can the “family” civilization in Chinese civilization traditions work to modern society? These most basic problems must be clarified in the philosophical level. If traditional thinking cannot be concealed in the modern world with the conceptual restructuring and thinking transformation of the sensory level, it will be difficult for modern society to be preserved.

Third, the May Fourth New Civilization Movement has strong anti-traditional civilization characteristics, and the criticism of “family civilization” is a major aspect. Criticism of the New Civilization Movement is carried out in social phenomena and the teaching system, focusing on criticism of family civilization. “Family” or “Family”, the difference in theory is very large in Han language. Criticism of family civilization in history has also been criticized by criticism of family civilization. “Family” is more of a traditional concept of ruling civilization, which has inherited too many institutional connotations in history, and “family” can be clarified as a philosophical concept. Discussing the problem of “family” from a philosophical perspective requires fundamental governance, to avoid this fundamental problem being concealed by the various registrar mechanisms in history, and to avoid this problem being biased by family problems. For those who are new civilization movements in May 4th have positive meanings about the reflection and criticism of the “family” civilization, but those who are new civilization movements do not clearly distinguish between concepts such as “family” and “family”, and do not make a distinction between “benevolence and filial piety” and “teaching”. Therefore, criticism of various phenomena in family civilization will affect our deep understanding of “family” and form a theory that understands “family”

AUTHOR

admin