The Dark Side of Confucianism 儒家学说的黑暗面 2004 10月12日星期二 原文网址: http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome/1097546969/index_html Confucius, his name has become synonymous with Chinese culture, thought, and philosophy. In Taiwan his birthday, September 28, is celebrated as Teacher‘s Day. Born at the end of the Spring and Autumn Period, Confucius (551-479 BC) is probably the most revered and dominant of Chinese philosophers. So who would criticize or challenge his teachings and what has this to do with current Chinese politics? 孔子之名跟中华文化思想哲学﹐几乎等量齐名。他在9月28日的生日﹐在台湾被人当成教 师节来庆祝。生於春秋战国末期(西元前551-479)的孔子可说是中国最受崇敬而又最有份 量的哲学家。 所以﹐ 谁没事干要敢来批评或甚至对他的教诲来下战书﹖ 更何况这跟当 代中国政治又有何相关﹖ Confucianism upholds the nobility of man; it preaches benevolence, responsibility and reciprocity in relationships. Superiors should set an example and inspire others to be good; they should change themselves before they seek to change the world etc. etc. etc. How can such teachings have a dark side? 儒家学说崇尚人的高贵情操﹔它推崇仁道﹐责任感﹐及推己及人。在上位者要作榜样以鼓 励他人为善﹔治国必先齐家等等。这麽好的教诲里怎麽可能会有什麽黑暗面﹖ A Taoist would simply say, “When everyone sees good in the good, the bad is already there“﹐but let us look into specifics. 道家会很简单的回说﹐”在人必称善之时﹐恶已隐乎其中”﹐不过我们在此不妨好好做一 下检视。 First a look at the history, the teachings of Confucius and his disciple Mencius (c.372~289 BC) began to gain official prominence in Chinese society from the Western Han Dynasty (206 BC~8 AD) on. The Emperor Wu Ti founded an Imperial Academy (124 BC) where officials would be specifically trained in the Confucian classics for a year and pass exams for positions. This began the civil service examinations. From then on the works of Confucius began to 首先从历史的角度来看好了﹐孔子与其弟子孟子(西元前372-289) 的学说是在西汉时期( 西元前206-西元後8年)才开始在中国社会正式发扬光大。汉武帝在西元前124年成立了五 经博士制(石头注﹐相当於现代国立大学) ﹐ 官员必须特别学习儒家思想﹐为期一年﹐通 过考试後才得晋用。这也是文治政府科举考试的起源。从此儒家学说奠定了国家意识理论 与制度的基础。 By the time of the Tang Dynasty (618~907 AD) the Confucian classics had become firmly entrenched in the civil service examinations. To hold any official district, provincial and national position in China you had to know Confucian thought forward and backward and how to express it (not necessarily believe it). Confucian classics became the Bible or at least the catechism of the state. This would continue even when China as a country (not as a culture) disappeared and it became part of the Mongolian and Manchu kingdoms. 等到西元後618-807时的唐朝﹐孔学已在文治政府科举考试里牢牢紮根。从地方省份到中 央﹐想在中国捞个一官半职﹐ 不管你为信徒与否﹐都得把孔孟学说熟悉到能倒背如流收 放自如的程度。孔学地位崇高有如圣经﹐至不济也等同国家基本教义。这种情况﹐即使在 中国国祚(而非文化)已亡而成了蒙古及满洲王国的一部分﹐仍然一直持续不断。 After two thousand years it is no wonder that Confucianism became completely ingrained as part of officialdom and subsequently part of the culture. People were taught the Confucian hierarchy and that harmony lies in submission; a pyramidic submission where the many submitted to the few as we shall see shortly. Picture the benefits to the emperor and state officials learning a system, which justified them at the top of the food chain and required all 像这样子过了两千年﹐儒家思想之所以会如此彻底的融入官僚体系并因而成为文化的一环 ﹐当然也就一点都不奇怪了。人民从小就接受儒家的社会阶级划分﹐并被教导和谐之道在 於顺服的美德﹔我们待会儿就要来细究这种有如金字塔般顺从的行为模式﹐它一级一级划 分下来﹐众人都要顺服於少数的几人。这对皇帝与国家官员的好处简直是无以复加。 想 想吧﹐他们一旦精通这种体系﹐ 就可名正言顺高高在上随心所欲的对其他所有的人颐指 气使。这麽好的差使谁不要﹖ Confucianism was of course not the only influential tradition in Chinese thought. The Legalist tradition developed in the fourth and third centuries BC after the death of Confucius. Legalism found its fullest _expression in the Chin Dynasty (221~207 BC). Machiavellian in aim and view, this tradition focused not on what should be, but what is. It analyzed power, how to acquire it, how to maintain it, and how to control the people with it. Disorder or dissent of any kind in the state was not to be tolerated. 当然儒家思想并不是中国唯一有影响力的传统思想。法家起源於孔子死後﹐西元前三四世 纪。法家在秦代(西元前221-207)全盛﹐ 思想本质与目标均与马奇维利理论符合﹐它强调 的是人性本恶﹐以法施教。这个学说对权力专精 - 如何取得权力﹐如何维系权力﹐还有 如何以权力来控制人民。国家对任何混乱与异议都没有容忍余地。 Han Fei-tzu (d. 233 BC) is considered the chief proponent of legalism. Where Confucianism stressed man‘s potential for goodness, Legalism stressed man’s potential for laziness, evil, selfishness, and deviation. These two schools of thought started from completely different premises, but interestingly enough, Legalism would be credited in part with providing the mechanism for unifying all the warring states under Chin Shih Huang (Shih Huang-ti), the founder of the Chin Dynasty. 大家公认西元前233年的韩非子为集法家之大成者。儒家强调人性本善﹐法家则认为人性 本恶。这两个学说的理论大相径庭﹐ 然而有趣的是秦始皇之所以能一统天下而立秦﹐多 少是倚赖法家道统以成。 The defining word for legalism is control, control, control and control. The state needs strong rulers but most especially strong laws to keep man in check. Han Fei-tzu stated that the emperor could use two handles to control the behavior of his subordinates. These were rewards that would appeal to man ‘s greed and stiff punishments that would inspire his fear. Legalism's brief, ruthless _expression in the Chin Dynasty was short-lived in history but it left a lasting mark on Chinese thought in reality. 法家最重视的莫过于控制控制控制控制再控制。国家不只需要强人领导﹐更需以法胜民。 韩非子说君王所立之法必须是「设民之所欲以求其功，故为爵禄以劝之；设民之所恶以禁 其奸，故为刑罚以威之」。法家虽因秦朝的短暂与残暴而早夭﹐不过实际上却在中国思想 上留下了不可磨灭的痕迹。 What is the link of these two unlikely philosophies? In Chinese society, Confucianism would come to be held up as the ideal; while legalism would become what was practiced. Despite their opposite views of the nature of man, in this symbiotic relationship Confucianism‘s worldview would ironically end up supporting the legalist position and herein is its dark side. 在这两个天地有别的思想流派当中到底有何联系之处﹖中国社会里﹐儒家思想属於理想派 而法家为实用派。虽然它们对人性的诠释有南辕北辙的差异﹐然其共生的关系却很吊诡的 造成了以儒家世界观来巩固法家地位的结果 - 而这也就是儒家的黑暗面。 Confucianism was the product of an agricultural, feudalistic society; its purpose was to keep harmony within the structure of such an outdated society. To do this, it postulated that life should be seen in terms of five basic 儒家思想是个封建农业社会的产物﹔ 目的在於保持这种旧式社会结构的和谐。为了达到 这个目的﹐它认为人生可被视为为五大基础关系并四种社会阶级。这就是我们必须探讨的 根本。 Simply put, the five relationships are emperor to subject; father to son; elder brother to younger brother, husband to wife, and friend to friend. Some would add a sixth, that of teacher to student. These relationships are role relationships not personal relationships; they don‘t change; they are part and parcel of a system that is hierarchical and patriarchal. 这五大关系简单说来就是君臣父子兄弟夫妇朋友。有人说应该再加上个第六个﹐也就是师 徒关系。这些关系跟角色有关而无关乎个人人际关系﹔它们再怎样也无变化﹔跟这个体制 的阶级关系与父权中心息息相关。 Each of these relationships, except that of friend to friend depends on a hierarchy. They contain superior and subordinate roles. Both the superior and the subordinate have their duties and obligations, but let there be no mistake; it is always in the context of superior and subordinate. 这里除了朋友之外﹐其它每个关系都有分阶级的高下。一为主一为从。主从皆有其应守的 本份与义务﹐ 可是我们千万不要搞错﹔它再怎样也还是主从关系。 The four social groups or class structures of the society are the scholar-gentry, the peasants, the artisans and craftsmen and finally the merchants. The scholar-gentry were deemed fit to rule because of their education. The peasants, the majority of the people, had second place and were given the dignity of work; this supposedly was to compensate for the fact that they had no real power. The artisans (3rd place) were allowed artistic _expression, which is probably better than being a hard-working farmer. Merchants were given the lowest class because they went for profit (a despicable factor for Confucianists). How many would not postulate the opposite view that in the real world, money is power? 这四个社群(或可称为阶级地位结构) 为士农工商。学而优则为仕为官。由於以农立国的 关系﹐农夫的地位仅次于士﹐很有工作尊严﹔顺便也趁机补偿一下农夫无权的现实。占第 三位的是工匠技艺﹐ 他们的地位其实可能比苦干的农夫要来得好些。商人的社会地位最 低因为他们志在谋利(最受儒家学者诟病)。可是不知有多少人考虑过﹐在实际世界里﹐金 钱即权力﹐事实反而与此颠倒﹖ Is there a gap between ideal and practice? Today the world is trying to beat a path to the great China market. At the same time the factories in China pour forth all sorts of sundry items ”Made in China“。 Of those who have a choice in this matter how many would freely choose a "noble" life of a farmer tilling the soil by the sweat of his brow? How many choose a more "despicable" but lucrative career? I rest my case. 理想与实际间有没有抵触﹖今天全世界都在挤破头抢大中国市场。同时中国工厂也在源源 生产各式各样”中国制造“的产品。那些有选择能力的人中有多少还会自由选择”高贵“ 的农夫生涯而汲汲营营於农务﹖有多少会选择一个”可鄙“却赚钱的行业﹖这根本连问都 不用问。 However, to return to Confucian ideals. Life (as was said) is seen in terms of role relationships, not personal relationships. Herein is the rub. Initially the roles may have been spoken of as a superior/subordinate relationship; in practice the change to superior/inferior is quick and almost unnoticeable. Cut it whatever way you want; quote the obligations of those on each side of the spectrum, at the end of the day, when push comes to shove, one is on top and the other is on the bottom, one is in control and one is not. There is no such thing as equality. 然而我们现在要回头来探讨一下儒家的理想。它所谓人生被视为一连串的角色关系﹐而非 人际关系。关键就在这里了。起初这些角色乃主从关系﹔实际上却在不知不觉间很快的演 变成上下属关系。随你怎麽说都一样﹔不管你再如何从两极寻求对於责任义务的注解﹐说 来说去说到後来就是这麽简单﹐ 怎麽样都是一个在上一个在下﹐一个有控制权﹐ 一个什 麽都没有。没有什麽平等可言。 A father never switches roles with a son; a wife never switches roles with her husband; an older brother never switches roles with his younger brother. A teacher never switches roles with his student; the emperor never switches roles with his subjects (barring a revolution in which case he is killed). Why in the past 2000 years had the ideas of democracy and the equality of man never been recognized until the present? Confucian structures would not allow it. 父亲决不会跟儿子交换地位﹔妻子决不能与夫易位﹔兄长决不会与幼弟易位。师徒不能换 位﹔ 君臣不能易位 (除非出了革命他被杀了以外)。 何以在过去两千多年来﹐民主与人 生而平等的意念﹐ 直到现在才被人接受﹖ 无它﹐儒家社会结构无法容许它的存在。 Is this idealistic hierarchical structure that bad? Women, particularly feminists most easily saw through the mutual responsibility sham. Confucianism's concept of roles for life has dealt them all the bad cards. In such a society, a woman is first subject to her father (a male), then to her husband (another male) and finally if she is widowed to her son (another male). Women had to know their place and stay in it. 这种理想性的阶级结构真的那麽糟吗﹖女人﹐ 尤其是女性主义者﹐最容易看穿这种骗鬼 的相辅相成说。儒家思想里所谓的人生角色派给女人做的都是烂牌。在那种社会里﹐一个 女人首先得受其父宰制(一个男人)﹐ 然後再受制於其夫(又一个男人)﹐ 好不容易等到丈 夫死了﹐又要受儿子控制(再一个男人)。女人始终必须认命的接受她们的地位。 In such a position a woman must either become submissive and hope the superior lives up to his obligations or learn to compensate and fight for power by becoming wily and manipulative, or resorting to cajoling and nagging. A woman can never ask for straightforward treatment as an equal. 处於这种地位的女人要嘛就得乖顺听话﹐希冀在上位者会记得履行他应尽的义务﹐不然就 得学会如何寻求补偿以占上风﹐ 有的用狡猾的手段利用别人﹐有的则采取一哭二闹三上 吊的手法以遂所求。女人永远无法直截了当的要求别人平等对待。 Males have always had the opportunity for balance. Even if they were sons to their fathers and younger brothers to their elder brothers, they could gain balance in their lives by being fathers to their sons and husbands to their wives. Such was not the fate of women. 男人却始终不缺平衡反制的机会。即使他们身为子弟﹐ 总有等到为父为夫的一日。女人 可没这麽好命。 If anyone has lived in Chinese society for any length of time, you quickly see that despite all the external rituals of consideration and displays of harmony it is primarily a power culture. The relationships may be expressed as ideally mutual, but they are hierarchical in practice. The authoritarian father-knows-best mentality pervades. When you witness a divorce between a man and a woman it is almost always a bitter, hate-to-the-death affair because it involves not only the two people but also an affirmation or negation of what each believes is the way life and society should be. The bottom line question in all matters business, political and social comes down to who has the power? 只要在中国社会里住过一段时日﹐你很快就能发现无论它外表如何礼节繁复互相体念和谐 非凡﹐ 骨子里却是着着实实的威权文化。它所谓的关系表面上一副满腹理想相辅相成的 模样﹐实际上却是阶级主义的实践﹐充斥着父威深重(原文用语为“父亲最行”)的专制心 态。每逢目睹夫妻离婚﹐几乎每回看到的都痛苦难当﹐愤恨到了极点﹐ 因为它代表的不 仅只是夫妻两个人的离婚而已﹐ 更代表了个人对生命及社会价值体系的同意或否定。无 论你从任何经济政治社会的角度来看﹐最终我们会问的还是 - 权力到底在谁手里﹖ And Legalism, is it still a viable part Chinese political thought? Look at the People's Republic of China (PRC). The ”liberation“ of the masses allegedly took place over 55 years ago in 1949, yet in how many ways does 而法家是否仍为中国政治思想重要的一环﹖看一下中华人民共和国就够了。人民的”解放 “说是发生於55年前的1949﹐ 可是至今多少专政控制手段犹存﹖ 国家仍然是极权的一党 专政。 When the students (not radical revolutionaries) expressed the wish for more democratic participation in Tiananmen Square in 1989, they were ruthlessly murdered and their movement was put down. Here was no Confucian trust in the benevolence of man’s nature. It was a legalistic response that the Chin emperor would be proud of. In the name of "preventing chaos" this and other atrocities continue to be done. 1989年学生(非急进的革命分子)在天安门广场表达他们期望参与民主的希望之时﹐他们被 无情的谋害﹐整个运动遭到镇压。根本就看不到任何儒家所谓的人性本善之说。如此法家 表现﹐恐怕连秦始皇也会感到骄傲。而像这种及其它以”防止混乱“为名的残酷手段至今 犹现。 Even in matters of religious _expression, the state seeks absolute control. The Falun Gong are beaten and jailed regularly simply because they wish to gather in public. These elderly ”radicals“ are not to be trusted. In the Catholic Church, the state wants to appoint all bishops. In Tibetan Buddhism, Beijing chose the 11th Panchen Lama in defiance of the Dalai Lama. Control, control, control. 连宗教信仰﹐国家也要全然控制。只不过为了希望能公开集会﹐法轮功信徒横遭挨打坐监 之事曾出不穷。 连对这些年老的 ”反动分子“都没有信心。国家要帮天主教会挑选主教 。而为了跟西藏佛教的达赖喇嘛唱反调﹐北京自己挑选第11世的班禅喇嘛。一切都是为了 控制﹐控制﹐控制。 Look further at the restrictions and continued monitoring and censoring of news media and the Internet. The ”liberated masses“ are still denied free access to information. They cannot be trusted with it. The list of controls can go on and on. 我们不妨把眼光拉远点来看看新闻媒体及网际网络所遭受的限制与持续性监视和检查。” 解放的大众“到现在还无法自由自在的取得资讯。国家不放心把这些交到人民手里。国家 进行控制的手段﹐数不尽也写不完。 What then is the strange symbiosis of Legalism and Confucianism? How does Confucianism support such a controlling system? In politics it generates a winner take all mentality; there is no such thing as a loyal opposition party. Once a power is established, the hierarchy must be maintained. Confucianism's hierarchical worldview is anti-democratic. There is no place for dissent. You can speak of an emperor losing the ”mandate of heaven“ but this euphemism is only applied after the fact to those who lose the power struggle not to those who have still maintained it despotically. 到底法家与儒家这种奇怪的共生何来﹖儒家思想何以会去支持如此具控制性的体系﹖在政 治上它导致了一种赢者为王败者为寇的心态﹔从来就没有什麽所谓的忠诚的反对党这种观 念。权力一旦建立了就一定要全力维系其阶级制度。儒家的阶级世界观根本就反民主。没 有异议的余地。当然你大可论述皇帝如何如何而会失去"天命"﹐ 可是这种婉转的说法只 有在当政者在政争失权後才派得上用场﹐对那些还在以专制独裁来维系政权的暴君﹐ 说 这些是没有用的。 In the name of harmony, Confucianism legitimizes and provides legalists with the time they need to consolidate their control. Look at the histories of self-appointed emperor Yuan Shih-kai (d.1916) who blessed China by dying early and Mao Tse-tung who did not. 以和谐为藉口﹐儒家学说让法家主义者合法化并给他们足够的时间来巩固其权力掌控。历 史不辩自明。看看自己称帝的袁士凯(1916)吧﹐幸而他早死﹐救了中国一命﹐ 可惜毛泽 东没有早死。 Chiang Kai-shek preached Confucian values but practiced a totalitarian, one-party rule. His legacy of continued subjection of Taiwan to martial law I have already treated in #12 of this series. 蒋介石一天到晚在宣扬儒家价值观﹐可是自己骨子里却是十足的一党专政极权独夫。他把 台湾长久压抑於戒严令下的臭名﹐ 我已在这一系列文章的第12篇中提及。 And what about other major philosophical traditions in Chinese thought like Taoism and Buddhism? These may have influenced certain rulers and people but they have never dominated central political thought. Interestingly enough, Taoism allows the spark of individualism in a highly communal Chinese culture. Taoism has become the safety valve to release the pressure created by an over insistence on harmony. Taoism allows one to withdraw from the world and operate in a different sphere. It is the thinking behind two expressions that one often hears spoken privately. "The Laws are for other people, not for me," and/or "The Law is only there as a reference point." 至於中国其它主要传统哲学思想﹐ 如道佛之类﹐又如何﹖它们可能对某些君主及人民有 些影响﹐可是从未主宰过任何政治中心思潮。不过有趣的一点是﹐道家在极度公共化的中 国文化里点燃了个人主义的火花﹐为过度讲求和谐的社会提供了减轻压力的安全阀。道家 容许个人遁世而逃避到另一境界。 人们日常在私下耳熟能详的两句话里﹐ 就隐含有道家 玄机﹕ 如”法律岂为我辈而设“﹐ 以及 ”法律只是给你放在那里作参考用的。“ Buddhism on the other hand provides a viewpoint that promotes concern for other people, those outside one’s family. Always suspect in the eyes of strict Confucianism, Buddhism is credited with removing the warlike spirit and curbing the acquisitiveness of Tibetans who once had captured the capital of the Tang Dynasty. Buddhism did not have such political influence on China, which in true legalist fashion pursues its aims to control the past Manchu conquered territories of Tibet, Inner Mongolia, Taiwan etc. 从另一面来说﹐佛教则提供了另类思考﹐ 要对家人以外的他人加以关怀。虽然从纯粹儒 家观点来看﹐佛教教义启人疑窦﹐ 然而佛教仍受其推崇﹐认为曾在唐代侵犯京城的藏人 ﹐其好战的天性都因接受佛教而化解﹐并使其不再如此贪得无厌。对中国的政治﹐佛教倒 是没有引起过这麽大的影响﹐它仍然以法家道地的作风﹐寻求统治西藏蒙古台湾等曾被满 清旧朝征服过的领土。 There is nothing wrong with Confucian values per se. However, the true examiner of any philosophical system must go beyond the system‘s professed values and examine the underpinnings, presuppositions and "paradigmatic baggage" it brings with it. Platonism, for example, saddled western thought with an outmoded dualistic way of perceiving the world for over 2000 years. Many are still locked into a Platonic idealism. 儒家思想本身并没错。不过一个人若要确实解读任何哲学体系﹐就必须超越体系本身所宣 称的价值观念﹐ 而仔细研考底下的理论基础﹐前提﹐及随其而来的各种例证包袱。就拿 柏拉图哲学来做例子好了﹐两千多年来﹐它一直把西方思想圈在一个老掉牙的二元论里来 体验世界。很多人到现在都还摆脱不掉柏拉图的唯心论。 Where should Chinese turn? They do have one example that has broken the political mold of the past. Taiwan has shown that democracy is not antithetical to Chinese thought. Democracy happened here. It came however not from the Kuomintang ruling party but from the tangwai (those outside the party) who were already on the island. 中国人该走向何方﹖他们其实有个已经打破了往日政治窠臼的例子可寻。台湾早就显示出 民主制度跟中国思想无所违逆。民主在此茁生。然而它来自於身在台湾的党外人士﹐ 而 与统治的国民党毫不相干。 Taiwan’s history in its experience of numerous and various outside rulers is different from that of China. One ruler, Japan, had already established a multi-party system and Diet form of government in the 1890‘s before Taiwan came under its control. Taiwan’s taste and struggle for democratic participation had definite roots in its Japanese era when it had gained the right to elect its own representatives to the Japanese Imperial Diet. 台湾历史﹐ 跟中国相异之处在於它经历过无数不同的外来统治者。其中之一的日本早在 1890﹐在还未管辖台湾之前就已建立了多党系统与国会政府。 台湾对民主的爱好与奋斗 早奠基於日治时代﹐ 当时台湾已能选举自己的议员代表他们参加日本帝国国会。 Is there a chance that those on the other side of the Taiwan Strait could learn from Taiwan‘s struggles and example? This is highly unlikely. A false interpretation of Confucianism’s respect for history and tradition interferes. This misinterpretation has already created a legacy of cultural superiority that can only look backward for ideals. It prevents Mainland Chinese from even thinking they could learn from a period tainted with 海峡对岸的人民有可能从台湾的奋斗中求取经验吗﹖答案是非常不可能。利用儒家对历史 传统的尊重来误导人民﹐为其一因素。这种误导早已造成了一种传统上的文化自大狂﹐认 为自己老旧的东西才是好的﹐也使中国大陆人根本无法想像他们可以从日治时代学到任何 东西。 Taiwan and China look on Japan with different eyes. For China, Japan will always be the cultural son, the student who learned from the Tang Dynasty. The teacher can never change roles with the student; the father can never change roles with the son. Japan will always have the inferior role. 台,中对日本的看法大不相同。对中国而言﹐日本永远都是文化上的儿子﹐是在唐代跑来 取经的学生。老师决不会跟学生易位﹐ 就如父亲决不会跟儿子掉换角色一样。日本永远 都是不够看的下属。 It would also be unthinkable for Beijing to imagine it could learn from Taipei (i.e. Taiwan). Since the Manchus once controlled a part of the island of Taiwan, Beijing can only see Taiwan with eyes of control. Whenever Taiwan offers the olive branch for open dialogue between the ”two Chinas,“ Beijing responds in legalist fashion that it does not trust Taiwan‘s motives. As if history has ever given Taiwan reason to trust the motives of the wolf on the other side of the Taiwan Strait. 至於要叫北京想想它能从台北(就是台湾啦)学到什麽也是徒劳。光从满清曾管辖过台湾这 一点说起就好了﹐ 北京只能从控制的观点来对待台湾。台湾再怎麽样释放善意以期“两 个中国”间能进行公开谈判﹐ 北京都会以法家手法来回应说它不信任台湾的意图。还说 得一副好像历史给过台湾任何理由来相信海峡对岸那匹狼会有什麽善良意图一样。 What is left? Legalistic control is not the answer. A reexamination of the spirit underlying the May 4th Movement (1919) is needed to establish the proper role of Confucianism. At that time at least the traditions of language and literature were freed. 那怎麽办呢﹖ 法家的控制不是答案。我们应该重新检验1919年五四运动的精神以正确的 建立儒家思想所应享的角色。 至少当时语言及文学都得以从传统里解放了出来。 In the western world, it was learned that the separation of Church and State was a necessary part of the development of democracy. Christianity still remains a part of the culture and ideals, but democratic participation must be free of it. In theory, in a perfect world, one can make a case for a Christian state, an Islamic state, a Hindu state or a Confucian state. But the world we live in is not the world where these religions and philosophies were formed and it never will be. Perhaps those idealized pasts never existed in reality. 至於西方世界﹐ 它已学到政教分离是民主发展必要的一部分。基督教仍然为文化理想的 一部份﹐ 然而它不能干涉到民主的参与。 从理论而言﹐ 在一个完美世界里﹐无论是基 督教国家﹐回教国家﹐印度教国家﹐或儒教国家都无妨。可是我们存在的世界并非原本发 展出这些宗教哲学的世界﹐ 未来也不可能达到。 可能这些理想化的过去根本就不存於实 际的世界上。 The dark side of Confucianism with its roles and structures must be faced; if not those with a legalist mentality and outlook will always manipulate it to their ends. 儒家的黑暗面﹐ 包括其角色与结构﹐我们迟早都得面对﹔ 倘不如此﹐ 那些拥有法家心 态与期待的人永远都会利用它以遂其利。 对祁夫润专栏文章的回响与评论，请移驾祈夫润专栏的回响与评论 一栏 Japanese rule.authoritarian control remain? The totalitarian one- party state still rules.relationships and four class structures. This is the base we must examine.others to be subservient. Who would not want to perpetuate such a system?be serve as the ideological background and framework of the state. -- Men willingly believe what they wish. ~Julius Caesar --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 61.63.86.91