The Liberal Tradition in China

by William Theodore de Bary

書中論及新儒學「學以為己」的個人自發色彩，其強調自得，相互激勵等價值的教育思想，以及明代知識分子自任於天下的責任感，認為黃宗羲正代表了這種自由主義特質的新綜合。在最後一章中，狄百瑞並討論這種自由思想在當代中國所遭遇的困境。

Genres: China, History

122 pages, Paperback

First published January 22, 1983

About the author

William Theodore de Bary was an East Asian studies expert at Columbia University, with the title John Mitchell Mason Professor of the University and Provost Emeritus.

De Bary graduated from Columbia College in 1941, where he was a student in the first iteration of Columbia's famed Literature Humanities course. He then briefly took up graduate studies at Harvard before the US entered the Second World War. De Bary left the academy to serve in American military intelligence in the Pacific Theatre. Upon his return, he resumed his studies at Columbia, where he earned his PhD.

He has edited numerous books of original source material relating to East Asian (primarily Japanese and Chinese) literature, history, and culture, as well as making the case, in his book Nobility and Civility, for the universality of Asian values. He is recognized as essentially creating the field of Neo-Confucian studies.

Additionally, DeBary was active in faculty intervention during the Columbia University protests of 1968 and served as the university's provost from 1971 to 1978. He has attempted to reshape the Core Curriculum of Columbia College to include Great Books classes devoted to non-Western civilizations. DeBary is additionally famous for rarely missing a Columbia Lions football game since he began teaching at the university in 1953. A recognized educator, he won Columbia's Great Teacher Award in 1969, its Lionel Trilling Book Award in 1983 and its Mark Van Doren Award for Great Teaching in 1987.

Now the director of the Heyman Center for the Humanities and still teaching, De Bary lives in Rockland County, New York.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_de_Bary

Reviews

[Qing Wang · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's said people get to know themselves from their relations with others. Mixing different peoples together and they will become more aware of their differences, which could be for good.

The last article in this collection is especially interesting in the way de Bary compares his approach to the topic of liberallism in China with that of Qian Mu. Though de Bary firmly believes that he and Mr. Qian are on the same side, he points out that on this particular topic, Mr. Qian argues with a Western mask (treat the idea of liberty as distinctly different in the West and East), while de Bary argues with a Chinese mask (seeking harmony and unity).

Methinks it's still the question of where do you put the emphasis. The western liberalism seems to focus more on individual's rights to oneself, while the neo-Confucianists take as of first importance the moral responsibilities an individual (intellectual) should be able to pursue/undertake freely.

If the western idea is to free the individual first and then spread it to others, the neo-Conficianists believe the purpose of individual is always to serve the whole society, while in order to do so, they must have the freedom to learn what they want, to find the truth by following their own path, to argue freely with peers and those in power.

The tragedy with the neo-Confucians in the Song and Ming dynasties are that the intellectuals see themselves as an instrument to help the rulers to rule wise and right, they put all their efforts into this one enterprise and often failed disastrously.

But yes liberalism cannot be forced and it's really no need to do so. We just need to learn to see it differently, to observe/recognize the various forms liberalism takes in different cultures.

[Anaiskald · Rating 3 out of 5]

一种温情的敬意，不过就像我读的所有和中国文化相关的书一样，缺乏一种逻辑鲜明锐利的框架和视角。感觉作者对自由主义的了解不多，对新儒家不好评价。