In this essay I argue that whereas earlier generations of internal participants in the formation of Chinese philosophy as an academic discipline acknowledged that “Chinese philosophy” was a product of the complex interaction between internal and external agencies; and that one or more non-Chinese philosophical tradition was essential to articulating China’s philosophical past,influential modern commentators have instead argued that paradigms and norms derived from the West, in particular, are not only inappropriate to the articulation of China’s philosophical heritage but are also fundamentally hegemonic. I also draw attention to the influence of what I call the “inner logic” paradigm—which emphasizes the continued agency and relevance of the past in the present—as developed, in particular, by intellectual historians of China, on contemporary Chinese views of China’s philosophical heritage. I maintain that this paradigm has contributed to the conferral of methodological legitimacy on so-called epistemological nativism: the idea that the articulation and development of China’s philosophical heritage must draw exclusively on the endogenous paradigms and norms of China’s indigenous heritage.
|Title of host publication||Journal of Chinese Philosophy and Culture|
|Place of Publication||Hong Kong|
|Publisher||Lijiang Publishing House (æ¼“æ±Ÿå‡ºç‰ˆç¤¾)|
|Publication status||Published - 2011|