One can see often in explanations of encyclopedia or lexicons of philosophy that Plato manifested primarily the absolute Idealism, whereas Aristotle verified antagonistically the relevance of realism. It is easy to pi...One can see often in explanations of encyclopedia or lexicons of philosophy that Plato manifested primarily the absolute Idealism, whereas Aristotle verified antagonistically the relevance of realism. It is easy to pick up several parts of their representative works and prove that this thesis is corresponded to the original of Plato and Aristotle. But, in reflections of philosophy, we should not ignore a cautious view, focused just on this starting point： If the above mentioned thesis is used like a slogan, ＂Plato for idealism, Aristotle for realism,＂ as it often is, in the meantime there arises a dogmatic position which fixes our mental and intellectual activity only within the frame, so that everyone begins to reflect on Plato or Aristotle from that starting point in a certain framework. A critical and self-critical view of philosophy may bring this position for a query.展开更多
The three mainstream International Relations theories that have arisen in the past thirty years, structural realism, neo-liberal institutionalism and structural constructivism, have all missed an important dimension, ...The three mainstream International Relations theories that have arisen in the past thirty years, structural realism, neo-liberal institutionalism and structural constructivism, have all missed an important dimension, i.e., the study relational complexity in international society. of processes in the international system and of This paper, informed by social constructivism and Chinese philosophical traditions, aims to make up for this missing link and develop a theoretical model of processual constructivism by incorporating and conceptualizing two key Chinese ideas - processes and relations. ＂Process,＂ defined as relations in motion, can stand on its own, has its own dynamics, and plays a crucial role in international relations. The core of process, by definition, consists in relations. If ＂rationality,＂ rooted in individuality, has been a key concept for Western society, then its counterpart in Chinese society can be ＂relationality.＂ Conceptualizing relationality and treating it as the theoretical hard core, processual constructivism holds that relational networking in international society helps nation-states form their identities and produces international power. Processual constructivism is an evolution theory at systemic level, focusing on interactive practices among states and emphasizing the independent ontology of social processes which play a meaningful role in constructing international norms and state identities.展开更多
The fundamental task of Marxist philosophical studies today is to uncover contemporary social actuality. It was Hegel who first showed a possible way to social actuality in philosophical terms via sharp critiques of s...The fundamental task of Marxist philosophical studies today is to uncover contemporary social actuality. It was Hegel who first showed a possible way to social actuality in philosophical terms via sharp critiques of subjective consciousness and its external reflection. Marx critically inherited this legacy from Hegel. His critiques not only undermined the speculative, idealist alliance of Idea and Actuality, but also thoroughly reconstructed the essential dimension of social actuality. A Kantian interpretation of Marxist philosophy on this theme presupposes a dismissal of the dimension of social actuality, which means a return to the philosophy of subjective consciousness. The latter in turn means the actual collapse of historical materialism. The path to social actuality is vital to historical materialism. It is only through this path that the truth of the theory of historical materialism can be upheld.展开更多
There are two opposing tendencies in the history of Westem philosophy： one is the Platonic- Hegelian tradition that mixes actuality and ideality, the other is the Aristotelian-Kantian tradition that differentiates th...There are two opposing tendencies in the history of Westem philosophy： one is the Platonic- Hegelian tradition that mixes actuality and ideality, the other is the Aristotelian-Kantian tradition that differentiates the two. Marx distanced himself from the former by his critiques of Hegelism, but the later generations have in a sense turned back to it in their interpretation of Marxist theory. Despite its significance, this reversal is fundamentally inconsistent with Marxist philosophy, and will frequently have unfortunate results in practice. Therefore it is of great necessity to clarify the theoretical distinction between Marxism and Hegelism on this issue.展开更多
文摘One can see often in explanations of encyclopedia or lexicons of philosophy that Plato manifested primarily the absolute Idealism, whereas Aristotle verified antagonistically the relevance of realism. It is easy to pick up several parts of their representative works and prove that this thesis is corresponded to the original of Plato and Aristotle. But, in reflections of philosophy, we should not ignore a cautious view, focused just on this starting point： If the above mentioned thesis is used like a slogan, ＂Plato for idealism, Aristotle for realism,＂ as it often is, in the meantime there arises a dogmatic position which fixes our mental and intellectual activity only within the frame, so that everyone begins to reflect on Plato or Aristotle from that starting point in a certain framework. A critical and self-critical view of philosophy may bring this position for a query.
文摘The three mainstream International Relations theories that have arisen in the past thirty years, structural realism, neo-liberal institutionalism and structural constructivism, have all missed an important dimension, i.e., the study relational complexity in international society. of processes in the international system and of This paper, informed by social constructivism and Chinese philosophical traditions, aims to make up for this missing link and develop a theoretical model of processual constructivism by incorporating and conceptualizing two key Chinese ideas - processes and relations. ＂Process,＂ defined as relations in motion, can stand on its own, has its own dynamics, and plays a crucial role in international relations. The core of process, by definition, consists in relations. If ＂rationality,＂ rooted in individuality, has been a key concept for Western society, then its counterpart in Chinese society can be ＂relationality.＂ Conceptualizing relationality and treating it as the theoretical hard core, processual constructivism holds that relational networking in international society helps nation-states form their identities and produces international power. Processual constructivism is an evolution theory at systemic level, focusing on interactive practices among states and emphasizing the independent ontology of social processes which play a meaningful role in constructing international norms and state identities.
文摘The fundamental task of Marxist philosophical studies today is to uncover contemporary social actuality. It was Hegel who first showed a possible way to social actuality in philosophical terms via sharp critiques of subjective consciousness and its external reflection. Marx critically inherited this legacy from Hegel. His critiques not only undermined the speculative, idealist alliance of Idea and Actuality, but also thoroughly reconstructed the essential dimension of social actuality. A Kantian interpretation of Marxist philosophy on this theme presupposes a dismissal of the dimension of social actuality, which means a return to the philosophy of subjective consciousness. The latter in turn means the actual collapse of historical materialism. The path to social actuality is vital to historical materialism. It is only through this path that the truth of the theory of historical materialism can be upheld.
文摘There are two opposing tendencies in the history of Westem philosophy： one is the Platonic- Hegelian tradition that mixes actuality and ideality, the other is the Aristotelian-Kantian tradition that differentiates the two. Marx distanced himself from the former by his critiques of Hegelism, but the later generations have in a sense turned back to it in their interpretation of Marxist theory. Despite its significance, this reversal is fundamentally inconsistent with Marxist philosophy, and will frequently have unfortunate results in practice. Therefore it is of great necessity to clarify the theoretical distinction between Marxism and Hegelism on this issue.
