The exact dating of Laozi and his work has long been a topic of scholarly interest.Since the 1920s,traditional views on Laozi’s dating have been widely questioned in both Chinese and Western academia.In the latter ha...The exact dating of Laozi and his work has long been a topic of scholarly interest.Since the 1920s,traditional views on Laozi’s dating have been widely questioned in both Chinese and Western academia.In the latter half of the 20th century,as the“Trust Antiquity”trend gradually emerged in Chinese academia,the view that“Laozi did not exist”became the most influential mainstream perspective in Western academia.This paper first reviews the process of unification and differentiation of opinions between Chinese and Western academia.Then,by analyzing and comparing representative papers from Chinese and Western scholars,it explores the reasons for the differences in mainstream opinions.Additionally,it briefly discusses the implications of these differences to provide insights for future research.展开更多
文摘The exact dating of Laozi and his work has long been a topic of scholarly interest.Since the 1920s,traditional views on Laozi’s dating have been widely questioned in both Chinese and Western academia.In the latter half of the 20th century,as the“Trust Antiquity”trend gradually emerged in Chinese academia,the view that“Laozi did not exist”became the most influential mainstream perspective in Western academia.This paper first reviews the process of unification and differentiation of opinions between Chinese and Western academia.Then,by analyzing and comparing representative papers from Chinese and Western scholars,it explores the reasons for the differences in mainstream opinions.Additionally,it briefly discusses the implications of these differences to provide insights for future research.
