Chinese Philosophy

[Setesh]

Well if everyone is gonna make a fuss about Chinese tattoos, then I'll get mine in rune script ( http://www.sunnyway.com/runes/ ). So there!

A few of the 'weekend warriors' here have them, most of them look horrendous.

[The_Nice_Guy]

Anyone else find ancient China fascinating?

I found a book in one of the libraries at San Jose State University that chronicled ancient Chinese cultural. I found it fascinating at the time and decided to check it out. That was 8 years ago so Ive forgotten most of it.

One thing that still stand out, was how Chinese hero's almost never get the girl like a Hero in the West does.

That was in the classical literature. Thankfully, modern chinese literature, represented by Louis Cha's(the Chinese Shakespeare) works, have improved on this aspect a great deal.

They get lucky, get the girl, and often end up in happy endings. Contrast to the four great classics, of which three(Outlaws of the March, Romance of the 3 Kingdoms, Dreams of the Red Mansion) have utterly heart wrenching endings.

The Nice Guy

[Darth Wong]

The West slapped China silly. That about says it all.

The Nice Guy

That's not much of a justification for societal values. The Nazis beat the hell out of the Jews too, but I don't see anyone using that as proof that Nazi culture was superior.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

Just an FYI, the ideas that China had a static culture, while the Europeans were dynamic, and kicked their asses, is completely false and didn't exist at the time. It's revisionist history, projecting the present reality of a post-industrial revolution Europe backwards in time, when it wasn't supreme at all. As a matter of fact, the Chinese had vast trade networks, which the Europeans simply plugged into, and the Chinese NEVER got "slapped silly" until the opium wars, well after the industrial revolution had upset the balance and put the Europeans ahead of the rest of the world.

[Joe]

China has been the most advanced civilization in the world for the bulk of its history, IIRC.

[Darth Wong]

Indeed, people often forget that the crucial inventions of gunpowder and the printing press were both Chinese. As recently as the 17th century, the Chinese empire was still arguably the world's most powerful civilization. But an isolationist Emperor screwed them over by instituting reactionary policies.

Incorrect moral of the story: Europeans are superior.
Correct moral of the story: Reactionaries always fuck things up.

[The_Nice_Guy]

The West slapped China silly. That about says it all.

The Nice Guy

That's not much of a justification for societal values. The Nazis beat the hell out of the Jews too, but I don't see anyone using that as proof that Nazi culture was superior.

Depends on what you define as superior. So the Nazis were militarily superior to the Jews, but not morally. This superiority did not solely result from their National Socialist values. IIRC, their military strength was a consequence of other factors.

In terms of politics, philosophy, and science, China was indeed inferior, as a direct result of its social values. Imagine, you're talking about a people that believed in a person's mandate to rule by Heaven, that loyalty outweighs everything else, and that their own superiority in the world was absolute, and they needn't change anything.

China has been the most advanced civilization in the world for the bulk of its history, IIRC.

Indeed, people often forget that the crucial inventions of gunpowder and the printing press were both Chinese. As recently as the 17th century, the Chinese empire was still arguably the world's most powerful civilization. But an isolationist Emperor screwed them over by instituting reactionary policies.

Who developed gunpowder first? The chinese. But they never did anything with it, did they? It doesn't matter if a civilization is advanced, if it didn't have the values for a dynamic and progressive society. A dynamic and progressive society, like the ones which formed in the West, would overtake a stagnant culture sooner or later, as history shows us.

There has been more than one isolationist emperor, many of them, in fact. Only Yongle(Ming) was anything like an outward looking sort.

There was nothing like the philosophy of progress, or the scientific method in China. It's due to the ingrained mindset of the chinese people, drummed into them by centuries of dynastic rule.

Incorrect moral of the story: Europeans are superior.

Correct moral of the story: Europeans had superior values. The Chinese(and everybody else who lost out) did not.

Correct moral of the story: Reactionaries always fuck things up.

And China has far too many of them in her history.

The Nice Guy

[Captain Jack]

Who developed gunpowder first? The chinese. But they never did anything with it, did they?

Nitpic: They made fireworks.

[The_Nice_Guy]

Just an FYI, the ideas that China had a static culture, while the Europeans were dynamic, and kicked their asses, is completely false and didn't exist at the time. It's revisionist history, projecting the present reality of a post-industrial revolution Europe backwards in time, when it wasn't supreme at all. As a matter of fact, the Chinese had vast trade networks, which the Europeans simply plugged into, and the Chinese NEVER got "slapped silly" until the opium wars, well after the industrial revolution had upset the balance and put the Europeans ahead of the rest of the world.

How does a vast trade network translate to having a 'dynamic' culture? It's possible to have both a static culture and an excellent trade system. The two are not exclusive.

China did have a stagnant culture. Yes, it appeared strong until the 18th century. But as you have said, the industrial revolution put the Europeans way above everyboy else.

So why the Europeans, and to a lesser extent, the Japanese, but not the Chinese? It has everything to do with the culture.

And the culture, the same static, isolationist, xenophobic culture of the chinese so often mentioned, was what dragged them back. Imagine if China had also embarked on industrialization in the 18th century!

You know what the chinese called Europeans from the start? Yang Gui Zi. Red haired devils, for short. You expect them to accept the scientific method and the idea of progress from the West?!?

The Nice Guy

[Darth Wong]

The Chinese did not lag behind Europe technologically until the Industrial Revolution, the timing of which unfortunately coincided with a particularly reactionary Emperor. It's not as if the entire society was like this, or every Emperor was like this.

[The_Nice_Guy]

The Chinese did not lag behind Europe technologically until the Industrial Revolution, the timing of which unfortunately coincided with a particularly reactionary Emperor. It's not as if the entire society was like this, or every Emperor was like this.

I'm not saying the entire chinese society at the time was reactionary, but the people who really mattered, the officials, the bureaucrats, the educated elite, were basically ALL reactionaries. True, there were a few exceptions, but hardly enough to fight aganst the isolationist tendencies of the system as a whole.

Take the imperial examination system, for example. Officials are selected on the basis of their grades in the examination, which consist of mostly rote learning, regurgitation of facts and indoctrinated philosophies, with comparatively little critical thinking skills involved. As a result, the people who got to be in the government were also more-or-less sticks in the mud who could not accept any other viewpoint other than their own. They were static, stale conservatives of the sternest sort.

So we have one reactionary emperor or government after another, all a direct result of the chinese culture. That is why China failed to progress.

Contrast with Japan. After they realized they were lagging behind, they were willing and able to go all out to catch up, and succeeded admirably. They were willing to absorb and learn new ideas from the West.

China, even after the Opium Wars, did not do so due to their mindset. It was only in the past 30 years that they realized that had to change.

The Nice Guy
PS. Fireworks, gunpowder, yadda yadda. The point is that they never did anything with it.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

China's technology and infrastructure (including trading infrastructure, contrary to what The_Nice_Guy claims) were far superior to Europe's in every way that mattered to them (ie. standard of living, agriculture, etc.). Europe was ahead in military technology because they were constantly at war with each other, while war was a distant abstraction for the Chinese. Japan, a very close neighbour, however, had an army that could crush any European army (can't remember the exact name of the battle, but one battle between Daimyos in the 16th century involved more guns than all the battles in all the wars in Europe's history combined! ) Korea, also next door, had warships called Turtleboats that could defeat European ships against forty to one odds!) These notions you have of Europe's dynamism and cultural superiority are simply false. It is revisionist history that is only being corrected within the last few decades by men like my father (not to pimp my dad's work, but if this discussion interests you, you should read some of his stuff, like Born With a Silver Spoon and more recently Cycles of Silver.

The reason China and other Asian countries did not experience an industrial revolution had nothing to do with culture and everything to do with geography. For an industrial revolution to take place, you need 3 things: Navigable waterways, coal, and iron. China had the first 2, but it's iron was locked away so deep in the mountains that it was inaccessible. Basically, The_Nice_Guy, or at least his sources, are peddling thinly veiled racism and religious bigotry. Racism in that the Europeans are claimed to be dynamic, brave, and brilliant, while Asians, native peoples, and especially Africans (btw, Africa had some very powerful, influential, and well developed societies that repeatedly kicked the Europeans' asses before the industrial revolution put Europe at the head of the world like The_Nice_Guy claims they always were) are painted in quite a bad light; religious bigotry in that the reasons for this dynamism are claimed to be, among other things, Christianity, particularly Protestanism, and Buddhism is bashed as being inward looking and stagnant.

[[BL]Phalanx]

Chinese heros don't get the girl, but that's because to the Chinese, romance was not an important part of being a hero; it's no real achievement. As Zhao Yun put it, "I seek fame, not a wife".

To which Liu Bei replied "You are indeed manly." (for not letting a woman cloud his thinking and make him soft)

Actually I find myself agreeing with those sentiments. I feel there's too much emphasis on romance these days. I'm sure it feels great to be in love (though I wouldn't know), but in the end that is between two people only. There are other matters of far greater weight. Romance does not a hero make.

[[BL]Phalanx]

For an industrial revolution to take place, you need 3 things: Navigable waterways, coal, and iron. China had the first 2, but it's iron was locked away so deep in the mountains that it was inaccessible.

I had read that China actually had plenty of private metallurgical production as far back as the Warring States period, and only later did the Han Emperor Wu Di decree a state monopoly on it (conveniently depriving the citizens of the ability to forge their own weapons...).

If, over 2000 years ago, they were able to mass produce it, I am not sure why they would be unable to do so just a few hundred years ago.

Basically, The_Nice_Guy, or at least his sources, are peddling thinly veiled racism and religious bigotry.

The Nice Guy is Chinese. I don't think it's racism. He's probably trying to be objective.

[The_Nice_Guy]

China's technology and infrastructure (including trading infrastructure, contrary to what The_Nice_Guy claims) were far superior to Europe's in every way that mattered to them (ie. standard of living, agriculture, etc.). Europe was ahead in military technology because they were constantly at war with each other, while war was a distant abstraction for the Chinese.

Wrong again. China's technology was better until the 17/18th century, when western scientific philosophy enabled them to catch up and surpass the Chinese in every way that mattered. Newtonian physics, for example. China had nothing on that. The chinese during Ming actually believed they had attained the most satisfactory civilization possible, and wanted things to stay that way forever. Of course they didn't.

And yes, the agriculture was better, but that was more due to the fertile land they had in the Central Plains. And rice has the highest grain yield of any staple crop.

War was hardly a distant distraction. Guess when the Qing came to power? 1644. BTW, it was not a peaceful transition. Chinese loved to blame Wu Sangui for allowing the Manchus to take over, but it was hardly the fault of just one person. Even during Kangxi's reign, rebellion and civil strife were ever present worries for the Emperor, what with guerilla bands trying to "Fan Qing Fu Ming". If you can, figure that one out.

Japan, a very close neighbour, however, had an army that could crush any European army (can't remember the exact name of the battle, but one battle between Daimyos in the 16th century involved more guns than all the battles in all the wars in Europe's history combined! )

Now that, I believe, is hyperbole. More guns than all those used in the Napoleonic Wars combined? Any historian with definite figures? With that many guns, they wouldn't need to worry about the US' puny boats, did they?

Korea, also next door, had warships called Turtleboats that could defeat European ships against forty to one odds!)

Sure they did. That didn't do them any good, did it?

These notions you have of Europe's dynamism and cultural superiority are simply false. It is revisionist history that is only being corrected within the last few decades by men like my father (not to pimp my dad's work, but if this discussion interests you, you should read some of his stuff, like Born With a Silver Spoon and more recently Cycles of Silver.

Your father may be right. However, Europe, due to its wars and the idea of the nation state, were indeed more dynamic in every way that mattered, while China was unable to come up with scientific and technological innovations to improve the lives of its people. The chinese believed that they were perfect, that they were better than anybody else. Ever thought of what the chinese name for China, "Zhong Guo", meant?

It didn't mean "Middle"(another misconception by Westerners). It actually means "Center". The chinese believed their nation to be the center of the universe! Is this hubris? I certainly think so.

Is Western culture superior? Perhaps. Were they dynamic? Certainly. Was this dynamism a result of their culture? I would say their culture was a factor, but not the only one.

But chinese cultural values, in terms of promoting dynamism, were indeed incapable of doing that. So were they inferior compared to Western ones? Perhaps in this sense, they were.

The reason China and other Asian countries did not experience an industrial revolution had nothing to do with culture and everything to do with geography. For an industrial revolution to take place, you need 3 things: Navigable waterways, coal, and iron. China had the first 2, but it's iron was locked away so deep in the mountains that it was inaccessible.

China, even if it had easy access to iron, would not be able to carry out any industrial revolution. Frankly speaking, if the government at the time had really wanted to, they could have managed somehow. That they did not speaks volumes about the basic unwillingness of the chinese people(okay, the government) then to expose themselves to new ideas. But the people themselves did not care much either.

Basically, The_Nice_Guy, or at least his sources, are peddling thinly veiled racism and religious bigotry.

No, I'm just stating facts. Some values are indeed better than others. The values of the Chinese people at that time doomed them to exploitation and colonisation by the West. You think that I, as an ethnic chinese, liked that my ancestors were bashed up by the West?

No, I didn't. But if the chinese people didn't face up to the fact that they were lagging behind because of their value systems, their culture, they would never have been able to attain the success they have today. Confucianism, as I studied a bit of it in its original form, is extremely stifling. Nobody studies it, nor cares for it nowadays. Okay, some, but very few.

Modern China has realized the folly of closing itself to ideas. Nowadays, they are so hungry for technology they are even willing to steal it from the US!

So if you can't beat them, join them!

Racism in that the Europeans are claimed to be dynamic, brave, and brilliant, while Asians, native peoples, and especially Africans (btw, Africa had some very powerful, influential, and well developed societies that repeatedly kicked the Europeans' asses before the industrial revolution put Europe at the head of the world like The_Nice_Guy claims they always were) are painted in quite a bad light; religious bigotry in that the reasons for this dynamism are claimed to be, among other things, Christianity, particularly Protestanism, and Buddhism is bashed as being inward looking and stagnant.

Bah! Christianity cannot take sole credit for Europe's dynamism. Competition among the squabbling nation states, the drive to attain more wealth, ambition, curiosity, organization. All these were factors in Europe's overall dynamism.

For science, the recovery of ancient greek texts from the Arabs were as much the galvanising factors behind Europe's sudden lurch towards scientific method and discovery. The Church never did approved of Galileo. And as the early scientists came up against the limits of Aristolean knowledge, they had the guts to break through into a new understanding of the world.

So, there's no single one reason for Europe's dynamism, just like it may be folly for me to claim China's past ills were solely due to its culture, when, as you have mentioned, geographical factors were also important. What's important is that Europe was dynamic, in ways unique in the world. This dynamism enabled them to take great risks, and also attain great rewards.

As an ethnic chinese, one who had studied quite a bit of China's past from chinese texts, I can say that culture had a great deal to do with the stagnation of chinese society, preventing them from attaining the dynamic nature of european societies. It may not be the only condition, but it was a necessary one. Even now, in many chinese cultures, the tendency towards stability and obedience towards authority runs strong. It's not just China. This can also be observed in Korean and Japan, though these influences are declining as the educated youth flex their freedoms.

And Buddhism's not one of the causes. It's Confucianism, which was encouraged by the state to instill obedience in the populace(revolts were a bit of a bother). It's Confucianism that's the inward looking philosophy that practially denigrates everything else, including scientific innovation.

before the industrial revolution put Europe at the head of the world like The_Nice_Guy claims they always were

When did I ever claim that? Stop putting words in my mouth.

What I meant was that even if they were inferior technologically, scientifically, and all sorts of -fically at a time, the dynamism of their society/s would enable them to catch up and overtake other cultures(eg. China) much quicker.

In conclusion, Chinese society during the dynastic age was stagnant, for reasons of culture, geography, and politics. While that might not necessarily be a bad thing, in a world with ravenous Europeans, it was a bad state of affairs. Even after their inferiority was demonstrated to them during the various wars with the Europeans, the Chinese did not understand the lessons taught, nor the actions they need to take to remain strong.

It was only when Sun Yat-Sen managed to overthrow the Qing dynasty did this start to change. And even then, it would be an ardous road before China finally got on the highway to progress.

The Nice Guy

[The_Nice_Guy]

Chinese heros don't get the girl, but that's because to the Chinese, romance was not an important part of being a hero; it's no real achievement. As Zhao Yun put it, "I seek fame, not a wife".

To which Liu Bei replied "You are indeed manly." (for not letting a woman cloud his thinking and make him soft)

Actually I find myself agreeing with those sentiments. I feel there's too much emphasis on romance these days. I'm sure it feels great to be in love (though I wouldn't know), but in the end that is between two people only. There are other matters of far greater weight. Romance does not a hero make.

But it does nowadays. Oh it does. In Dragon Sabre and Heaven Sword, the protaganist Zhang Wuji had no less than 4 girls chasing afer him!

I had read that China actually had plenty of private metallurgical production as far back as the Warring States period, and only later did the Han Emperor Wu Di decree a state monopoly on it (conveniently depriving the citizens of the ability to forge their own weapons...).

That's because the rulers feared rebellion. And you need metal for weapons.

If, over 2000 years ago, they were able to mass produce it, I am not sure why they would be unable to do so just a few hundred years ago.

The mines could have ran out. It's more than a thousand years between the Han dynasty and the Ming.

To tell the truth, I have no idea what mineral resources were available to the chinese during the Ming/Qing dynasties. I find it hard to believe that there were no significant deposits of minerals left in the chinese territory in the 17th century. Not even enough to start up some modest light manufacturing?

The Nice Guy is Chinese. I don't think it's racism. He's probably trying to be objective.

You noticed that, didn't you? Thanks.

[[BL]Phalanx]

But it does nowadays. Oh it does. In Dragon Sabre and Heaven Sword, the protaganist Zhang Wuji had no less than 4 girls chasing afer him!

LOL, true. I wonder if that is because of Western influence?

That's because the rulers feared rebellion. And you need metal for weapons.

I know. That's why I said "conveniently"...

The mines could have ran out. It's more than a thousand years between the Han dynasty and the Ming.

And European mines didn't run out? Well I suppose it's possible because of course resources on Earth aren't evenly distributed...

To tell the truth, I have no idea what mineral resources were available to the chinese during the Ming/Qing dynasties. I find it hard to believe that there were no significant deposits of minerals left in the chinese territory in the 17th century. Not even enough to start up some modest light manufacturing?

Well if the mid-1960s is any indication, they *had* the resources to industrialize, IMO. Wasn't private forging of metal a big deal during the "Great Leap Forward" of the mid to late 1950s?

Also, my dad remembers them coming to his village and taking away alot of the metal, and smelting it together to make some pile of crap they called a superior "alloy".... the metallurgy of ancient Qin was more advanced than the crap they churned out. My dad remembers sharing the others' feeling of being cheated of alot of their metal assets for no good reason at all. Rather than going to make useful products they made large lumps of metal....

Anyways, how do they "run out" of metal? Couldn't they just have taken existing metal and melted it down to reforge?

You noticed that, didn't you? Thanks.

Heh, yeah. We first met over at the SB forums, you might remember. I'm Chinese as well, living in CA, USA. I'm ABC, though, so my exposure to Chinese culture is limited, and my ability to read, write, and speak the language are also limited. I'm Cantonese and speak and listen to it fairly well (until you start using flowery language or start speaking the way Cantonese news anchors do), but my skills with Mandarin are nearly non-existent.

[The_Nice_Guy]

Mandarin and Cantonese are the two main spoken forms of chinese in the world. As long as you know one of them, it's perfectly fine!

Ever heard of the vote between Mandarin and Cantonese as the official spoken form of chinese? Mandarin won by one vote!

Too bad I can't speak, nor understand Cantonese at all. I can't even speak my native dialect of Teochew at all! Though I can still understand Hokkien and Teochew...

The Nice Guy

[Darth Gojira]

Nice Guy:

(sarcasm) Of course the turtle ships didn't work, Who cares about the Japanese invasion and their following naval defeat(sarcasm)

To all:

I believe it was the Mongol-North Chinese war that was the first to have an abundance of guns on both sides. The Chinese seemed to have a cycle of progress to conservative isolationism and back.

[Yogi]

Chinese moral superiority includes killing newborn baby girls so the family can have a son instead.
This is not old news. This is AFTER the "one child, one family" policy was implemented, making this a 20th century thing. This is also NOT isolated incidents, as the male birth to female birth ratio is now 112:100 (http://www.popcouncil.org/mediacenter/n ... _2chu.html)

Of course, in aincient times, the mysogony seen in Europeian culture was also prevalent, forbidding women to learn, barring them from office, denying them amny legal rights, crushing their feet with bandages, being treated as property etc.. No, the bandages part was not a typo. As a sign of wealth, high class women were expected to bind their feet tightly from when they were a young age, so that they were around half the size of a normal foot, with all the bones broken. Actually, I'm not sure Europe has the equivalent of this practice.

I bet my mom is regretting teaching me about my "glorious culture and history" right around now.

Edit: No, I am not kidding on the foot binding part. http://www.angelfire.com/ca/beekeeper/foot.html http://www.kidzworld.com/site/p2142.htm and http://www.sfmuseum.org/chin/foot.html

[[BL]Phalanx]

Bah, so what, I say. No culture is perfect. I can either be ashamed of it or proud of it, either way doesn't change what it was. I can see alot of the good things in it, and I take pride in those.

[Cap'n Hector]

Reactionaries always fuck things up.

Huh? Aren't reactionaries people working against the status quo, such as the Founding Fathers of the US?

How can they always fuck stuff up?

[PrinceofLowLight]

Something I never quite understood about China: Why was (and still is, for that matter) such a stable country if revolutions were practically routine?

[XPViking]

Easy. Because it wasn't always stable. You could ask yourself this; stable for who? Maybe for the average peasant their life doesn't change, but perhaps not for the aristocracy. Also it would depend on location.

XPViking

[Frank Hipper]

Who developed gunpowder first? The chinese. But they never did anything with it, did they?

Nitpic: They made fireworks.

The Chinese developed the cannon first, it spread to Europe within a few decades. It had a bottle-shaped barrell and fired rocket-arrows, apparently. The earliest European representation of a canon is almost identical to what they've found in Asia.
Here's something I found on a quick search:
http://www.china.org.cn/e-gudai/8.htm