Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-27T16:54:51.399Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A New Look at the Classical Chinese Dào of the Relation between Word and World

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 May 2024

Chad Hansen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I argue that the absence of some of the ‘greatest hits’ of Western philosophy in Classical China can be explained by a Wittgensteinian take on the role of language in philosophy. One is the ‘Idea Theory’ of meaning which anchors Western Mind-Body dualism. Its attraction is removed when the writing reminds us that a picture does not by itself ‘give life to’ our language even while it plays a role of cross-linguistic communication. Another is the centrality of a law-command theory of normativity which combines with mind-body dualism to give a natural push toward monotheistic supernaturalism. Western attempts to make the ‘God’ impulse logical (e.g., the Ontological Argument) fail because of differences in Chinese syntax. The upshot is we need not deny Chinese thinkers the status of philosophers for their failure to share our philosophical presuppositions and resultant agenda.

Type
Paper
Information
Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements , Volume 95: Words and Worlds: New Directions in the Philosophy of Language , May 2024 , pp. 181 - 198
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy and the contributors 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aristotle, Categoriae and De lnterpretatione, Ackrill, J.L.. (trans.), (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1963).Google Scholar
Bloomfield, L., An Introduction to the Study of Language (New York: Holt/London: Bell, 1914).Google Scholar
Carus, Paul, Lao-Tzu's Tao-Te-King (Chicago: Open Court, 1898).Google Scholar
Confucius, Analects, ca. 5th c. BC, in Lau, D.C. et al. (ed.), A Concordance to the Lunyu (論語逐字索引) (Hong Kong: Commercial Press, 1995).Google Scholar
DeFrancis, John, The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy (Honolulu: The University of Hawaii Press, 1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeFrancis, John, Visible Speech: The Diverse Oneness of Writing Systems (Honolulu: The University of Hawaii Press, 1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du Ponceau, Peter Stephen, A Dissertation on the Nature and Character of the Chinese System of Writing (Philadelphia:American Philosophical Society, 1838).Google Scholar
Hansen, Chad, A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992).Google Scholar
Hansen, Chad, Laozi: Tao Te Ching on The Art of Harmony (London: Duncan Baird, 2009).Google Scholar
Kripke, Saul, ‘Naming and Necessity’, in Harman, Gilbert and Davidson, Donald (eds), Semantics of Natural Language (Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 1972).Google Scholar
Mozi, (ca. 4th c. BC), in Harvard-Yenching Institute Sinological Index Series (Taipei: Chinese Materials and Service Center Inc., 1973).Google Scholar
de Saussure, Ferdinand, Course in General Linguistics, Harris, Roy (trans.), (London: Duckworth, 1983).Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig, The Blue and Brown Books (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1964).Google Scholar
Longxi, Zhang, The Tao and the Logos: Literary Hermeneutics, East and West (Durham: Duke University Press, 1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar