收藏 纠错 引文

中国古代科技文化及其现代启示(上册)

ISBN:978-7-5161-8355-7

出版日期:2016-08

页数:485

字数:938.0千字

点击量:6912次

中图法分类:
出版单位:
关键词:
专题:
折扣价:¥119.4 [6折] 原价:¥199.0 立即购买电子书

图书简介

中国科学院院士 席泽宗演讲详细地讲解了中国传统文化当中的创新精神,从汤武文王开始,特别强调日新日新又日新,又讲到《易经》里革卦的变革思想,革故鼎新,还有《易经》里的与时偕行的思想,一直延续到现在。这样一条创新精神的脉络,梳理得十分清楚。演讲进一步分两条线来讲中国传统文化的启示,一条是从价值观、从科学家应当具备的修养来看;另一条是从认识论来看“格物致知”的意义。《尚书》《大学》讲到,“大学之道在明明德,在亲民,在止于至善”:“古之欲明明德于天下者,先治其国;欲治其国者先齐其家;欲齐其家者先修其身;欲修其身者,先正其心;欲正其心者,先诚其意;欲诚其意者,先致其知;致知在格物。物格而后知至,知至而后意诚,意诚而后心正,心正而后身修,身修而后家齐,家齐而后国治,国治而后天下平。”这样一条线,讲的是非常清楚的,我们一定要心正意诚,然后知至,然后修身齐家治国平天下。另外讲“格物致知”,这是中国古代对自然的认识论,从《大学》里的“格物致知”一直讲到朱子,朱子讲得很清楚:“所谓格物致知者,言欲致吾之知,在即物而穷其理也。盖人心之灵,莫不有知,而天下之物,莫不有理。惟于理有所未穷,故其知有所不尽也。是以大学始教,必使学者即凡天下之物,莫不因其已知之理而益穷之,以求尽乎其极。至于用力之久,而一旦豁然贯通焉,则万物之表里精粗无不到,而吾心之全体大用无不明矣。此谓物格,此谓知之尽也。”演讲对中国古代传统文化的科学意义做出较为全面而正确的评价和比较清晰的梳理,从《论语》到《孟子》,一直到《周易》的变革思想,及怎么样用《周易》的变革思想来应对当今变化的世界,对中国古代文化科学思想的脉络,对古代科学认识论、价值观、方法论都梳理得非常清楚。谈到怎么样正确对待中国的传统文化,特别是讲到现在没有一成不变的模式,也没有最后的真理。非常高兴受到邀请来这里发言。当时我答应了,可以讲一次,但是讲这些,对我来说也很困难,因为我的眼睛完全不行,让我写稿子,自己写了以后,回头来看自己也不认识,让别人打字再来看,就很费劲,所以有困难。我就准备腹稿,根据我的记忆来谈。但在会议期间,上礼拜四晚上,突然感冒了。我虽然年纪大了,感冒还是很少的,几年也不一定有一次。这次还挺厉害,礼拜五、礼拜六,高烧38度,我想这个事情可能就讲不成了。幸亏到了礼拜一就好了,体温降到36度多,恢复正常了,今天还是可以来跟大家见面,愿意尽这一点绵薄之力吧。汝信刚才讲了四点指导性意见,我听了以后感觉很好。这个课题如果按照汝信先生的四条原则往下走,能够做得很好的。我很拥护汝信先生的四条原则,希望我还能再学习学习。我的眼睛不行,后面的人我看不到,但是最前排,一个是李申同志,一个是董光璧同志。我受这两位同志的启发很大,我的许多观点也都是从他们这儿转过来的。李申是我的《科学思想史》这一卷主要的作者。这本书去年得了中国社会科学院的“郭沫若中国历史学奖”的二等奖,主要归功于李申。我在思想史、科学史综合研究方面,有许多的观点、见解都取自这两位的意见,所以这次也是很好的请教的机会。现在讲创新。我们要建立创新型的国家,这是很大的事情。我就从中国传统文化中的创新精神的题目来说一说,可能还是有意义的。说中国的创新,当然是很多了。拿胡锦涛主席的话来说,新中国成立以后,社会主义能够集中力量做大事、搞创新,最典型的范例就是“两弹一星”的成功,一直到现在也要学习“两弹一星”的经验。“两弹一星”的一种说法就是原子弹、氢弹、人造卫星,当然这个说法不确切,好像原子弹、氢弹算一回事,导弹算一个“弹”,然后是人造卫星。不管怎么说,原子弹、氢弹算一件也好、两件也好,业务总指挥彭桓武先生把做原子弹、氢弹的经验总结成两句话,贴在办公室里,作为他的座右铭。头一句话是“日新日新又日新”,下一句话就是“集体集体再集体”。我说你这不是传统文化加社会主义吗?他说:对呀,我也崇拜传统文化。彭先生对传统文化有很深的造诣,古诗作得很好,是中关村诗社的社长。就说原子弹、氢弹,在联合国五个常任理事国里面,从造成原子弹到造成氢弹,所用时间最短的是我们国家,用了三年的时间;最长的是法国,用了八年。其他的成就不算,从原子弹到氢弹,用的年份是代表着一个水平,而这个是我们国家最快。原因在什么地方呢?彭桓武就是两句话,“日新日新又日新,集体集体再集体”。这不是说一说的,他有深刻的体会。他认为,中国造原子弹,那么多的大学毕业生,那么多的工人起了很大的作用。最近几年,他本人成绩很大,得到了“功勋科学家”的称号,得了各种奖金,这些钱他都没有装到自己的腰包里,也没有捐到哪里去,他把这些钱都分给原来参加这些工作的工人等这些不起眼的人。他说这些人干了一辈子,工资都很低,他们才是真正的英雄,这些钱应该分给他们。他把这些钱分了以后,送到每一个人的家里去。所以“集体集体再集体”这句话,他是亲身体会,而且亲身在做。他吃饭很简单,生活用品都很少。这首诗的头一条“日新日新又日新”,这话是从哪里来的?中国的历史,是“唐尧虞舜夏商周”,唐尧、虞舜都是人,干了一段时间就找一个人做下任。到夏禹的时候,就是“夏传子,家天下”,奴隶社会开始。但是“家天下”之后,多少代之后就变质了。本来第一个人可能很好,后来就腐败,就不好了。然后汤武就革命了,“革命”这两个字就从这儿开始的。汤武革命把夏朝最后一个后代给伐掉了,他传了多少代以后,又不好了,后来就是“武王伐纣”。现在有“夏商周断代工程”,就是研究这个年代。汤武革命是历史上很大的事,汤做了天子。这个开国之君是很好的,在他的洗澡盆上刻了几个字,“苟日新,日日新,又日新”。彭桓武以这句话为制造原子弹、氢弹的座右铭。汤武是为了警惕子弟,不要他们变坏了。这是公元前1600多年的事情,现在三千多年了,汤武洗澡的盆子早就没有了,但是在一本书上写下来了。有本书叫《大学》,书里开始的一句话就是“大学之道,在明明德,在亲民,在止于至善”。所谓“大学”,就是15岁以后要学习的内容,就是大人学的。小学就是扫地、怎么做算术这些。大学就是学大道理,“治国平天下”。“明德”是一个词,就是说人生来是善良的。哲学史上从来是两派,人性是性善还是性恶。孟子这一派是认为性善的,认为人生下来以后,他要受社会的传染,要变坏,就像一个明珠一样。这个珠子露在外面就不明了。要学习,就要想办法,这块明珠就要擦明。“明明德”,头一个“明”是动词,就是擦明;第二句话,“在亲民”,对自己来说,要“明明德”,而对周围的人,对其他的老百姓,要“亲民”,要让他不要变坏,也要不断地创新。《大学》第一部分,只有205个字,这句话是总纲,后面有八个条目,然后是“在亲民”。“在亲民”就要有解释了,有三段内容。第一段话说,汤之《盘铭》曰:“苟日新,日日新,又日新。”汤王洗澡的盆子上说,日新日新又日新,天天都要创新。第二段话说“周虽旧邦,其命惟新”。周朝后来革命把商朝伐掉了,把纣王给杀了。周是在西安西边的一个小国家,这个国家是旧的,但是天命要它立新。它要再来创新,不能再用旧的那一套。商是“苟日新,日日新,又日新”。周虽然是一个旧的国家,但是还要再来创新。后来老百姓在洛阳附近建了新城,然后这些人做“新民”,也要有新的面貌出现,这是真正的创新精神。《大学》这本书也是个创新,是《礼记》里面的一篇。《礼记》形成是从战国到汉朝。中国有儒法斗争,儒家是以礼治国的,讲仁义说道德的,而法家用法律治国。儒家讲的礼就多了,死老人有礼,结婚也有礼,小孩子18岁了也有礼,每天都有礼。从战国到汉朝,讲礼节的书很多。到了汉朝,大的《礼记》有85篇之多,小的《礼记》也有四五十篇。刚才说的这些精彩东西就混在里面,很少有人看。你拿一摞出来,让人看,很难。到了宋朝的朱熹,过去都大批说朱熹怎么坏,在座的年轻人可能不知道,我们都知道。朱熹是大儒,大唯心主义,被批得一塌糊涂。胡适写了一篇文章《中国哲学里的科学精神和科学方法》,认为朱熹是王充以后中国第二个伟大的哲学革新家。胡适主要是说什么呢?从汉朝开始,儒家经典是大家顶礼膜拜的,但是朱熹提出了一个大胆的怀疑。所谓儒家六经就是《诗》《书》《礼》《易》《乐》《春秋》,《书》是政治作品文集。秦始皇焚书先是把这部书烧掉。到汉朝怎么办?就找了一个老头子,比我现在的年龄还大,九十多岁了,他说他能把《尚书》背下来。汉朝找人跟他学,他说,别人记。这个有33篇,是用汉朝的文字写下来的。后来在济南发现了孔子家墙壁里有古文《尚书》,多出29篇,后来又丢了。到了东晋的时候,有人说又找到了。《尚书》分两派之争。到了唐朝,搁在一起,都认为是经书了。唐朝起,大家都念这个经书,确信不疑。到了宋朝,朱熹说这个古文《尚书》靠不住,怀疑是假的。这就厉害了,具有造反精神了。一部经书,今文33篇,说古文的28篇是假的,小一半都是假的了,等于今天说《马克思恩格斯全集》里有一半都是别人写的,这就是很大的一件事情了。他这个发现引起大家都来考证这个古文,一直到清朝乾隆的时候,才确定地查出来,这个古文《尚书》都是从哪里抄来的。所以朱熹是大的革命家。但是我觉得,朱熹还有更大的一部分重要的工作,胡适对他重视得不够。朱熹不但对古文《尚书》提出了怀疑,而且对《周易》这本书也提出了新见解,把本来大家不注意的东西,他做了肯定。《大学》从汉朝以来一千多年都没有人看,不知道是怎么回事。他拿出来以后,说这是一本书,原来只有一篇文章。他自己编了一个《四书集注》,就是把《论语》《孟子》《大学》《中庸》集在一起。《中庸》现在看来也是非常重要的,讲的是治学方法,一直到现在都是大家非常推崇的。把《大学》《中庸》摆在里面,读《论语》之前是要先读这些的,这样知道的人就多了。《大学》不但有创新精神,而且提出了“格物致知”。原来儒家做学问,都是讲为人处世、治国平天下。朱熹在《大学》里找了“格物致知”四个字出来。“大学之道,在明明德”,“明明德”就是修身养性,然后“在亲民,在止于至善”。怎么做到这个事情?就是“诚心正意,格物致知,修身齐家治国平天下”,这就是八个纲,而且这八件事情不是平行并列的。诚心正意就是做人做鬼的问题。心不诚、意不正,天天说假话,就不是人,就是鬼。他对“格物”解释说凡事都是物,凡物都有理,有理就要研究,就要扩充知识。如果不“格物致知”,就是在那里做梦,要干什么就是瞎碰,也许碰对了,就做得成,也许碰错了还不知道是错的。“诚心正意,格物致知,修身齐家治国平天下”就变成一大套东西了。对“格物致知”,在《大学》里就没有解释。朱熹自己来解释,“格物致知”就是从已知的东西推测未知的东西,来扩充知识,有了知识之后再做事情,“修身齐家治国平天下”。这个东西讲得很透。后来在《朱子语论》中第十五卷、第八卷有两卷专门讲,讲得细致得很。“格物”凡是皆有,凡是皆是物。他的“物”包括一草一木,山为什么长这么高,水为什么往下流,船为什么在水里走,车为什么在陆上走,这都一个一个地研究。讨论自然方面,在他之前,中国没有这么大的学问。到了元朝之后,搞自然科学的人都认为自己是在“格物致知”。一直到现在,我们的基础科学也是这样。他把《大学》取出来,单独列为一本书,这个事情就是创新,而且影响了中国后来的科学发展。朱熹把《大学》从《礼记》的一大堆的东西里拿出来,单独成了一本书,搁在《四书》的头部,这是重要的事情。还有一个重要的事情,就是《中庸》。《中庸》也是《礼记》里的一篇,据传是孔子的孙子做的。这也是没有人看的书,大家都不注意。但是朱熹把它拿出来了。任何哲学家的活动也都是受政治环境和历史条件支配的。在朱熹把《大学》《中庸》拿出来之前,比朱熹早一百年的沈括就注意到《中庸》这本书的重要性。沈括说《中庸》里讲的治学方法,我能不能做到是一件事,但是一定要按这个做。《中庸》中讲了一套治学方法,就是现在大家都知道的“博学之、审问之、慎思之、明辨之、笃行之”,一共是15个字,孙中山把它说成十个字,就是“博学、审问、慎思、明辨、笃行”,把它作为广东大学(后来的中山大学)的校训,校歌里也用这十个字。到后来讲自然科学,竺可桢也讲这一套。他认为治学方法、科学方法在《中庸》里面就全有了。社会科学方面,侯外庐讲治学方法,也是讲这15个字。这一套方法,朱熹不但拿了出来,而且做了很多的解释。就“博学”来讲,他认为,学不单纯是看书,看书是学,但是更重要的是考察,去看山看水,去做调查,用现在的话来说,就是收集信息。朱熹把这些都看得很重。孔子说:“学而不思则罔,思而不学则殆。”如果一个人天天收集材料,也做不了学问,他要思考。然后是提问,这个“问”是很重要的,“审问之”。中国“学问”两个字,有人认为“学”是次要的,“问”是重要的,能提出问题才行。朱熹说,你看一本书觉得没有问题,也要找问题,有了问题之后,解决问题。“辨”就是看这个材料对不对,然后是“行”,你认为对的再去做。这五个步骤在《中庸》里有,朱熹做了大量的解释工作。现在有人研究过,把爱因斯坦的科学方法,把波普尔的一套科学哲学的公式来对照了以后,认为差不了多少,针对性还是很强的。所以,朱熹把《中庸》里这一套方法拿了出来,把《中庸》这本书拿了出来,我认为这对中国的认识史、科学发展史是很重要的一步。把《大学》和《中庸》这两篇文章从《礼记》里挑出来,单独编成书,而且编在《论语》《孟子》的前面,宋朝以后就是“四书五经”嘛。这四部书和五部经典是并列的,对我们认识世界,对知识领域的扩充有很大的促进作用。这以后就谈方法,谈研究物,当然物也还是包括认识,治国平天下也是重要的部分。这是一个很大的进步。现在认为,《中庸》本身就是一个方法。中国科学院技术科学部有一位唐稚松是清华哲学系毕业的,他搞了一套计算机逻辑语言系统,这一套系统引起了很大的重视。他说我这套系统用的就是《中庸》的方法,还有《三国演义》里的方法,再有就是《周易》这三个系统做成的,得了1989年的自然科学一等奖。以后日本《朝日新闻》上发了很大的一篇文章,说唐稚松的贡献是21世纪计算机科学大事,是东方文明的很大贡献,具体的东西都是西方的,但是出发点和哲学思想是东方的。日本人就认为,这是东方文明对计算机科学在21世纪的很大的贡献。还有一篇东西发表在朱伯崑编的《国际易学研究》里面。作为一个哲学的方法,一个系统性的东西,《中庸》还是很重要的一件事情。传统文化是什么?现在文化这个词用得很滥,任何东西都可以挂上“文化”两个字。现在地摊上很多书,都挂着传统文化,里面很多东西跟我们说的传统文化就完全没有关系。有一本书叫《传统文化天文历法》,里面都是二十八宿,大家的说法也都不一样。我们说的传统文化,就是指经典著作,四书当然是了。《大学》《中庸》这两部是很重要的,还有《论语》和《孟子》。对孔子打倒了好多次,“打倒孔家店”,又回到孔家店,再抬出孔家店,现在是全世界都建立孔家店,都建立孔子学院了,这是否定之否定。说孔子完全没有要打倒的东西也是不对的。美籍华人陈香梅是美国参议院民主委员会的,是陈纳德的夫人。她有一次去美国的一个地方演讲,就说孔子不好,说孔子不重视妇女,孔子说“惟女子与小人难养也”。有一个华侨就提出来:“这个话我也认为是不对的,但是要看跟他同时代的人怎么讲的。”美国什么时候妇女才有了参政权和选举权?跟孔子同时代的希腊哲学家是苏格拉底,他说妇女不好的话,跟孔子差不多,甚至更厉害。美国妇女参政也没有多少年。社会在进步,时代是在进步的,我们也不能说孔子这句话是对的,但是要跟他同时代的人来对比,看看怎么样,得有这样的态度。《论语》这本书我倒是做过一些研究,写了一篇文章,叫《孔子与科学》。我研究孔子,认为孔子思想对发展科学是没有什么坏处的,有益处的东西还是不少的。他的教育思想,《论语》里精彩的东西,可供今天应用的东西还是很多的。比如说孔子喜欢颜回,颜回这个人是最老实听话的,给人的印象,好像孔子最喜欢唯唯诺诺、不敢说话的人。孔子在《论语》里说:“吾与回言,终日不违,如愚。”我谈一天话,他都没有不同的意见,就像傻子一样。但是孔子对颜回这个人并不赞成,他说:“回也,非助我者也!”说颜回这种做法对我没有帮助。但是有几个人,子路这些给孔子提意见的人,孔子还是很欣赏的。孔子做学问,就是“无臆、无必、无固、无我”,就是说不能主观意见,不能固执己见,不能唯我独尊。这些东西还是可取的。《论语》这本书也还是值得看的。孔子以后分两派,荀子这一派是唯物的,孟子是唯心的。从性善性恶分两派,孟子是性善派,朱熹后来也继承了这个。孟子也有了不起的地方。在中国的古书里,要说有民本思想,有大无畏精神的,孟子是最值得学习的。《孟子》说“尽信书不如无书”。要看书,都去信的话,还不如不看书,这个话就厉害了。对于今天来说,就是有本书你来看看,知道它是怎么回事,实际上还要你来判断。《孟子》说做皇帝的,要有做皇帝的样子,假如皇帝是一个贪污犯,孟子说就可以杀,杀了以后没有听说是杀君。过去《春秋》里把杀字分两种,一个是杀得合理的,就是杀。他虽然是皇帝,但是他是贪污犯,我只听见杀一个贪污犯,没有听见杀皇帝。还有认为杀得不对的。后来欧洲人看了《孟子》以后说这个书不得了啊,16世纪的欧洲对于君权、对于宗教主能不能废除都是争论不休的,中国在孟子那时候居然就敢说,皇帝犯了罪也一样杀,就是杀了一个坏人,并不是杀了皇帝。《孟子》这部书在科学方面,有求故思想。“苟求其故,千岁之日至,可坐而致也。”也就是说,以前冬至、夏至可以算出来,要研究它的道理,追究原因,问个为什么,可以算出来。孟子自己会不会算是另一回事,但是他有这个信心,这个信心鼓励了中国历法的发展。后来明朝时说,中国一套历法史就是两个字。一个是“故”,大家都在计算历法,都在找原因,问为什么。一直到了近代科学以后,李善兰翻译赫歇尔的《谈天》,这是中国人接触到的第一部近代天文学的比较全面的一部书。李善兰就连说三句话,哥白尼求其故怎么样,开普勒求其故怎么样,牛顿求其故怎么样。他用三句话,从哥白尼到牛顿,把近代的天文学关于天体力学的历史都说得清清楚楚,他说都是“善求其故也”。还有一个字是“革”,这是借用了《周易》的革卦,是从汤武的革命开始的。“革”就是“change”。最近一件大事,美国人奥巴马搞选举,到处喊“change”,翻译成汉字就是“易”。当然不是说奥巴马看过《周易》。奥巴马能够选上美国总统,有那么大的轰动,把美国的白宫的“白”变成“黑”了,这是全世界的大事。他就用一个字,就是“易”这个字。当然,他可能不知道这本书,但是真理是一样的,“人同此性,性同此理”。中国传统文化能够发挥的地方还是很多的。《周易》这本书今年就有人批判,说这一套完全是伪科学。我从来不对任何学问,说它不对。发现有不合适的地方,不轻易扣帽子。传统的文化,也不是说哪个都好。任何一本书都不能说没有错,不能要求任何人说的话都是对的,那是不可能的事。所以没有最后的真理,也没有一成不变的模式。我和《周易》还有一些关系。对《周易》的看法,辩论得最厉害的时候,闹伪科学闹得最厉害的时候,丘亮辉找我去了,在我门口就碰到了何祚庥。何祚庥说你还搞《周易》啊?丘亮辉问他,你说《周易》是怎么回事?何祚庥就反问,你认为《周易》是怎么回事?丘亮辉就说,阁下是不是清华毕业的?何祚庥说是的。那么清华校训是什么?“厚德载物、自强不息”,现在还贴在清华,到处宣传。丘亮辉说这八个字是不是伪科学?是不是错了?何祚庥说,这八个字我还是赞成的。就说,那么《周易》里至少这八个字是对的。他说,能够为我们今天用的还不止这八个字。何祚庥服了,两个人谈得很好,说这个事情大家不要扣帽子,不要打棍子,任何东西都要具体分析。我们生活在这样一个环境里,有几千年的文化,你说完全抛开不管,你不管它,它还要管你的。他们两个那天还是谈得很好的。《周易》这本书,是儒家经典里很重要的一本哲学著作。当然我不赞成说《周易》里面连近代的DNA也有。你今天发现了什么东西,就到《周易》里去找,这个办法是不行的。作为一本哲学著作,它的精神还是可以的。就说“苟日新,日日新,又日新”,那个跟今天彭桓武需要的,也不一定具体一样的,但这个精神还是可以传承的,还是应该具体问题具体分析,不做结论。胡锦涛同志在博鳌论坛上有一个讲话,说“没有一成不变的模式,没有最后的真理,大家都在前进”。以前认为美国这一套、西方这一套就完美无缺了,都要跟它接轨。现在不这样想了,国际金融体制要改革。我们认识世界是很少的。对整个宇宙来说,宇宙大爆炸已经170亿年,我们现在才几千年,从认识的东西来说,现在97%的物质我们还不知道是什么,暗物质、暗能量,理论物理学家讨论时,都不知道是什么东西。我们才知道百分之几的物质世界,就说我们穷尽一切了?这个事情不能这么说。我们传统的文化也是如此,别的国家也有它的优点,我们都可以尊重。(下面用20分钟的时间进行提问和回答。)提问:席先生讲得非常好,深入浅出,对我们很有启发,怎么样认识中国古代的传统文化及其科学思想。我的问题是,您讲了朱熹非常大胆,非常创新,把《大学》和《中庸》拿出来作为经典,这在宋代是很有趣的现象,宋代把很多古代过去认为不重要的著作给经典化,为什么宋代会出现这样的情况?包括王安石把《孟子》也提得很高,司马光比较注重《春秋》,认为要以史为鉴,资治通鉴,但是王安石要“法先王易”,您认为朱熹把《孟子》《大学》《中庸》拿出来作为经典,和宋代的学术环境有没有什么关系?您有什么看法?席泽宗:这个具体值得研究,我原则上同意刚才汝信先生的意见,任何一个哲学家的行为都不是偶然的。从历史场合来看,当时学术和科学发展到了一定的程度。我在我那本书里曾经谈到,唯物主义理论化不是凭空出来的,而是从那时候的社会需要出来的。具体到宋朝的问题,还可以具体研究。朱熹把《大学》《中庸》突出得这么厉害,其实沈括就已经意识到了《中庸》的重要性,他比朱熹早了一百年。提问:我觉得,您讲的我也非常同意,确实在中国的传统文化里,它一点也不缺乏创新的精神和意识,包括方法,都可以看得到。“易”的哲学嵌进去,中国哲学最根本的就是变化,但是我们始终回避不了李约瑟的问题,为什么有这么创新的思想和精神在里面,可是特别是到了近代以来,始终没有产生出新的科学来,或者现代科学的蓬勃发展的创新我们就没有,这是怎么个问题?李约瑟还是从社会的角度来考虑,不知道您对这个问题是怎么看的?席泽宗:这个是老问题了。还有其他的社会现象放在一起来看。比如说文艺复兴时期,欧洲那一套,当时追求变化,就是创新思想。这一套精神科学是有很多,但是当时还有别的东西都配合起来了,这要综合在一起来研究。我刚才说胡适那一篇文章,从中国传统文化理解科学精神和人文精神。欧洲追求这些精神,最早是文艺复兴时期人文学家提出来的,不是科学家。那时候,整个欧洲的宗教革命等一大堆的问题积累起来爆发的。胡适那篇文章很好,还可以看一看。这个事情以前我们不知道,有一个哲学家大会,前面开过两次,都是讨论中国为什么没有近代科学,都说西方有逻辑,中国没有。第三次胡适去了,他写了一篇文章,就讲中西哲学到底是同的多还是异的多,那两个会的材料我们以前都没有看过。提问:您这里有这个材料吗?席泽宗:胡适第三次去,是批判前面的两次会上的一种诬蔑中国人的论断的。胡适这篇文章,上海复旦大学编的《胡适学术文集》里有,但是会议的材料,我们都不知道。这是跟当时欧洲的综合问题合起来看的,我们现在看的是科学史这一点。提问:去年《人民日报》海外版发表两篇文章,有关中国天文学的问题,一个说中国天文学主要是占星术。中国科技大学教授也发表了文章,他认为中国天文学不仅仅是占星术,还有许多历法的知识。您对这个讨论怎么看?席泽宗:说中国天文学就是占星术的这个话太武断了。不说别的,就说天文志、历法志里,天文志里占星术的多,但是历法志里的这一套原理,就是刚才说的追求革新、追求为什么,还有检验真理的标准,从汉朝开始,一直贯彻。检验真理的标准这一条,在中国历法史里是很厉害的。一直到清朝,西方的科学进来以后,双方比试行不行,还是大家算出来,你去比,看对不对。大家对于要不要西方的方法,有不同的意见,但是检验谁对谁错的标准,这是双方都没有争论的。这个标准是从汉朝就一直延续下来的。占星术是中国天文学里很大的一部分,但是说中国天文学就是占星术,完全是错误的。汝信:利用这个机会,我也跟席老请教,刚才也有提到李约瑟那个书的,李约瑟那本书当时是中国科学院牵头翻译的,中间讲到先秦的一卷,跟哲学关系,跟先秦的哲学派别关系特别密切,交给中国社会科学院负责翻译,我也参加了这个工作。但是李约瑟一个主要的问题就是对儒家的评价。多少年前,我最后校订那一卷的时候,就感觉到李约瑟对儒家的评价,对中国科技的发展,他认为不起好作用,没有太大的贡献,相反他对道家、墨家很推崇,评价比较高。当时我感觉到,李约瑟的观点能不能成立,或者有一些偏颇。今天听了席老的讲话,给我很大的启发,对儒家不能做这么片面的论断,革新的思想在儒家的经典里也有很多的阐述。我后来想到,这个问题到底应该怎么看,应该怎么评价?是不是儒家本身也有一个发展的过程,特别是发展到后来,成为一种官方哲学以后,它本身也是走向保守僵化,但是应该说原始儒家的思想中间确实有变化革新的这一面。在长期历史的发展过程中,后来确实有僵化、保守的东西占了主导的地位,引起了不好的后果。是不是能这么理解?儒家在历史上发展这么长时间,到后来成了官方的意识形态体系以后,当然是被当时一些封建的王朝作为用来巩固现存秩序的意识形态的工具了,这样可能对一些新事物,对一些科学技术的发展起到了非常不好的作用。对李约瑟的书是不是可以这样理解?我感觉到席老的话对我有很大的启发,就是什么事情都应该有具体的分析,不应该脱离当时的时间、条件和地点。具体的分析不要做一个绝对化的结论,认为哪个学派如何如何。对儒家在整个中国两千多年的历史中起到什么样的作用,可以有不同的观点,可以有自由讨论的余地。绝对化地下结论,恐怕是不大科学的。今天我听了席老的讲话,这一点上给了我很深的启发。郭书春:我很同意席先生的看法。儒学联合会要讨论儒学和科技的关系,山东大学一位教授说,你们讨论这些东西,不请搞科学史的人来是不行的。我和董光璧一起去的。我在会上发表一篇文章,基本观点是,儒家作为一个学派,很多思想方法对中国的发展是起到了积极作用的。但是理论方面,如果儒家被统治阶级利用,成了桎梏人们思想的工具,这时候作用是相反的。别的我不知道,中国古代数学的几个最高潮的时候,都是儒家统治地位被削弱的时候,魏晋南北朝、宋元,宋元尽管有道学,但还不像明清时期占统治地位。我很同意,应该把儒家这个学派本身和统治阶级利用作为统治人们思想工具的时候分开来讨论,所以我很同意汝信和席老的观点。提问:刚才听了席老师关于《中庸》的说法我很受启发,我最近了解到的问题,在宋代,对《中庸》的认识有个过程。实际上,宋代初年的时候,对《中庸》的论述,最早的不是儒家,而是佛教的两个著名的僧人,他们两个人都有专门的著作。而儒家,第一个是司马光,后来是“二程”、朱熹,影响了中国后期封建社会的发展。席先生说的我非常赞成。我觉得有这样的问题,我看到一篇关于宋代的儒林的文章,讲到儒家的含义,作者认为,在宋代王安石变法的时候,曾经有儒家的经学、教育、科学三位一体化的趋势,但是王安石变法在宋哲宗时期失败了。朱熹也有这样的理念,但是仍然没有成功。一直到明朝,在编撰《性理大全》的时候,才真正将儒家的经学、教育、科学三位一体化,大量的儒家知识分子向这方面靠拢。从这个角度来理解的话,可能对后代的知识分子怎么样研究科学、思考问题的方法和价值取向会产生更大的影响。我想,朱熹这个理论在明朝的时候真正发挥作用,对后来的发展产生更大的影响。所以我同意席老的话,我们对儒家也应该划分不同的阶段来认识和评价,可能更有客观性。

Xi Zezong, academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, gave a speech that explained in detail the spirit of innovation in traditional Chinese culture, starting with King Tang Wuwen, with special emphasis on the new and new every day, and talked about the revolutionary ideas in the "I Ching", the reform of the old and the new, and the idea of walking with the times in the "I Ching", which has continued to the present. Such a thread of innovative spirit is very clear. The speech is further divided into two lines to talk about the enlightenment of traditional Chinese culture, one is from the perspective of values and the cultivation that scientists should have; The other is the epistemological point of view of the meaning of "knowing by lattice". "Shangshu" and "University" said, "The way of the university lies in Mingmingde, in being close to the people, and in ending in the supreme goodness": "Those who want to understand the world in ancient times, first rule their country; Those who want to rule their country must first join their families; Those who want to unite their families first cultivate their bodies; Those who want to cultivate their bodies must first correct their hearts; Those who want to correct their hearts, first sincerely do so; Those who wish to be sincere, first let them know; To know in the grid. Character then knows, knows and then sincere, sincerity and then heart is right, heart is right and then body cultivation, body cultivation is followed by family qi, family qi is then national rule, national rule and then world peace. "Such a line, the statement is very clear, we must be honest and sincere, and then know, and then cultivate the family to govern the country and the world." In addition, it is said that "lattice things know", which is the ancient Chinese epistemology of nature, from the "lattice to know" in "University" to Zhu Zi, Zhuzi said very clearly: "The so-called lattice to know, words and desires to know, in the matter and exhaustion." The spirit that covers people's hearts does not know, and the things under the world are unreasonable. However, there is no end to reason, so there is no exhaustive knowledge. It is the beginning of the university that the scholar, that is, all things under the world, will not benefit because of the known reason, so as to achieve the fullest. As for the long time of exertion, once it is suddenly penetrated, the surface of all things is fine, and the whole of my heart is of great use. This predicate is the object, this predicate is also the end of knowledge. The speech made a more comprehensive and correct evaluation and clearer combing of the scientific significance of ancient traditional Chinese culture, from the Analects to Mencius, all the way to the reform ideas of "Zhou Yi", and how to use the reform ideas of "Zhou Yi" to deal with today's changing world, the context of ancient Chinese cultural scientific thought, ancient scientific epistemology, values and methodologies are very clear. When it comes to how to treat China's traditional culture correctly, especially when it comes to the fact that there is no immutable model and no final truth. It is a great pleasure to be invited to speak here. At that time, I promised that I could talk about it once, but it was also difficult for me to talk about this, because my eyes were completely bad, let me write the manuscript, after I wrote it myself, I looked back and didn't know myself, and it was very difficult to let others type and look at it again, so it was difficult. I'll prepare a belly draft and talk about it based on my memory. But during the meeting, last Thursday night, I suddenly caught a cold. Although I am older, I still have very few colds, not necessarily once in a few years. This time it was quite bad, on Friday, Saturday, the fever was 38 degrees, I think this thing may not be able to be said. Fortunately, it was good on Monday, the body temperature dropped to more than 36 degrees, and it returned to normal, so I can still come and meet you today, and I am willing to do my part. Ru Xin just made four guiding opinions, and I feel very good after listening to them. This issue can be done well if we follow Mr. Ruxin's four principles. I am a big supporter of Mr. Ruxin's four principles and hope that I can learn again. My eyes are not good, and I can't see the people behind me, but in the front row, one is Comrade Li Shen and the other is Comrade Dong Guangbi. I was greatly inspired by these two comrades, and many of my views were transferred from them. Li Shen is the main author of my volume "History of Scientific Thought". The book won the second prize of the Guo Moruo Prize in Chinese History from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences last year, largely thanks to Li Shen. In my comprehensive research on the history of ideas and the history of science, I have many opinions and opinions drawn from these two opinions, so this is also a good opportunity to consult. Now about innovation. We want to build innovative nations, and that's a big deal. It may still be meaningful for me to talk about the innovative spirit in traditional Chinese culture. Of course, there are a lot of innovations in China. Take the words of President Hu Jintao, after the founding of New China, socialism was able to concentrate its efforts on doing great things and making innovations, and the most typical example was the success of the "two bombs and one satellite." One of the sayings of "two bombs and one satellite" is atomic bombs, hydrogen bombs, artificial satellites, of course, this statement is not accurate, as if atomic bombs and hydrogen bombs are one thing, missiles are counted as one "bomb", and then artificial satellites. In any case, atomic bombs and hydrogen bombs are counted as one or two, and Mr. Peng Huanwu, the chief commander of the business, summed up the experience of making atomic bombs and hydrogen bombs into two sentences and pasted them in his office as his motto. The first sentence is "new and new", and the next sentence is "collective and collective". I said you are not traditional culture plus socialism? He said: Yes, I also worship traditional culture. Mr. Peng has a deep knowledge of traditional culture, writes ancient poems very well, and is the president of Zhongguancun Poetry Society. Let's just say that the atomic bomb and the hydrogen bomb, among the five permanent members of the United Nations, the shortest time from the creation of the atomic bomb to the creation of the hydrogen bomb is our country, which took three years; The longest was in France, which took eight years. Other achievements are not counted, from atomic bombs to hydrogen bombs, the year used represents a level, and this is the fastest in our country. What is the reason? Peng Huanwu is two sentences, "Every day is new and every day is new, and the collective is collective." This is not to say, he has a deep understanding. He believes that China's atomic bomb, so many college graduates, so many workers played a big role. In recent years, he himself has achieved great results, won the title of "meritorious scientist", received various bonuses, these money he did not put in his own pocket, did not donate anywhere, he distributed all this money to the original workers who participated in these work and other inconspicuous people. He said that these people have worked all their lives, they are poorly paid, they are the real heroes, and the money should be shared with them. He divided the money and sent it to everyone's home. So the phrase "collective collective and collective", he personally experienced and did it. He eats very simply, and has very few daily necessities. The first line of the poem, "New and new", where does this come from? China's history is "Tang Yao Yu Shun Xia Shang Zhou", Tang Yao and Yu Shun are both people, and after working for a period of time, they will find someone to be the next post. By the time of Xia Yu, it was "Xia Chuanzi, the family world", and the slave society began. But after the "family world", after how many generations it will deteriorate. Originally, the first person may be good, but then it will be corrupt, it will not be good. Then Tang Wu revolutionized, and the word "revolution" began here. The Tangwu Revolution cut down the last descendant of the Xia Dynasty, and after how many generations he passed it on, it was not good, and later it was "King Wu felling". Now there is the "Xia Shang Zhou Dynasty Project", which is to study this era. The Tangwu Revolution was a great event in history, and Tang became the Son of Heaven. This founding king was very good, and a few words were engraved on his bath, "Gou is new, every day is new, and every day is new". Peng Huanwu took this sentence as the motto for manufacturing atomic bombs and hydrogen bombs. Tang Wu is to be wary of his children and not to let them become bad. This was more than 1600 BC, and now more than three thousand years later, the basin where Tang Wu bathed has long been gone, but it was written down in a book. There is a book called "University", and the sentence at the beginning of the book is "The way of university is in Mingmingde, in being close to the people, and in ending in the ultimate goodness". The so-called "university" is what you want to learn after the age of 15, which is what adults learn. Elementary school is all about sweeping the floor and how to do arithmetic. University is to learn the great principle, "governing the country and the world". "Matilda" is a word that means that people are born good. There have always been two schools in the history of philosophy, whether human nature is good or evil. Mencius's school believed that sex was good, and believed that after he was born, he would be infected by society and become bad, like a pearl. This bead is not clear when it is exposed. If you want to learn, you have to find a way, and this pearl must be polished. "Mingmingde", the first "ming" is a verb, that is, to wipe ming; The second sentence, "in being close to the people", for oneself, it is necessary to be "clear and enlightened", and to the people around him and other ordinary people, to be "close to the people", to let him not become bad, but also to constantly innovate. The first part of "University" has only 205 words, this sentence is the general outline, followed by eight entries, and then "in the people". "Being close to the people" requires an explanation, with three paragraphs. The first paragraph says that Tang Zhi's "Panming" says: "Gou is new, every day is new, and every day is new." "The basin where the king of Tang takes a bath says that every day is new and new, and every day must be innovative. The second paragraph says, "Although Zhou is an old state, its life is new." The Zhou Dynasty later revolutionized the Shang Dynasty and killed King Shu. Zhou is a small country west of Xi'an, a country that is old, but destiny wants it to be new. It needs to innovate again, not the old one. Shang is "new every day, new every day, and new every day". Although Zhou is an old country, it needs to innovate again. Later, the common people built a new city near Luoyang, and then these people became "new people", and they also had to have a new look, which is the real spirit of innovation. The book "University" is also an innovation, and it is an article in the "Book of Rites". The "Book of Rites" was formed from the Warring States to the Han Dynasty. In China, there is a struggle between Confucianism and law, Confucianism governs the country with propriety, preaches benevolence and righteousness and morality, and legalists govern the country with law. Confucianism talks about more etiquette, dead old people have etiquette, marriage also has etiquette, children are 18 years old also have etiquette, every day there is etiquette. From the Warring States to the Han Dynasty, there are many books on etiquette. In the Han Dynasty, there were as many as 85 large "Records of Rites" and forty or fifty small "Records of Rites". These wonderful things just mentioned are mixed in and few people watch them. You take a stack and come out for people to see, it's hard. When Zhu Xi arrived in the Song Dynasty, in the past, a large number of people said how bad Zhu Xi was, and the young people here may not know, we all know. Zhu Xi was a great Confucian, a great idealist, and was criticized as a mess. Hu Shi wrote an essay entitled "The Scientific Spirit and Scientific Method in Chinese Philosophy," arguing that Zhu Xi was the second great philosophical innovator in China after Wang Chong. What is Hu Shi mainly talking about? Since the Han Dynasty, Confucian classics have been worshiped by everyone, but Zhu Xi raised a bold skepticism. The so-called Six Confucian classics are "Poems", "Books", "Rites", "Yi", "Music", "Spring and Autumn", and "Books" are collections of political works. Qin Shi Huang burned the book first. What to do in the Han Dynasty? So I found an old man, older than my current age, in his nineties, who said that he could memorize the Book of Shang. The Han Dynasty found someone to learn from him, he said, others remember. There are 33 articles in this one, which were written in the Han Dynasty script. Later, it was found in Jinan that there were ancient texts "Shang Shu" in the wall of Confucius's house, 29 more articles, and later lost. When it came to the Eastern Jin Dynasty, some people said that they found it again. The Book of Shangshu is divided into two factions. In the Tang Dynasty, they were all considered scriptures. Since the Tang Dynasty, everyone has read this scripture and is convinced. In the Song Dynasty, Zhu Xi said that this ancient text "Shang Shu" was unreliable and suspected to be fake. This is powerful, with the spirit of rebellion. A scripture, 33 articles today, says that 28 of the ancient texts are false, and the small half are false, which is equivalent to saying today that half of the "Complete Works of Marx and Engels" were written by others, which is a big thing. His discovery caused everyone to examine this ancient text, and it was not until the Qianlong period of the Qing Dynasty that he found out with certainty where this ancient text "Book of Shang" was copied. So Zhu Xi is a big revolutionary. But I think that Zhu Xi still has a larger part of important work, and Hu Shi does not pay enough attention to him. Zhu Xi not only raised doubts about the ancient text "Shang Shu", but also put forward new insights into the book "Zhou Yi", and he affirmed what everyone did not pay attention to. "University" has not been watched for more than a thousand years since the Han Dynasty, and I don't know what is going on. After he took it out, he said that it was a book, and it turned out to be only one article. He compiled a "Commentary on the Four Books" himself, which is a collection of Analects, Mencius, University, and Mean. "The Mean" also seems to be very important now, it talks about the method of learning, and it has been very respected by everyone until now. Put "University" and "Mean" in it, and read these before reading the Analects, so that more people will know. "University" not only has an innovative spirit, but also puts forward "knowledge through things". It turns out that Confucianism is all about dealing with the world and governing the country and the world. Zhu Xi found the four words "knowledge of things" in "University". "The way of university, in Mingmingde", "Mingmingde" is self-cultivation, and then "in being close to the people, in stopping at the highest good". How to do this? That is, "sincerity and righteousness, knowledge of things, self-cultivation, family rule and peace in the world", these are the eight principles, and these eight things are not parallel and juxtaposed. Sincerity is a matter of being a ghost. If the heart is not sincere, the intention is not right, and the lie is told every day, it is not a person or a ghost. He explained to the "lattice" that everything is a thing, everything has reason, and reason requires research and expansion of knowledge. If you don't "know what you want", you are dreaming there, what you want to do is blindly touching, maybe if you touch it right, you can do it, maybe you touch it wrong and you don't know it's wrong. "Sincerity and righteousness, knowledge of things, self-cultivation, family rule and peace in the world" has become a big set of things. There is no explanation of "knowledge of qualities" in "University". Zhu Xi himself explained that "knowing by qualities" is to infer unknown things from what is known, to expand knowledge, and then do things after having knowledge, "cultivate oneself and rule the country and the world". This thing goes very well. Later, in the "Zhuzi Language Theory", two volumes 15 and 8 were devoted to it, which were very detailed. "Lattice" is everything, everything is a thing. His "things" include a grass and a tree, why the mountains grow so tall, why the water flows down, why the boat walks in the water, why the car walks on land, all of which are studied one by one. Discussing the natural aspect, before him, China did not have such great knowledge. After the Yuan Dynasty, people engaged in natural science thought that they were "knowing things". Until now, our basic science has been like this. He took out "The University" and listed it as a separate book, which was innovation, and it influenced the later development of science in China. It is important that Zhu Xi took "University" out of a large number of things in the "Book of Rites" and turned it into a separate book, which was placed at the head of the "Four Books". Another important thing is "The Mean". The Mean is also an entry from the Book of Rites, which is said to have been made by Confucius's grandson. This is also a book that no one reads, and everyone does not pay attention. But Zhu Xi took it out. The activities of any philosopher are also governed by political circumstances and historical conditions. Before Zhu Xi took out "The University" and "The Mean", Shen Kuo, who was a hundred years before Zhu Xi, noticed the importance of the book "The Mean". Shen Kuo said that the academic method mentioned in "The Mean", whether I can do it is one thing, but I must do it according to this. "The Mean" talks about a set of academic methods, that is, what everyone now knows as "erudition, interrogation, careful thinking, discernment, and dedication", a total of 15 characters, Sun Yat-sen described it into ten characters, that is, "erudition, interrogation, careful thinking, discernment, and dedication", which was taken as the motto of Guangdong University (later Sun Yat-sen University), and these ten characters were also used in the school song. Later, when he talked about natural science, Zhu Kezhen also talked about this set. He believes that the academic method and the scientific method are all available in "The Mean". In terms of social sciences, Hou Wailu also talked about these 15 words when he talked about the method of governance. This set of methods, Zhu Xi not only took it out, but also made a lot of explanations. As far as "erudition" is concerned, he believes that learning is not simply reading books, reading books is learning, but more importantly, investigating, looking at mountains and waters, doing investigations, in today's terms, collecting information. Zhu Xi took all of this very seriously. Confucius said, "To learn without thinking is to be ignorant, and to think without learning is to perish." "If a person collects materials every day and can't do learning, he has to think. Then there is the questioning, and this "question" is very important, "interrogation". Some people think that "learning" is secondary, and "asking" is important, and only by asking questions can we ask questions. Zhu Xi said, if you read a book and feel that there is no problem, you must also find the problem, and after you have the problem, solve the problem. "Discernment" is to see whether the material is right, then "OK", and then do what you think is right. These five steps are found in "The Mean", and Zhu Xi has done a lot of explanatory work. Now some people have studied it, and after comparing Einstein's scientific method with Popper's set of formulas for the philosophy of science, they think that it is not much different, and the pertinence is still very strong. Therefore, Zhu Xi took out this set of methods in "The Mean" and took out the book "The Mean", which I think is a very important step in the history of China's understanding and scientific development. The two articles "University" and "The Mean" were selected from the "Book of Rites" and compiled into separate books, and compiled in front of the "Analects" and "Mencius", which were "Four Books and Five Classics" after the Song Dynasty. These four books and the five classics are juxtaposed, which greatly promotes our understanding of the world and the expansion of the field of knowledge. After that, we will talk about methods, talk about research objects, of course, things still include understanding, and governing the country and the world is also an important part. That's a big step forward. It is now believed that "The Mean" is a method in itself. A Tang Zhisong from the Department of Technology and Science of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, who graduated from the Department of Philosophy of Tsinghua University, developed a set of computer logic language systems, which attracted great attention. He said that my system used the method of "The Mean", the method in "Romance of the Three Kingdoms", and then the three systems of "Zhou Yi", which won the first prize of natural science in 1989. Later, Japan's "Asahi Shimbun" published a very large article, saying that Tang Zhisong's contribution is a major event in computer science in the 21st century, a great contribution to Eastern civilization, and the specific things are Western, but the starting point and philosophical ideas are Eastern. The Japanese believe that this is a great contribution of Eastern civilization to computer science in the 21st century. Another article was published in the International Yi Xue Research edited by Zhu Bokun. As a philosophical method, a systematic thing, "The Mean" is still a very important thing. What is traditional culture? Now the word culture is used indiscriminately, and the word "culture" can be hung on anything. Now there are many books on the stalls, all hanging traditional culture, and many things in it have nothing to do with the traditional culture we are talking about. There is a book called "Traditional Cultural Astronomical Calendar", which is full of twenty-eight juku, and everyone's statements are different. When we say traditional culture, we mean classic works, and the four books are, of course. The two books "University" and "The Mean" are very important, as well as "Analects" and "Mencius". He knocked down Confucius many times, "down with the Confucius family", returned to the Confucius store, and then lifted out the Confucius Family, and now the whole world has established Confucius Jiadian and established Confucius Institutes, which is the negation of negation. It is also wrong to say that Confucius had absolutely nothing to overthrow. Chinese-American Chen Xiangmei is the wife of Chennault of the Democratic Committee of the United States Senate. She once went to a place in the United States to give a speech, saying that Confucius was not good, that Confucius did not attach importance to women, and that Confucius said, "Only women and villains are difficult to raise." An overseas Chinese put it forward: "I also think this is wrong, but it depends on what his contemporaries say." "When did women in the United States have the right to suffrage and vote? The Greek philosopher of Confucius's contemporaries was Socrates, who said that women were not good, similar to Confucius, or even more powerful. American women have not been in politics for many years. Society is progressing, the times are progressing, and we can't say that Confucius is right, but we must compare with his contemporaries to see how it is, and we must have such an attitude. I did some research on the book "Analects" and wrote an article called "Confucius and Science". I studied Confucius and thought that Confucius thought was not harmful to the development of science, and there were still many things that were beneficial. His educational ideas, the wonderful things in the Analects, and the things that can be applied today, are still many. For example, Confucius likes Yan Hui, and Yan Hui is the most honest and obedient, giving the impression that Confucius likes people who only promise and dare not speak. Confucius said in the Analects: "I and the reply are not contrary to each other, like foolishness." "I talked for a day, and he didn't have a different opinion, like a fool. But Confucius did not approve of Yan Hui, saying, "Hui Ye, not those who help me!" "It doesn't help me to say that Yan Hui is doing this. But there were a few people, Zilu, these people who gave advice to Confucius, Confucius still appreciated it. Confucius's learning means "no assumption, no necessity, no solidity, no self", that is, one cannot have subjective opinions, cannot be stubborn in one's own opinions, and cannot be self-respecting. These things are still desirable. The book "Analects" is also worth reading. After Confucius, there were two factions, Xunzi's school was materialistic, and Mencius was idealistic. Mencius was a sexual good, and Zhu Xi later inherited this. Mencius also had something remarkable. In the ancient Chinese books, if you want to say that there is a people-based thinking and a fearless spirit, Mencius is the most worthy of learning. Mencius said, "It is better to believe in a book than to have no book." If you want to read a book, if you all believe it, it's better not to read it, this is powerful. For today, there is a book for you to see, know what it is about, and actually let you judge. "Mencius" said that to be an emperor, you must have the appearance of being an emperor, if the emperor is a corrupt criminal, Mencius said that he can kill, and after killing, he has not heard that it is killing a king. In the past, "Spring and Autumn" divided the word killing into two types, one is to kill reasonably, that is, kill. Although he is the emperor, he is an embezzler, and I only heard of the killing of one embezzler, not the emperor. There are also those who think that the killing is wrong. Later, Europeans read "Mencius" and said that this book is incredible, 16th century Europe for the right of kings, for whether the religious lord can be abolished are endlessly debated, China in Mencius actually dared to say that the emperor committed a crime and killed the same, that is, killed a bad person, not killed the emperor. The book "Mencius" has the idea of seeking reasons in terms of science. "If you ask for it, you can sit down on the day of Chitose." That is to say, in the past, the winter solstice and the summer solstice can be calculated, and it is necessary to study its reason, investigate the cause, and ask why, which can be calculated. Whether Mencius himself would be considered another matter, but he had this confidence, which encouraged the development of the Chinese calendar. Later, in the Ming Dynasty, it was said that a set of Chinese calendar history is two words. One is "therefore", everyone is calculating the calendar, looking for reasons and asking why. It was not until after modern science that Li Shanlan translated Herschel's "Talking Heaven", which was the first relatively comprehensive book of modern astronomy that Chinese came into contact with. Li Shanlan even said three words, how about Copernicus asking for his reason, how about Kepler's asking for his reason, and how about Newton's asking for his reason. In three sentences, from Copernicus to Newton, he explained the history of modern astronomy on celestial mechanics clearly, saying that it was all "good for the cause". There is also a word for "revolution", which is borrowed from the "Zhou Yi" trigram, which began with Tang Wu's revolution. "Leather" is "change". In a recent major event, the American Obama held an election, shouting "change" everywhere, which translates into the Chinese character "easy". Of course, this is not to say that Obama has seen "Zhou Yi". Obama was able to elect the president of the United States, there was such a big sensation, the "white" of the White House in the United States became "black", which is a major event in the world. He used one word, the word "easy". Of course, he may not know the book, but the truth is the same, "people have the same sex, and sex is the same reason." There are still many places where traditional Chinese culture can play a role. The book "Zhou Yi" has been criticized this year, saying that this set is completely pseudoscience. I never say anything wrong with any learning. If you find something inappropriate, don't button your hat easily. Traditional culture does not mean that all of them are good. No book can say that there is nothing wrong, and it is impossible to ask anyone to say that everything is right. So there is no final truth, and there is no immutable pattern. I still have some relationship with "Zhou Yi". When the debate on "Zhou Yi" was the strongest, when pseudoscience was the most promising, Qiu Lianghui went to me and met He Zuoxiu at my door. He Zuoxiu said that you still do "Zhou Yi"? Qiu Lianghui asked him, what do you say about "Zhou Yi"? He Zuoxiu asked rhetorically, what do you think is going on with "Zhou Yi"? Qiu Lianghui said, did you graduate from Tsinghua? He Zuoxiu said yes. So what is the Tsinghua school motto? "Virtuous and self-improving", which is still posted in Tsinghua and publicized everywhere. Yau Lianghui said that these eight words are not pseudoscience? Is it wrong? He Zuoxiu said: I still agree with these eight words. Let's just say that at least these eight words in "Zhou Yi" are correct. He said that there are more than these eight words that can be used for us today. He Zuoxiu obeyed, and the two talked very well, saying that everyone should not button their hats, do not beat sticks, and everything must be analyzed in detail. We live in such an environment, with thousands of years of culture, and you say completely leave it alone, you don't care about it, it still has to take care of you. The two of them still talked very well that day. The book "Zhou Yi" is an important philosophical work in the Confucian classics. Of course, I don't agree that even modern DNA is in "Zhou Yi". If you find something today, go to "Zhou Yi" to find it, this method will not work. As a philosophical work, its spirit is still okay. Just say "every day is new, every day is new, and every day is new", that is not necessarily the same as what Peng Huanwu needs today, but this spirit can still be inherited, or should be analyzed on a case-by-case basis without drawing conclusions. Comrade Hu Jintao made a speech at the Boao Forum, saying that "there is no immutable pattern, there is no final truth, and everyone is moving forward." I used to think that the United States and the West were perfect, and they had to be in line with it. Instead of thinking that way, the international financial system needs to be reformed. We know very little about the world. For the entire universe, the Big Bang has been 17 billion years old, we are only a few thousand years now, in terms of knowledge, 97% of the matter we do not know what it is, dark matter, dark energy, theoretical physicists do not know what it is. What percent of the material world do we know, and we say that we have exhausted everything? The same cannot be said about this matter. The same is true of our traditional culture, and other countries have their own merits, which we can all respect. (Let's take 20 minutes to ask and answer.) Question: Mr. Xi spoke very well, in-depth and simple, and inspired us very much, how to understand the ancient Chinese traditional culture and its scientific thoughts. My question is, you said that Zhu Xi was very bold and innovative, and took out "University" and "The Mean" as classics, which is a very interesting phenomenon in the Song Dynasty, which canonized many works that were considered unimportant in the ancient past, why did this happen in the Song Dynasty? Including Wang Anshi also raised "Mencius" very high, Sima Guang paid more attention to "Spring and Autumn", thinking that it is necessary to take history as a lesson and rule through the rules, but Wang Anshi wants "Law before Wang Yi", do you think Zhu Xi took out "Mencius", "University" and "Mean" as classics, does it have anything to do with the academic environment of the Song Dynasty? What is your opinion? Xi Zezong: This specific is worth studying, and I agree with Mr. Ruxin's opinion in principle that the behavior of any philosopher is not accidental. From the perspective of historical occasions, academia and science developed to a certain extent at that time. I said in my book that materialist theorization did not come out of thin air, but from the needs of society at that time. Specific to the problems of the Song Dynasty, it can also be studied in detail. Zhu Xi highlighted "University" and "Mean" so much, in fact, Shen Kuo had already realized the importance of "Mean", and he was a hundred years earlier than Zhu Xi. Question: I think I agree very much with what you said, indeed in Chinese traditional culture, it does not lack the spirit and awareness of innovation at all, including methods, which can be seen. The philosophy of "Yi" is embedded, the most fundamental thing in Chinese philosophy is change, but we can never avoid Needham's question, why is there such an innovative idea and spirit in it, but especially in modern times, there has never been a new science, or the vigorous development of modern science innovation we do not, what is the problem? Needham still thinks from a social point of view, I wonder what you think about this issue? Xi Zezong: This is an old question. There are other social phenomena put together. For example, during the Renaissance, the European set, when the pursuit of change was innovative ideas. There were many of this set of spiritual sciences, but at that time there were other things that cooperated, and this had to be studied together. I just said that Hu Shi's article understands the scientific spirit and humanistic spirit from traditional Chinese culture. Europe's pursuit of these spirits was first proposed by Renaissance humanists, not scientists. At that time, a whole host of problems such as religious revolutions throughout Europe accumulated and erupted. Hu Shi's article is very good, you can also read it. We didn't know about this before, there was a conference of philosophers, which was held twice before, both discussing why China did not have modern science, and both said that the West has logic and China does not. The third time Hu Shi went, he wrote an article about whether Chinese and Western philosophies are more similar or different, and we have not seen the materials of the two conferences before. Question: Do you have this material here? Xi Zezong: Hu Shi's third visit was to criticize a slanderous and Chinese thesis at the previous two meetings. Hu Shi's article is contained in the "Hu Shi Academic Collection" edited by Fudan University in Shanghai, but we don't know the materials of the conference. This was taken together with the comprehensive problems of Europe at that time, and we are now looking at the history of science. Question: Last year, the overseas edition of People's Daily published two articles on Chinese astronomy, one saying that Chinese astronomy is mainly astrology. A professor at the University of Science and Technology of China has also published an article arguing that Chinese astronomy is not only astrology, but also has a lot of knowledge of the calendar. What do you think of this discussion? Xi Zezong: It is too arbitrary to say that Chinese astronomy is astrology. If nothing else, let's say that there is a lot of astrology in the astronomical records, calendars, and astronomical records, but this set of principles in the calendars is the pursuit of innovation, the pursuit of why, and the criteria for testing truth, which has been implemented since the Han Dynasty. The criterion for testing truth is very powerful in the history of the Chinese calendar. Until the Qing Dynasty, after Western science came in, the two sides compared the trial or not, or everyone calculated it, you go to compare, see if it is right. There are different opinions on whether to use the Western method or not, but the test of who is right and who is wrong is not disputed by either side. This standard has been carried over since the Han Dynasty. Astrology is a large part of Chinese astronomy, but it is completely wrong to say that Chinese astronomy is astrology. Ru Xin: Taking advantage of this opportunity, I also consulted with Xi Lao, and just now I also mentioned Needham's book, which was led by the Chinese Academy of Sciences at that time, and talked about a volume of the pre-Qin dynasty, which is particularly closely related to philosophy, and the philosophical school of the pre-Qin dynasty, and handed over to the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences for translation, and I also participated in this work. But one of Needham's main problems was his assessment of Confucianism. Many years ago, when I finally edited that volume, I felt that Joseph Needham's evaluation of Confucianism did not play a good role in the development of Chinese science and technology, and did not make much contribution, on the contrary, he was very respectful of Taoism and Moism, and his evaluation was relatively high. At that time, I felt that Needham's view could not be valid, or that there was some bias. Listening to Xi Lao's speech today, I was greatly inspired by the fact that Confucianism cannot make such a one-sided judgment, and the idea of innovation has also been expounded a lot in Confucian classics. I later thought, what should this question be viewed and how should it be evaluated? Is it true that Confucianism itself also has a process of development, especially after it has developed into an official philosophy, it itself is also moving towards conservative and rigid, but it should be said that there is indeed a change and innovation in the original Confucian thought. In the course of long-term historical development, later there were indeed rigid and conservative things that dominated, causing bad consequences. Is it so understood? Confucianism developed for so long in history, and later became the official ideological system, of course, it was used by some feudal dynasties at that time as an ideological tool to consolidate the existing order, which may have played a very bad role in some new things and the development of some science and technology. Is it possible to understand Needham's book in this way? I feel that Xi Lao's words have inspired me a lot, that is, everything should be analyzed concretely, and should not be divorced from the time, conditions and place at that time. Specific analysis should not make an absolute conclusion, think which school of thought and how. There can be different views on what role Confucianism has played throughout China's more than 2,000-year history, and there is room for free discussion. Absolute underground conclusions are probably not very scientific. Today, I listened to Xi Lao's speech, which gave me a deep inspiration. Guo Shuchun: I agree with Mr. Xi. The Confucian Federation wanted to discuss the relationship between Confucianism and science and technology, and a professor at Shandong University said, "If you discuss these things, you can't do it without inviting people who are involved in the history of science." I went with Dong Guangbi. I published an article at the conference, and the basic point was that Confucianism as a school of thought, many methods of thought have played a positive role in the development of China. But in theory, if Confucianism is used by the ruling class as a tool to shackle people's minds, then the effect is the opposite. I don't know anything else, but several of the highest tides of ancient Chinese mathematics were when Confucian dominance was weakened, Wei, Jin, Southern and Northern Dynasties, Song and Yuan, and Song and Yuan, although they had Taoism, were not as dominant as the Ming and Qing dynasties. I quite agree that the Confucian school itself should be discussed separately from the use of the ruling class as a tool to rule people's thoughts, so I agree with Ru Xin and Xi Lao. Question: I was inspired by what Teacher Xi said about "The Mean" just now, and the problem I recently learned is that in the Song Dynasty, there was a process of understanding "The Mean". In fact, in the early years of the Song Dynasty, the earliest discussion of the "Mean" was not Confucianism, but two famous monks of Buddhism, both of whom had special works. And Confucianism, the first was Sima Guang, later "Ercheng" and Zhu Xi, influenced the development of feudal society in late China. I very much agree with what Mr. Xi said. I think there is such a problem, I saw an article about Ru Lin in the Song Dynasty, talking about the meaning of Confucianism, the author believes that when Wang Anshi changed the law in the Song Dynasty, there was a trend of integration of Confucian scripture, education and science, but Wang Anshi changed the method in the Song Zhezong period. Zhu Xi also had such a concept, but it still did not succeed. It was not until the Ming Dynasty, when compiling the "Encyclopedia of Sex", that the Confucian classics, education, and science were truly integrated, and a large number of Confucian intellectuals moved closer to this aspect. If understood from this perspective, it may have a greater impact on how future generations of intellectuals study science and think about problems, and their methods and value orientations. I think that Zhu Xi's theory really played a role in the Ming Dynasty and had a greater impact on later development. So I agree with Xi Lao's words, we should also divide Confucianism into different stages to understand and evaluate, which may be more objective.(AI翻译)

展开

作者简介

展开

图书目录

本书视频 参考文献 本书图表

相关推荐

相关词

阅读
请支付
×
提示:您即将购买的内容资源仅支持在线阅读,不支持下载!

当前账户可用余额

余额不足,请先充值或选择其他支付方式

请选择感兴趣的分类
选好了,开始浏览
×
推荐购买
×
手机注册 邮箱注册

已有账号,返回登录

×
账号登录 一键登录

没有账号,快速注册

×
手机找回 邮箱找回

返回登录

引文

×
GB/T 7714-2015 格式引文
汝信,李惠国.中国古代科技文化及其现代启示(上册)[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2016
复制
MLA 格式引文
汝信,李惠国.中国古代科技文化及其现代启示(上册).北京,中国社会科学出版社:2016E-book.
复制
APA 格式引文
汝信和李惠国(2016).中国古代科技文化及其现代启示(上册).北京:中国社会科学出版社
复制
×
错误反馈