札記

札記
札記

賴錫三 著〈繽紛多彩,期許共生〉
“Through the dynamic multiplicity of the world, a hope for mutual co-becoming emerges”

理想狀態,自然生生不息,人文多元多嬌。人類與萬物,原共同居存於同一蒼穹下、大地上。同屬一家,命運連枝。雖然,自然不缺生存競爭,人類未少矛盾沖突,但自然競爭極少贏者全拿,而人類沖突卻經常掉入零和遊戲。

In its ideal disposition, nature constantly creates, and alongside of this dynamic tumult the humanities themselves becomes become plural and multi-faceted. In the beginning, humanity and the myriad of things co-existed together under one vaulted universe and on one great earth. We were all one family, with our fate bound together. While nature produced innumerable contests for survival, and humanity was certainly not without conflict and contradictions, natural competition rarely saw a winner take all scenario. The conflicts of humanity, on the other hand, often become a zero sum game.

共生之道,不否定競爭與沖突,但要迴避剛強爭伐的「永不知足」。共生之道,期待在彼此差異的辯證張力中,轉化「非生即死」,調節雙方而永保生生餘地。

The path of mutual co-existence (which could also be translated as mutual becoming) does not mean a total negation of competition and conflict. But what must be avoided is a unyielding mode of aggression which “never knows satisfaction.” The path of mutual becoming hopes that the dialectical tension produced out of mutual differences can become transformed, so that all sides come to understand that “if we do not co-exist together, then only mutual destruction that awaits.” With this realization, a process of mutual transformation can commence, which can lead to the perpetual protection of life to flourish.

當今天下,天氣失調,大地荒蕪,生物滅絕,種族衝突,貧富懸殊,強權惡鬥⋯⋯或呈現剛強霸凌柔弱,或呈現剛強鬥爭剛強。當此之世,我們更加需要「共生」的思想運動,用「雙贏」的「無限遊戲」之王道,來取代「獨贏」的「有限遊戲」之霸道。

Today, all under heaven, the climate has become unbalanced, the earth has become arid, life is dying, ethnicities are rife with conflict between one another, the gap between the wealthy and the poor widens…the strong bully the weak, while the strong battle with the strong. At this moment, we need more than ever an intellectual movement organized around the concept of “co-existence,” or “mutual co-becoming.” This is a movement that can utilize the “win-win” logic of a “game without end” to replace the “singular winner” of “a game with an end.” The former could be considered the kingly or sagely way, the later the way of the hegemon. 

「漢學之島:國際漢學平台在中山」,我們的計畫遠不只是計畫,它是對未來的想像與期待,想像基礎在於「共生」思想的興發與運動,以及「共生」平台的搭建與橋接。我們以臺灣的人文風土、高雄的海洋風韻為據地,一方面,「通古今之變」地對古典漢學資源進行價值重估與持續開採。另一方面,「通中西之變」地邀請跨領域跨文化的漢學家們來集思廣議「共生哲學」。讓「跨文化漢學之島」的臺灣,在人類的焦慮年代,發揮它可貴可愛的文化軟實力。

The Ministry of Education sponsored project “The Sino-Island: The Global Sinology Platform at Zhongshan” is not simply a public project in formalistic terms. It represents a sense of imagination and hope for the future. Its imaginative basis is grounded in developments around the notion of “mutual co-becoming,” which can serve as platform and bridge. With Taiwan’s humanistic local culture as the larger backdrop against which we conduct our work, and Kaoshiung’s oceanic port city as our homebase, we seek to on the one hand to produce “connected variations through the ancient and the modern,” re-evaluating classical Sinological resources, engaging with them deeply as tools to think with and respond to contemporary challenges. On the other hand, we seek to produced “connected variations between the Sino-cultural world and the West,” inviting Sinologists whose work intersects across various fields and cultures to converge within the space of our platform, working to develop the promise of what a “philosophy of co-becoming” could be. In this era of deep anxiety, we aim to speak of Taiwan as a “transcultural Sino-island,” giving full play to its soft cultural force, which is ever valuable, ever delicate.

莫加南(Mark McConaghy) 著〈中華寶島:反思「國際漢學平台」〉
“The Sino-Island: Thoughts on The Global Sinology Platform”

納中華入台灣:反思「國際漢學平台」

本人與賴錫三教授共同合作建構本平台的動力在於長期以來我對台灣人文教育的焦慮,即其面對在認識論上的危機。台灣本地擁有其瑰瑋的漢學歷史,擁有世界第一流的漢學單位,包括:國家圖書館漢學研究中心、中央研究院與各大學的中文系與研究中心。我們將漢學定義為中華世界中豐碩的文史哲傳統及其自身現代的命運。無法否認的是,作為漢學重鎮的台灣於國民黨1949年之後在台的政權意識形態有關——彼時的政府亟欲代表另一種中國現代轉型的路線,維持對中國傳統文化正面的態度與對岸戰後極端反傳統主義展現出鮮明顯的對比。因而在國府來台後,台灣能夠吸收中國大陸第一流的自由主義者與傳統主義者,如:牟宗三、徐復觀、錢穆、胡適與傅斯年等重要人物,這些先驅皆能夠被視為使得台灣能成為漢學之島的奠基者。同時,也必須強調日治時期的文人與公共知識分子(如林獻堂、連橫與蔣渭水等)以中華文化作為認同的來源與反殖民的重要工具。

自七零年代末期,台灣在文化與政治上的民族主義開始浮出島嶼地表之上,成熟於八、九零年代,此一民族主義不僅僅反應當時台灣本土社會對白色恐怖的反感,也是針對過往黨國體制禁止所有與台灣歷史、語言和認同相關論述的尖銳批判。 台灣民族主義試圖跟日治時期反殖民的「台灣是台灣人的台灣」的社會、政治運動連結, 希望能進一步挖掘/建構/加強台灣的主體性與本土意識,此一論述將本土意識與大中華意識看成是兩種對立的他者,而譴責後者為外來的和壓迫性的。

爾後,以華語為主的人文教育在台灣分歧為兩種不同的途徑:一為戰後中國自由主義者與傳統主義者相關的漢學,另則是以台灣為主的台灣研究, 前者的目的旨在保存海外華夏文化,提供與中華人民共和國不一樣的另類中國現代化方案。後者以後殖民理論作為基礎,目的在於拯救與孕育具有台灣意識的國家認同。從本土的角度來看,漢學(以及支持它的戰後政權)忽略了台灣本土社會的語言、歷史與意識。

一方面,台灣漢學的學術傳統立足於中華世界的漫長歷史之中,保有對經史子集傳統教育的尊敬態度,將中華看成是文明價值的來源並能提供認同上的歸屬;而台灣研究以建設台灣共和國的文化與公民上的知識條件為終極目標與作為文化載體的中華民國保持距離。台灣研究為達到這個目標採取強調台灣主體性與本土性的策略,同時對台灣被容納到大中華的論述框架裡持保留態度。 由此可知,漢學在台灣的關鍵詞為中華,然台灣研究的關鍵詞為台灣。

對個人而言,此時此刻的主要任務為把這兩種同時在寶島上存在的「孤獨者」進行對話。其實,我們早應該開始這樣的對話,試圖在台灣建設一種共生的共同體,能夠相互完整彼此達到物我合一的境界。我們需要思考中華文化如何透過台灣本土社會而被演繹出來,台灣本土經驗如何對大中華文化做出不可磨滅的貢獻。也許,建構虛幻的「外來」與「本土」的二元對立是不必要的,再一次重述和肯定台灣的中華過去、現在與未來能賦予我們一種重要的話語,這個話語能夠使得台灣與大中華世界進行有意義的對話,同時也能夠保存台灣過往百年來本土運動所創造最珍貴的禮物——對民主與自治的堅持。

我們能夠達成此一「不可能」的任務嗎?魯迅的話語或許可以做如此解:「希望本是無所謂有,無所謂無的。這正如地上的路;其實地上本沒有路,走的人多了,也便成了路。」

Thoughts on The Global Sinology Platform

My initial impetus for working with professor Lai Hsi-san to launch this platform stemmed from a concern I had over what I long felt was a kind of epistemological crisis that marked the humanities in Taiwan. Taiwan is an blessed with some of the world’s leading libraries (for example the National Library), archives (for example Academia Sinica), and educational institutions related to Sinological research (including the many Chinese literature departments that dot the island). Sinology here is defined broadly as the Sino-world’s illustrious literary-historcal-philosophical (文史哲) tradition and its modern fate. No doubt this Sinological treasure-house was supported by the GMD state’s attempts after the 1949 crisis to represent a Sino-positive alternative to Maoist iconoclasm across the straits. Taiwan’s ability to attract luminaries of Chinese traditionalism and liberalism such as Mou Zongsan, Xu Fuguan, Qian Mu, Hu Shih, Fu Sinian and many others during this time set the foundations for the island to become the bastion of Sinological learning it is today. Such Sinological learning also drew sustenance during an earlier era of cultural activity on the island, where anti-colonial luminaries such as Lin Xiantang, Lien Heng, and Chiang Wei-shui turned to Chinese culture as source of value and identity during the 1920s and 30s.

However, beginning in the late 1970s and taking powerful shape throughout the 80s and 90s, Taiwanese political and cultural nationalism arouse as a reaction to not only the political terror of the martial period, but the suppression of discussion and research about Taiwanese history, languages, and identity that marked the period. Making connections back to the island centered anti-colonial movements of the Japanese colonial period (1895-1945), Taiwanese nationalist discourse sought to unearth/construct/strengthen a sense of Taiwanese subjectivity (台灣主體性) and consciousness (台灣意識), which it set up in opposition to the larger overall rubrics of Chinese identity and history (now read as oppressive and largely exogenous). 

Since then, Chinese-language humanities on the island have largely cleaved into two tracks: the deep Sinological tradition linked to post-war liberal and Confucian Chinese intellectuals, intent on nurturing an alternative Chinese modernity to the PRC, and Taiwanese-centered historical and cultural study, whose underlying theoretical tenant is post-colonial theory, attempting to rescue and nurture a Taiwanese history and consciousness that Sinological learning (and the GMD state that supported it) are critiqued as having ignored.

One academic tradition is anchored in the deep time of Chinese history, being reverent of traditional learning, and identifies with China as source of civilizational value and identity. The other is committed to forging the cultural and civic foundations of a new Taiwanese nation unmoored from the ROC state project, doing so by emphasizing local authenticity over larger integration into the Chinese cultural world. One tradition’s master signifier is Sino, the other Taiwan. 

It seems to me it is long past time to put these two solitudes into conversation with one another. To build a community of not just co-existence on the island, but common becoming, and to think of the ways in which Sino-culture is local Taiwanese culture (and vice-versa), without building false dichotomies between the exogenous and endogenous, richening both the island and the larger Chinese world in the process. Re-affirming Taiwan’s Sino-cultural past, present, and future can provide the island with a language to speak to the larger Sino-world off its Western and Southern coasts (an urgent task today), while retaining its commitment to democracy and self-definition that are the most precious gifts that local political struggles over the last one hundred years have given the island.

Can the impossible be accomplished? In the words of one of Lu Xun: “Hope isn’t the kind of thing that you can say either exists or doesn’t exist. It’s like a path across the land- it’s not there to begin with, but when lots of people go the same way, it comes into being.”

羅亞娜 Jana Rošker〈 第25屆臺法文化獎,獲獎講辭〉
賴錫三 譯

 

Univerza v Ljubljani
Filozofska fakulteta

Jana Rošker, Profesorica sinologije, Znanstvena svétnica 
Professor of Sinology, Research  counselor
Glavna urednica znanstvene revije Asian Studies / Chief editor of Asian Studies (AS journal)
Oddelek za azijske študije / Department of Asian Studies 
Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani / Faculty of arts at the University of Ljubljana
Aškerčeva cesta 2, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija / Slovenia

 

First of all, of course, I would like to express my sincere and profound gratitude for this generous award, the value of which manifests itself not only in quantitative terms, but also – and even more so – on a symbolic level. In this sense, I am deeply grateful to the French-Taiwanese Cultural Foundation, but even more to the Taiwanese people and to all those friends, colleagues and people in Europe and France who value intercultural dialogue and exchange. Such exchanges – especially at the level of culture, arts and humanities – are indeed a very valuable building block that can help us piece together a new mosaic, an image of true friendship that unites the people of Taiwan, France, Europe and the whole world, one that belongs to all of us and that we must all appreciate, nourish and cherish because it is our only home, and our only motherland. 

 

首先,我當然要對這個慷慨的獎項表達我由衷及深切的感謝. 它的價值不僅體現在提高我個人的影響或光榮上; 更重要的是, 它還有著巨大的象徵性價值。對此,我深深感謝台法文化基金會,更感謝台灣人民,以及所有珍視跨文化對話與交流的歐洲和法國的朋友和同事們。這種交流——尤其是在文化、藝術和人文學術層次的交流——確實是非常有價值的基石,可以幫助我們拼湊出一幅新的馬賽克,凝結出一個團結台灣、法國、歐洲和全世界人民的真正友誼的形象 ,一個屬於我們所有人的,我們都應該愛惜與滋養的形象,因為,這個全球化的世界是我們唯一的家園,也是我們唯一的母土(祖國)。

 

The current crises, such as severe environmental disasters, unequal distribution of resources, viral pandemics, wars, etc., are global problems that cannot be fully solved within the narrow framework of individual countries or nation-states. They must also be addressed within the larger framework of global cooperation and solidarity. Such strategies require the development of a genuine intercultural dialogue, that can lead to a transcultural exchange of knowledge and ideas. Learning and mastering such a transcultural perspective is particularly important for Europe, not only in terms of its external relations, but also internally, because Europe itself is made up of different regions, languages, religions, histories and social orders. Europe can only maintain its important role in today’s world if it can adopt a global philosophical and ethical perspective.

 

當前的危機,諸如:嚴重的環境災難、資源分配不均、病毒大流行、戰爭,等等,這些全球性的難題,都無法在單一民族國家的狹隘框架之內來獲得解決。這些難題必須在全球性合作與團結的廣大架構中,來重新表述。為了實現這種大戰略,就需要我們展開真正的跨文化對話,從而引導跨文化的知識和理念的交流。而學習和掌握這樣的跨文化視角,對歐洲來說尤其特別重要,這不僅僅止於歐洲的對外關係,而且對歐洲的內部問題也很有意義,因為歐洲本身就是由差異性的不同地區、語言、宗教、歷史和社會秩序,所組成的。也只有當歐洲能採取全球性的哲學與倫理視角,才能夠保持它在當今世界的重要地位。

 

In this context, I would like to dedicate my life and work to building bridges that connect different cultures, languages and societies. As a Sinologist and philosopher, I focus on the field of Sinophone culture, especially Taiwan, its unique philosophy. However, I quickly realized that there is a great imbalance in Taiwanese knowledge about European cultures and vice versa. Europe’s ignorance of not only Taiwanese, but also the entire East Asian culture and way of thinking is part of the remnants of its (post)colonial heritage. Indeed, the currently existing global power relations continue to manifest themselves in the dominance of the West in epistemological, scientific, and ideational interactions and exchanges with East Asia and the Global South.

 

在這種情況下,我願意奉獻一生的工作來為不同的文化、語言、社會,搭建連結的橋樑。作為一位漢學家和哲學家,我專注於華語文化領域,尤其是對於台灣那獨具特色的哲學。然而,我也很快就意識到台灣人對歐洲文化的了解,相對於歐洲人對於台灣文化和學術的了解,兩者之間存著巨大的失衡。歐洲對台灣乃至整個東亞文化和思維的無知,其實也是它承續著(後)殖民遺產的殘餘的一部分。事實上,在當今現實的全球化權力關係下,不管在認識論上、在科學上、在與東亞及全球南方的理念交流和關係互動上,西方依然顯示出它的主導性地位。

Although most technological and economic power is shifting from the West to Asian regions, and although their rapid global rise has created new challenges for the United States, the EU, and individual European governments, the “East-West” dialog continues to be dominated by the axiological, intellectual, and operational conceptualizations of Western traditions. The reason for the West’s continued dominance in this basic paradigm of exchange is related to the fact that the modernization that provided the epistemological and scientific foundations for today’s global system was “exported” from Europe to the rest of the world, including East Asia and Taiwan.

 

儘管眾多技術和經濟力量,正在從西方轉移到亞洲地區;儘管亞洲在全球的快速崛起,也已經給美國、歐盟和歐洲的個別政府帶來了許多展新挑戰,但“東-西”之間的對話,卻依然被西方傳統的價值論、知識論和概念化操作所主宰。而西方之所以能在這種基本的交流範式中,繼續佔據主導性地位,原因就在於歐洲的現代化模式提供了當今全球化系統在認識論上和科學上的基礎,而那大約是在兩個世紀前,才從歐洲輸出到全世界各地,當然也包括了東亞和台灣。

 

This process also entailed a “modernization” (i.e., “Westernization”) of knowledge, creating an asymmetrical relationship between the two sides in which European indifference to Asia and Asian interest in Europe were anything but balanced. This has led to a problematic gap in European knowledge about non-Western, including Taiwanese, regions and their intellectual history. This gap needs to be closed, because economic and even political power is shifting to Asia, whether we really understand how its societies work or not. However, if Europe continues to adopt such an ignorant and careless attitude towards Sinic societies, it runs the risk of finding itself in a world system whose deep groundworks it does not understand.

 

這個過程,雖然也帶來了所謂知識的“現代化”(也就是 “西方化”),然而歐洲對亞洲的冷漠,和亞洲對歐洲的興趣,兩者之間卻形成了一種極不對稱的關係。而且這種情況更導致了歐洲人認識「非西方」(包括台灣)區域與知識性歷史的嚴重間距。我們一定要彌合這個間距,因為無論我們歐洲人是否真正了解亞洲社會的運作方式,世界經濟甚至政治權力都正在向亞洲轉移。而這是一種眾所周知的事實。然而,假如歐洲對東亞和華語社會繼續採取這種無知又粗心的態度,那麼歐洲人恐怕會面臨著一種風險,也就是在不久的將來,發現已然置身在自己並不了解其中深層基礎的(新)世界體系中了。

 

My work on Taiwanese philosophy grew out of my awareness of these problems, but more importantly out of my sincere love for the people of Taiwan and their culture. Since I first set foot on this “island of treasures,” I have fallen in love with its vibrant, friendly, and extremely hospitable society, where I still have many close friends and brilliant colleagues. Over the past decade, I have spent several years on research stays at many different Taiwanese universities and research institutes. My work has often been supported by the Centre for Chinese Studies at the National Central Library and especially by the Chiang Ching-kuo Foundation, to whom I am also very grateful.

 

 

我對台灣哲學的研究工作,就是生長自於我對這些難題的關注,但更重要的是源自於我對台灣人民及其文化的真誠熱愛。自從我第一次踏上這座“寶島(寶藏之島)”以來,我就愛上了這個充滿活力、友善、熱情好客的社會,在那裡,我仍然有許多親密的朋友和優秀的同事。在過去的十年來,我曾在台灣許多不同的大學和研究機構進行了數年的研究。我的工作經常獲得國家中央圖書館裡的漢學研究中心,還有蔣經國基金會的支持,對此我非常感謝。

 

Taiwan has always fascinated me very much, not only as a person, but also professionally, as a sinologist and philosopher. Soon after my first visit to Taiwan, I became aware of the problem of a certain marginalization and even discrimination of the culture and intellectual history of this country. Coming from a small country myself, I was particularly sensitive to such attitudes and forms of exclusion. This unhappy feeling and empathy toward Taiwanese people, culture, and philosophy became even stronger when I became aware of the large and immensely important role Taiwanese philosophy played in the general development of Sinophone philosophy in the 20th century. Therefore, I decided to investigate the contribution of Taiwanese philosophy to maintaining the continuity of research in the Chinese intellectual tradition in the second half of the 20th century and to introduce it to a wider Western, especially European, audience. Indeed, during this period, Taiwanese philosophers represented a kind of lifebelt for the preservation of the whole Chinese and Sinophone philosophical tradition.

 

台灣一直讓我非常著迷,這不僅是止於我個人的感同身受,而且在漢學與哲學的專業工作上,也是如此, 她也留給了我永難忘懷的影像。在我第一次訪問台灣後不久,我就意識到這個國家的文化和思想歷史面臨著某種邊緣化甚至歧視的問題。由於我自己就是來自一個小國家,所以對這樣的態度和排斥形式也就特別敏感。而當我意識到台灣哲學在 20 世紀華語哲學的總體發展中,所能發揮的巨大而且極其重要的角色時,這種對台灣人民、文化和哲學的不快感和同情心,也就變得更加強烈了。因此,我決定探索台灣哲學在20 世紀下半葉對保持華語傳統哲學研究的連續性所作出的貢獻,並且將它介紹給廣泛的西方朋友,尤其是歐洲學術界的讀者們。確實,在這一時期,台灣哲學家們可以說是扮演了保護整個中國和華語哲學傳統的救生圈。

 

The role of Taiwanese philosophical research was particularly crucial in the period between 1949 and the late 1990s. During these years, philosophical production in mainland China was subject to censorship, and the directives of state policy dictated that researchers focus primarily on the Sinicization and development of Marxism. Although the dialogue between Marxist philosophy and Chinese academia was also important because it brought the Chinese people closer to understanding modern European thought and theory, at the same time, and very regrettably, the Chinese government in mainland China almost completely neglected research in its own tradition of thought.

 

從 1949 年到1990 年代的後期,台灣哲學研究的角色尤其重要。在那樣的年代,中國大陸的哲學生產成為了被審查的主要對象,而國家政策的指示則要求學者們,將主要關注放在馬克思主義中國化的發展上。儘管馬克思主義哲學與中國學術界的對話也很重要,因為它使中國人更能貼近地理解現代歐洲思想和理論,但同時,令人非常遺憾的是,中國大陸的政府卻幾乎完全忽視了對自身傳統思想的研究。

 

During this period, the study of Chinese intellectual history on the mainland was discouraged, and the continuity of research, cultivation, and development of the Sinophone philosophical tradition was limited to the important work done by Taiwanese scholars. It was precisely this openness to the tradition and the unbroken continuity of research on it that gave the Taiwanese philosophers a solid foundation on which to develop their own works.

 

在那段時光裡,大陸對中國思想歷史的研究受到了嚴重抑制,而華語哲學傳統的研究、培育和發展延續,卻被劃歸在台灣學者們所做的重要工作。也正是這種對傳統的開放和對傳統研究的不間斷的連續性努力,台灣哲學家們為自己的理論發展奠定了堅實的基礎。

 

So if you ask me what I have learned from Taiwan and especially from Taiwanese philosophy, I firmly believe that it is precisely this openness of mind, the ability to look to the future with hope and positive commitment. On the other hand, Taiwanese philosophy has also given me an awareness of the immense values of our histories and traditions. They manifests itself in our human dignity, our interpersonal compassion and solidarity. These are all elements that form an important foundation of our humanity, and this foundation is needed today more than ever. I will be forever grateful to many of Taiwan’s great thinkers for teaching me this lesson, for bringing me closer to my humanness, and for opening my horizons in such a significant way.

 

所以如果你問我: 我從台灣,尤其從台灣哲學中學到了什麼?我堅信,正是這種開放的心胸,以及一種滿懷希望、積極承諾而展望未來的能力。另一方面,台灣哲學也讓我意識到我們的歷史和傳統的巨大價值。它們體現在我們的人格尊嚴、人際之間的同情共感和團結能力之中。而這些價值都是構成人性重要基礎的主要基本要素,而且當今之世,我們比任何時刻都更需要它們。我將永遠感謝台灣許多偉大的思想家們所教給我的這一課,他們讓我更接近我自己內心裡的仁愛,並且以如此意味深遠的方式開啟了我的視野。