杜亞泉과 陳獨秀 논쟁의 검토

이한결 중국근현대사학회 2022 중국근현대사연구 Vol.96 No.-

This thesis examines the debate between Du yaquan, Editor-in-chief of 『Eastern Miscellany(東方雜誌)』 and Chen duxiu, leading figure in the New Culture Movement-. In Spetember of 1918, Chen raised suspicion and argued through the pages of 『New Youth(新靑年)』, that 『Eastern Miscellany』 is supporting the idea of revival of hereditary monarchy. Du countered this suspicion on 『Eastern Miscellany』 three months later. This exchange of arguments through the pages of their own magazine is often regarded as starting point of ‘East-West (Cultural) Debate’ in later studies. In 1990s’, studies on Du yaquan began, From the early 1910s’, media activities of Du yaquan were mainly focused on political proposals. He was concentrating on how to establish constitutional politics in China. After the establishment of the Republic of China, Du focused on developing discussions on the relationship between individuals, society and state, during this process he often emphasized the importance of Chinnese civilization. On the other hand, one of the main activities of the New Culture Movement was a critique on Chinese civilization, especially Confucianism political ethics. Among them, Chen duxiu was the one who had the most severe criticism on effect of Confucianism ethics in republic of China. Previous studies on this debate, mainly focused on how Du and Chen had differed in understanding of the Chinese civilization. In this thesis, by I pointed out that ‘debate’ between Du and Chen was not a result of their diffenrence in understanding of Chinese civilization, but it was rather Chen portraying Du as a person opposed to republican politics in order to emphasize the discussion he had argued through his journalism activities. In this process, Chen formed his argument by ignoring the context of Du’s media activity. Du was one who constantly supported the idea of settling republican politics in China. But in the debate, Du only pointed out the logical fallacies of Chen. In response to Du’s argument, Chen raised the question again and labelled Du as one who opposed republican politics. Image of Du yaquan, as an opposer of Chen duxiu and New culture movement was maintained for a quite long time.

A Study on the Anti-Confucianism Movement in Early-Twentieth Century: Focus on Chen Duxiu and Lu Xun

( Yeong Jin Bahk ) 한국윤리학회 2013 倫理硏究 Vol.89 No.1

Originating from the teachings of Confucius, Confucianism became the mainstream of Chinese culture and had enormous effects on all aspects of Chinese society. Confucianism has gone through three major changes in Chinese history: the first occurred during the Han period, the second during the Song period, and the third during the Qing period, after the first Opium War. In the late Qing period, China experienced a rapid decline due to the invasion of Western forces. Progressive intellectuals attributed this to the conservative nature of Confucianism at that time. Their Anti-Confucianism Movement grew especially active during the May Fourth Movement in the early twentieth century. Two prominent figures in this movement were Chen Duxiu, from the political field, and Lu Xun, from the literary field. Chen Duxiu, who was a thinker and politician, and Lu Xun, who was a thinker and novelist, were both strongly critical of the problematic social habits connected to conservative Confucian ideologies, such as humaneness, courtesy, filial piety, and so on. However, there were also important differences between these two figures: while Chen Duxiu criticized the bad habits of Confucianism across various fields of society at a rather abstract political angle through his articles, Lu Xun more specifically criticized the bad habits of Confucianism in daily life from a literary perspective through his novels. These differences derived from their respective vocations. Consequently, while Chen Duxiu`s Anti-Confucianism Movement had a huge impact on intellectuals, Lu Xun`s Anti-Confucianism Movement had a huge impact on the general public. While the former led the Anti-Confucianism Movement, the latter popularized it. The third major change in Confucianism is still ongoing. It seems likely that the Anti-Confucianism Movement of Chen Duxiu and Lu Xun will help us to anticipate what kind of changes in Confucianism may go through in future.

“五四”無鬼神論者的思想探尋——以陳獨秀、胡適為例

한지연 한국중국학회 2019 중국학보 Vol.90 No.-

When we are involved in the “science” and “spirits” of the “May 4th” period, on the one hand, the enlightenment of the people to the blind state of feudal superstition; on the other hand, the attempt to build a new culture, the two are mutually exclusive, it also affects each other. Until the “May 4th” period, the so-called “science” was not only a new knowledge system and method, but actually more marked the critical spirit played by an intellectual, and even determined their outlook on life. The use of “science” to overthrow spirits is undoubtedly one of the main manifestations of the “May 4th” enlightenment, but from another perspective, the slogans such as “overthrow spirits” in this period are not limited to criticizing old cultures. The old idols are defeated, and they are “the mind of the enlightenment” and “the thought of liberating people”. From the perspective of the history of human development, it has profound historical and cultural significance. This paper makes an attempt to discuss about the Ideological approach to atheist in the period of the May 4th Movement, with Chen Duxiu陳獨秀 and Hu Shi胡適 as the breakthrough point, trying to discuss about of “science” and “spirits” in the early period of the May 4th Movement. Both Chen Duxiu and Hu Shi represent the two flags set up by the “May 4th” intellectuals. At that time, they actively participated in the “spirits” critique, advocated the abolition of feudal superstitions, had great beliefs and beliefs in science, and advocated “scientific” no ghosts. According to this, this thesis puts it into the ideological discourse, tries to touch the thought connotation behind Chen Duxiu & Hu Shi’s scientific view and its implications. As for Chen Duxiu's scientific view, it is based on the banner of the “May 4th” anti-feudal ideology revolution. Chen believes that “science” is not only an independent disciplinary system, but also an ideological weapon, not only in the specific conditions of the “May 4th”. What has been formed is also produced in the current situation of the political and social contradictions of modern China and the national crisis and cultural imbalances. What needs to be paid attention to is that under the premise and conditions of “ethical consciousness”, Chen Duxiu pointed to the extremely “false” and “distorted” concept of spirits and its that existed in the minds and hearts of the people at that time, thus treating the “spirits” belief as poisoning people's souls and “anti-ethics” thoughts; like Chen Duxiu, Hu Shi's scientific view is also on the banner of the “May 4th” anti-feudal revolution, but Hu Shi’s scientific view is derived from his family influence and personal experience in his childhood, and the influence of Western learning in his youth. These internal and external factors make Hu Shi more seeking science and pursuing the truth, thus vividly reflecting his unique “ideology and personality” and “atheism” thinking. Hu Shi not only adheres to “freedom of thought”, but also actively accepts the “scientific method” of Western learning. The two self-contained systems form an “ideology argument” and become the most important ideological resource in Hu Shi’s academic research and ideological practice.  Under the two flags of “Democracy” and “Science” during the May Fourth Movement, the two have had far-reaching implications for the future of China. The “May 4th” intellectuals have made their own inner voices, and so far can give us a new thinking, there is still room for further understanding and research. This just shows the long-lasting charm of the “May 4th” discourse, and it also shows why we need to pay attention to the “May 4th” discourse. 當我們牽涉到“五四”時期的“科學”與“鬼神”問題時,一方面,啟蒙民眾對封建迷信的盲目狀態;而從另一方面講,則力圖構建新文化,兩者相互排斥,同時也相互影響。直到“五四”時期,所謂的“科學”不只是作為一種新的知識體系和方法,其實更多的是標誌著一種知識分子所扮演的批判精神,甚至還決定著他們的人生觀。用“科學”驅鬼,無疑是“五四”啟蒙的主要表現之一 ,但從另一角度來講,這時期的“驅鬼”、“打鬼”等口號,其目的不只局限在批判舊文化、打倒舊偶像,而且在於“啟蒙人的心靈”、“解放人的思想”。從人類發展史的角度來講,頗有深厚的歷史文化意義。 本論文以“五四”前期陳獨秀和胡適的科學觀切入,試圖探討一下“五四”前期“科學”與“鬼神”問題。陳獨秀和胡適都代表著“五四”知識分子樹立的兩面旗幟,當時他們積極參與“鬼神”批判,主張廢除封建迷信,對科學有著極大的信念和信仰,倡導“科學的”無鬼神論。據此,本論文走出藝術領域中的“鬼神”世界,將此放置到思想話語之中,試圖觸摸一下陳胡兩人在“科學”與“鬼神”問題背後所蘊含的思想內涵何在,並嘗試對此予以評論。 至於陳獨秀的科學觀,正是建立在“五四”反封建思想革命的旗幟上,陳氏認為“科學”既是一門獨立的學科體系,也是一種思想武器,這不僅在“五四”的特定條件下所形成的,還在近代中國在政治上、社會上的矛盾以及民族危機和文化失衡的國家現狀中所產生的。需要關注的是,陳獨秀在“倫理覺悟”的前提和條件之下,把矛頭指向當時民眾頭腦和心中所存在的極為“虛假的”、“歪曲的”鬼神觀念,從而將“鬼神”信仰看做毒害人們心靈的禍首以及“反倫理”的思想糟粕;與陳獨秀一樣,胡適的科學觀亦是在“五四”反封建思想革命的旗幟上所呈現出來的,然而與陳獨秀不同的一點是,胡適的科學觀,來源於他的幼年時期的家學影響和個人經歷,加上青年時期所受到的西學的影響,這些內外因素使胡適更加尋求科學、追求真理,從而淋漓盡致地體現出他獨有的“思想個性”以及“無神論”思想。胡適既堅持“思想自由”,也積極接受西學的“科學方法”,兩者自成體系,形成一種“思想論據”,成為胡適學術研究和思想實踐中最為關鍵的思想資源。 在“五四”期間“德先生”和“賽先生”的兩面旗幟下,兩者給未來的中國帶來的影響深遠,在這一特定時期的科學語境中所產生的“鬼神”問題,使得“五四”知識分子發出自己內心的聲音,至今為止能够給予我們一種新的思考,仍有進一步了解和研究的餘地。這恰恰表明“五四”話語的恆久魅力,同時也表明我們為何需要關注“五四”話語。

A Study on the Anti-Confucianism Movement in Early-Twentieth Century: Focus on Chen Duxiu and Lu Xun

박영진 한국윤리학회 2013 倫理硏究 Vol.89 No.1

Originating from the teachings of Confucius, Confucianism became the mainstream of Chinese culture and had enormous effects on all aspects of Chinese society. Confucianism has gone through three major changes in Chinese history: the first occurred during the Han period, the second during the Song period, and the third during the Qing period, after the first Opium War. In the late Qing period, China experienced a rapid decline due to the invasion of Western forces. Progressive intellectuals attributed this to the conservative nature of Confucianism at that time. Their Anti-Confucianism Movement grew especially active during the May Fourth Movement in the early twentieth century. Two prominent figures in this movement were Chen Duxiu, from the political field, and Lu Xun, from the literary field. Chen Duxiu, who was a thinker and politician, and Lu Xun, who was a thinker and novelist, were both strongly critical of the problematic social habits connected to conservative Confucian ideologies, such as humaneness, courtesy, filial piety, and so on. However, there were also important differences between these two figures: while Chen Duxiu criticized the bad habits of Confucianism across various fields of society at a rather abstract political angle through his articles, Lu Xun more specifically criticized the bad habits of Confucianism in daily life from a literary perspective through his novels. These differences derived from their respective vocations. Consequently, while Chen Duxiu’s Anti-Confucianism Movement had a huge impact on intellectuals, Lu Xun’s Anti-Confucianism Movement had a huge impact on the general public. While the former led the Anti-Confucianism Movement, the latter popularized it. The third major change in Confucianism is still ongoing. It seems likely that the Anti-Confucianism Movement of Chen Duxiu and Lu Xun will help us to anticipate what kind of changes in Confucianism may go through in future

민국 초 담론권력의 변동과 『新靑年』 ― 『新靑年』 陳獨秀와 『東方雜誌』 杜亞泉 간의 논쟁을 사례로

이보고 한국중국현대문학학회 2009 中國現代文學 Vol.0 No.48

This study is focused on political and cultural controversies about narratives and discourses of nation states in early Republican China. The main participants of this controversies are Xinqingnian(新靑年)'s Chen-Duxiu(陳獨秀) and Dongfangzazhi(東方雜誌)'s Du-Yaquan(杜亞泉). Their debates presented a kind of public sphere in the intellectual society of modern china. The competitions and conflicts of discourses at discussion space symbolized ideological meaning of the public sphere. Chen-Duxiu's Xinqingnian, as discussed in this paper, had grasped a crucial link between shanghai and beijing's public sphere. This paper makes a comparative study of a historical views and recognitions about nation states between Chen and Du. Their differences of recognitions heavily influenced in their each political positions and practices. In this process, we can find a formation of many kinds of intellectual groups and their differences. This paper reverberates Benjamin Schwartz's reference: “An intellectual history of China should be concerned not simply with ‘Chinese thought' but with Chinese thinking and thinking within the framework of historical situations.” In fact, this paper is most interested in the changing process of discourse's hegemony. The main subject of this paper have originated from the search to find what enabled Xinqingnian discourse's hegemony at May forth's public sphere. This paper attempts to explain their psychological and narrative strategy. This paper also explains a part of the bigger understanding the May forth's public sphere as a whole.

진독수의 민주정치사상

배영동 ( Young Dong Pai ) 중국사학회 2004 中國史硏究 Vol.31 No.-

연구논문 : 근대기 중국에서의 과학 담론: 진독수와 양계초를 중심으로

이용주 ( Yong Ju Lee ) 충남대학교 유학연구소 2012 儒學硏究 Vol.26 No.-

본 논문은 근대기 중국에서의 과학 담론의 형성과 발전 과정을 스케치한다. 19세기 중엽부터 중국은 서양의 과학 기술을 수입하기 위해 온 힘을 쏟는다. 서양의 과학기술을 수입하던 초기에, 중국인들은 과학기술의 긍정적인 측면에만 관심을 가짐으로써, 거의 종교적이라고 부를 수 있을 정도로 과학기술에 대한 일방적인 존경과 찬양을 보낸다. 군사무기와 경제력으로 무장한 서양의 제국주의 열강을 넘어서기 위해서는 그 무기와 경제력의 배경이 되는 과학기술을 수입해야 하고, 그 과학기술의 수입이 곧 중국의 근대화와 부강화의 길이라는 확신이 온 사회를 지배하고 있었다. 과학 수입 초기 중국인을 지배하던 과학기술 신앙을 대표하는 사상가로 우리는 엄복을 기억할 수 있다. 엄복에 의해 시작된 서양 과학에 대한 일방적인 찬양의 태도는 20세기초 신문화운동기에 낡은 중국을 전면 개조하고 전면적으로 서양의 문화와 과학기술을 수용해야 한다고 주장하는 진덕수나 호적에 의해 계승되고, 확대되어 간다. 그러나 다른 한편, 과학만능에 대한 신앙을 비판적인 시각에서 바라보는 사람들이 등장한다. 과학기술의 도입을 시작하던 19세기 중엽부터 과학기술을 부정적인 시각으로 평가하던 보수적인 인사들이 존재하지 않았던 것은 아니지만, 그들의 반대는 과학기술을 앞세우고 밀려오는 서양의 정신문화가 결국은 중국의 전통적인 도덕주의와 사회질서, 정치질서에 혼란을 초래할 것이라는 정치적 보수주의에서 비롯되는 것이었다. 그러나 1920년에 들어서면서, 진독수 등의 과학만능주의에 대항하는 과학만능 비판론은 단순한 전통주의나 정치적 보수주의에 의해 촉발된 것이라고만은 말할 수 없다. 양계초로 대표되는 과학비판론자들은 기본적으로 근대과학의 강점을 이해하고, 그것을 수용하는 것이 필요하다는 사실 자체를 부정하지는 않았지만, 과도한 과학 발전 혹은 무비판적인 과학 발전이 오히려 초래할 수 있는 사회적 위험의 증가, 국가 간의 갈등의 증가, 그리고 전쟁의 확대라는 세계사적 현실에 착안한다. 그 결과 그들 비판적 과학론자들은 과학이 제공하는 유토피아적 희망이 지닌 허구성에 주목하고, 과도한 과학 신앙, 맹목적인 과학기술 발전론을 비판하기 시작한다. 그런 과학만능론과 과학비판론은 그 어느 쪽이든 상대방의 극단적인 면만을 바라보는 극단론으로서 한계를 가지지만, 20세기의 20년대와 40년대에 활발하게 이루어지는 과학과 철학의 가치와 한계를 둘러싼 대논쟁, 그리고 중국적 사유와 서양적 사유의 차이를 규명하고자 하는 문화논쟁, 민족성 논쟁, 역사발전 논쟁이라는 근대 중국을 형성하는 중요한 사상적 논쟁을 열어주는 중요한 역할을 한다. 이 논문은 그런 후대의 사상 논전을 이해하기 위한 머리말, 실마리로서, 근대 중국을 장식하는 대논전의 서론으로서 의미를 가진다. This article sketches the process of the formation and development of the discourse on science in modern China. From the middle of 19th century, China tries to import western science and technology. At the very beginning of importing science and technology, the Chinese valued and revered science and technology something like a religion. They have convinced that to overcome and rival the western countries which equipped with science and technology China also have to learn science and technology which was thought to be the basis of western powers. They also have the conviction that the import of science and technology is the only way to accomplish modernization and success of China. We can remember Yan Fu as a thinker who represents ‘science religion’(科學宗敎) which prevailed at that time. This kind of science religion which supported by Yan Fu was furthered by Chen Duxiu and Hu Shi who advocated the merits of western culture, and science and technology. But sooner or later there appeared the criticiser who see science critically. Surely, from the middle of 19th century, there existed the cultural and political conservatives who criticised science and technology from the stance that western spiritual culture which represented by science would destroy chinese traditional values. The dissenters of ``science faith`` of early 20th century China, such as Liang Qichao, affirmed the benefits of science and never denied the import of science as science. They attacked, however, the increase social risk, troubles between countries, wars which excessive development of science would bring. As a result, the criticiser of science gave attention to the fictive aspect of the utopian hope which science faith have advertised, and started to criticise science faith and reckless advocates of science. The controversy between Chen Duxiu and Liang Qichao can be considered as a forerunner of “Science and Philosophy Controversy”(科玄論爭) which begins at 1923, and other big controversies, such as Culture Controversy(文化論戰) aiming at clarify chinese way of thinking vs. western way of thin, etc. This article could serves as the introduction to understand great controversies of modern China.

신문화 운동기 중국 지식인의 종교논쟁

이재령(Lee, Jae-ryoung) 중국근현대사학회 2021 중국근현대사연구 Vol.92 No.-

This paper is to synthetically understand the analysis of intellects’ perception on religious studies and Christianity during the New Culture Movement which became the theoretical basement of the 1920’s anti-Christianity movement. As the revival of Confucianism during Yuan Shikai’s reign became active, opposition from Christianity and other religious circles immediately intensified. Students and intellects baptized from western sciences and thoughts refused Confucianism as state religion and claimed anti-religion. Through New Youths, Young China, Life, and so on, religious debates of the period can be grasped. Marxists defined religions as fantasies of future world and as opium of suppressed people, and asserted abolishment of them. Anarchists perceived religions as a kind of authoritative systems, and discerned that they infringed sciences and disturbed free developments of individual human beings. Scientism advocated that as all kinds of phenomena and problems among mankinds and in societies could be resolved within sciences, sciences should replace religions. Such anti-religious trends arose from opposition against Confucianism as state religion, and rapidly spread out within the upsurge of nationalism and anti-imperialism. Regarding religions, Liang Qichao and Cai Yuanpei Chen Duxiu differed in their opinions by pros and cons, but were same in the point in which they understood religions as productions of emotions. Cai Yuanpei, the naysayer, separated religions from the boundaries of morals and education, and replaced them with aesthetic education. Chen Duxiu recognized the greatness and existence of Jesus from the emotional perspective excluding the sacred, and cultivated deep-seated affection by himself. Liu Boming Liang Shumíng Tu Xiaoshi who were friendly toward religions claimed that the essence of religions as a transcendental inner tendency is placed in each individual’s mind, and that it ought to be cultivated and guided. At the same time, they saw that a religion can be a competence maintaining social orders and cultural spirits. For the result from the fact that western science and ration overwhelmed hereditary Confucian tradition, the assertion that science should replace religion became fierce. Hu Shi with a strong atheistic tendency admired Jesus, but he respected merely his personality and achievements, and Christianity was not his religion. Chen Duxiu also fiercely criticized the Confucian tradition, saying that Jesus" personality is admirable, but Christian doctrine is unreliable on scientific grounds. Among Chinese intellects in the early 20<SUP>th</SUP> century, science gradually became an icon, it became hard to accept the value of religions’ existence within the trust on all-mighty of science. Youths and students thought that all religions were unscientific superstitions, and that as religions deprived human-beings’ rational capabilities and restrained liberty, so they were the biggest obstacles against humans’ progress. Regarding such all-mightiness of science, there were warnings and criticisms from Ling Qichao, but they did not show much power. The religious debates during the New Culture Movement can be considered as the victory of science. The status of science after the establishment of the Republic of China was never doubtable. Nevertheless, through this debate Chinese intellects could cultivate perceptions on religions and the Mystic Learning, and came to be incapable to unilaterally underestimate or to lightly judge religions. Also, church leaders came to keep an eye on the turbulent reality of China and to actively respond toward later issues of anti-religion and anti-Christianity.

李大钊、陈独秀民主政治思想之异同分析

왕지립 대한중국학회 2011 중국학 Vol.39 No.-

In the early 20th century, as the main founders of the Chinese Communist Party, Chen Duxiu and Li Dazhao formed their respective characteristic democratic thoughts on China's political development, which were based on the need to solve the practical problems of China, and combined with their cultural backgrounds, experiences as well as the judgments about China's political situation, in the environment of the changing world and the turbulent politics of China. Today, it is extremely necessary to do the comparative studies on their democratic political thoughts at the important moment of developing socialist democratic politics and promoting democracy within the party. 20世纪初,在世界局势变动不居、中国政局风雨飘摇的时代背景下,陈独秀、李大钊作为中国共产党的主要创始人,基于解决中国实际问题的需要,结合自己的知识背景和对中国政局的判断,就中国政治发展有着独特的见解和思路,形成了各具特色的民主政治思想。今天,在发展社会主义民主政治、推进党内民主建设的重要时刻,对他们的民主政治思想进行比较研究尤显必要。

李大?、??秀民主政治思想之?同分析

王志立(Wang zhili) 대한중국학회 2011 중국학 Vol.39 No.-

20世?初,在世界局???不居、中?政局?雨??的?代背景下,??秀、李大?作?中?共??的主要?始人,基于解?中?????的需要,?合自己的知?背景和?中?政局的判?,就中?政治?展有着?特的?解和思路,形成了各具特色的民主政治思想。今天,在?展社?主?民主政治、推???民主建?的重要?刻,?他?的民主政治思想?行比??究尤?必要。 In the early 20th century, as the main founders of the Chinese Communist Party, Chen Duxiu and Li Dazhao formed their respective characteristic democratic thoughts on China’s political development, which were based on the need to solve the practical problems of China, and combined with their cultural backgrounds, experiences as well as the judgments about China’s political situation, in the environment of the changing world and the turbulent politics of China. Today, it is extremely necessary to do the comparative studies on their democratic political thoughts at the important moment of developing socialist democratic politics and promoting democracy within the party.