25.10.2015

愚：前輩午安。

智：你好，看樣子，心情不太好，是嗎？

愚：從過去幾次前輩的談話中，得到的訊息和我原有的知識有很大出入，簡直顛 覆了我過去對中西文化的概念，我和朋友同學聚舊時，談到中西文化和文明的差異時，都是拿中國的落後和愚昧來做笑柄，以前未聽過前輩的資料，一起説笑時很自 在，但聽過後，良心上過不了自己，便很難跟著大伙兒一起笑，但亦不敢駁斥，因為他們都引用著一些著名的專欄作家或大學講師的權威説話來做證據，我是沒有還 口之力的。

智：那是説嘗到點衆人皆醉我獨醒的滋味了，哈哈。我説過要實事求是，對祖宗的文化，既不宜妄自菲薄，也不應太過自吹自擂，一些太過以偏概全或立場先 行的人，便會得出一些似是而非的結論，自欺欺人，也誤己誤人。以一位前大學講師的專欄評論員的論述為例，他本身專業為社會學，看來對西方文化有近乎宗教信 仰的情操，所以動不動便説西方甚至港英年代的社會管治理念領先中國一二千年，誇張得完全脱離事實，課堂上的學生聽了還要考他的試，然後再向外流傳，便積非 成是。

西方要到中世紀才脱離黑暗時代，在此之前，一直是神權，君權和封建領主專權的農奴社會，經歷匈人和蒙古人的征服後，認識到自己的落後，才興起向東方 (Orient)的瘋狂學習，大量翻譯東方人的書籍，從阿拉伯人和蒙古人那裏學到製紙，印刷，冶金和火藥的技術，也從這些書籍中得到精神文明的啟蒙，在 宋、元、明的時代，中國一個大城市的人口，已超過西方的一個民族國家，政府的管治架構也精細嚴密得多；人文科學的成就，也遠超當時的西方，直至西元13世 紀第4次十字軍東征，在東羅馬帝國首都君士坦丁堡大肆搜掠，財物包括各式各樣的拉丁文和阿拉伯文藏書，轉賣給意大利的商人，而古希臘的著作「譯本」，也被 「重新發現」（rediscovered)，開啟了文藝復興運動，將歐洲人的思想從君權，神權，封建領主的專權下慢慢釋放出來，由黑暗時代結束至上一世紀 不過是5至6個世紀，何來一二千年？希臘雅典城邦的文化成就，在考古上一直充滿疑點，即使屬實也是規模有限，近似中國夏朝或三王五帝的發展程度；而且偏處 東南歐，近中東多於西歐，一直不被當作西歐主流文化一部份；歐洲人只承認西羅馬帝國的正統地位，連東羅馬帝國也強行改稱為拜占庭帝國，便是因為東羅馬位處 現時的土耳其，和西歐有相當距離，而希臘是東羅馬的一個行省，地理上和土耳其陸地相連。西方文明，要到明朝中葉後，才大致上跟中國拉平，工業革命的即時效 果最明顯，令西方在軍事上超前中國，那不過是200年光景。

愚：難道前輩不承認西方在精神文明上的超前嗎？

智：光談理念和理論，大部份主流的文化都是崇高偉大的，分别在於實踐和成效。東西方文明在過去二千年的競爭中，在實踐上，支持者大都有以偏概全的傾向，西方的精神文明的實踐模式，一直都是局部的文明建立在不文明的大環境上。

愚：吓，什麽不文明大環境的局部文明，很難理解？

智：根據西方人本身所研究得出的資料，雅典的公民權只限雅典城中約2萬人的少數貴族擁有，其餘8至10萬的奴隸沒有權利，所以雅典實際是行精英政體 (aristocracy)的奴隸社会。美國獨立戰爭，是因為新大陸上的公民受到英國政府不平等的對待，所以憤而反抗，但成功獨立後，公民中只有男性白人 有平等權利，白種女性和黑人沒有。獨立一個世紀後，民主黨分裂出來不久的共和黨候選人林肯當選成為總統，民主黨控制的南部各州不服，另推總統，南北大戰 後，黑人才算解除奴隸身份，但仍未有平等公民權，包括投票權，白種女性屆1920年才爭得投票權；1965馬丁路德金被刺，黑人進行大規抗爭後才取得名義 上的投票權。法國大革命是真正意圖建立全民平等社會的嘗試，結果很清楚。這些例子只顯示西方人如何追求一國內部社會國民的平等，至今仍無法完全實現，更不 要説達致國際上國與國之間的平等了。西方由文藝復興開始，追求國家民族崛起和強大的目的，仍是和羅馬帝國的思路一樣，便是要征服其他民族和取得他們的財 富，所以緊接著大航海時代後是重商主義，殖民地主義和帝國主義的興起，整個世界成為西方列強爭霸的戰場，最終導致兩次世界大戰，戰後西方世界仍然在國際關 係上奉行不平等政策，利用在第二和第三世界廉價取得的資源來提升國內民衆的物質生活水平，從而紓緩社會內部矛盾，衣食足而知榮辱，倉廩實而知禮節，觀察者 由此感覺到西方社會管理水平優越先進。站在第二及第三世界的立場而言，西方近二百年的高水平生活質素，很大程度是從剝削第二及第三世界而達致的。所以説西 方文化文明先進，還要分開理論上的和實踐上的兩部份來比較。

愚：那前輩意見呢？

智：説理論，可説殊途同歸，世界各地文化所憧憬的烏托邦其實大同小異，巴黎人民公社或馬克斯的共產社會，和禮記禮運篇孔子所説的大同之治無異。雅典 的城邦議會共和制，孟德斯鳩的民約論，是儒家大同之治和道家無為而治的混合體。總而言之，個體的自由和權利得到充份保障，而群體的利益也得到照顧。但説到 實踐方法，便衍生很多不同的所謂意識形態，西方人第一是重視方法(methodology)，每當找到一種認為正確的方法，便會執著認為是唯一的方法，並 不以為殊途可以同歸，第二是將方法也當成目標一部份，將一些程序看成公義一部份，便更加認定世上只有一條達至至善的途徑。之前説到的福山(Francis Fukuyama)，便是其中一個一元文化論者，而本地不少學者或公眾人物，不過是重覆他的理論吧了。可惜福山也修正了他的學説，而本地一些「跟車太貼」 的學者便轉不了軚。

愚：那前輩是認為條條大路通羅馬，不必走同一條路了。

智：正是如此，上兩三個世紀，西方興起中國熱，所以東方學(Oriental Studies)外，還有中國學(Sinologism)，上次説的羅氏藏書不過是其中一小部份。中國的各式著作西傳可追溯至16世紀，1582年傳教士 利馬竇到達中國，1593年將四書譯成拉丁文在杭州出版，其接任人繼續將五經翻譯為西方語言寄回西方，對那時代的西方學者產生很大的影響，到18世紀，中 國典籍已被全方位地翻譯成西方文字並流入歐洲的知識界，啟蒙時代的西方思想家，受到中國近乎無神論的「道法自然」思想啟發，從基督教的神權思想桎梏中解放 出來，轉而探討自然法則(natural law)，對自然科學和哲學的發展都有極大的正面影響；量子力學的奠基者之一的波耳爾(Neils Henrik David Bohr) 便以太極做臂章的圖案；黑格爾(Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel)的正反合説，有道家和易學中陰陽相生相勊學説的影子；萊布萊兹的二進制和太極八卦的構思相近；法國啟蒙運動的思想家，在哲學或社會政治學的理 念，都受到中國倫理學的啟發。這段歷史，當中國在19世紀末和以後一百年間處於低沉時期，在軍事上被西方擊敗後，西方人便不屑提起曾向被征服者學習的歷史 事實，寧可將一切歸功於已被歷史洶汰並湮滅千多年的希臘文化，然後便是獨尊西方文化。

愚：華夏文明是屢戰屢敗，那是事實，難道還要阿Q精神一番嗎？

智：那一段令華人傷痛的日子始於1839年的鴉片戰爭，終於1945年二戰終戰日，以歷史的跨度而言，100年不過是彈指之間。華夏文化和文明，經 歷五千年而未墜，而希臘文化和文明，原來不過是湮滅了千多年的歷史陳蹟，也被神奇地被再發現而且啟發了今日現代先進的西方文明，客觀上，華夏文化具有更強 的生命力，怎麽會沒有值得保留的優點呢？只是西方一些主流學派，得到政客的協助，利用媒體和學術界的話語權，將西方文化優越論從各種渠道向世人傳達，受者 再輾轉散播，將這個觀點形造成不證自明的真理。我姑且舉個例子，下面一段文字，就是來自那位前大學講師的一篇專欄文章：

其中用了很多學術名詞，不外乎是褒西方而貶華夏，可是，老人家發現這位學者的典型論述，只要將主體對調，論據略加改動或甚至不必改動，同樣言之成理，但批判對像便完全相反：

愚：呃…，前輩，這改動完全將矛頭反向，卻又確實言之成理，那究竟那一個説法才對呢？

智：對，可見這些論點的空洞。我沒有存心冒犯，只是身為學者，只要內心持平，思考一下中世紀的西方人為何熱切從海路前往中國和印度，從馬哥孛羅的遊 記中想像當時東西的差距，歐洲人當時是抱著朝聖的心態向東方學習的；在大學圖書館多讀一點當時的原始文獻，便會發現東西的交流並非一面倒或單向的。新亞書 院創辦人錢穆先生便認為西方的大學制度是借鑑中國的國子監和私人書院，英國的公務員銓敍制度是複製中國的文官制度和科舉考試。當年這些理論當然難容於港英 政府，所以新亞幾位以承傳中華文化為己任的創辨人最後都要黯然然離去，並非偶然。當年的憤青，不但沒有稱新亞三子為大中華膠，還憤憤不平居多。

愚：前輩説的東學西漸，我簡直是聞所未聞，如非前輩有根有據地提出，我是不會從一般的書本或媒體得知的，所以那些大學教授或專欄作家怎樣寫便怎樣聽，都信以為真，那裡可以找到相關資料呢？

智：如今網上已能找到很多資訊，但要找可靠的，嚴肅的作者，在引用資料時都有註明出處，可供查證，你用 "Oriental Studies" 和 "Sinologism" 作搜尋關鍵字便可找到很多。下面有一些連結，你可以看看：

1. Ming Dong Gu (顧明棟): <Sinologism: An Alternative to Orientalism and Postcolonialism>, Routledge (December 7, 2012)
- English Version on Amazon:
  http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00AYIKK12?qid=1457581742&ref_=sr_1_1&s=books&sr=1-1
- Chinese Version on Amazon:
  http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/7100112109?qid=1457581742&ref_=sr_1_2&s=books&sr=1-2
- Review and Introduction:
  http://u.osu.edu/mclc/book-reviews/gangzhou/
  https://www.routledge.com/products/9780415626545

2. Martin Ledstrup: <China has inspired us since Enlightenment>
 http://sciencenordic.com/china-has-inspired-us-enlightenment
- Citation:

According to Stefan Gaarsmand Jacobsen, the great thinkers of the Enlightenment were also inspired by foreign cultures and civilisations, and by the Chinese in particular.   Jacobsen, of the Department of Culture and Society – Department of the History of Ideas at Aarhus University, was recently awarded a PhD for his thesis (‘A model for all states – China in debates on poverty, meritocracy, absolutism and political economy in early modern Europe’) on how China played a role in the European Enlightenment during the 18th Century. Jesuits brought news from China China’s influence on the European Enlightenment started in the 17th century, when Jesuit monks travelled to China to spread Christianity. Through letters and books, the missionaries described a country that was more peaceful than Europe – which had experienced decades of war, including the Thirty Years’ War (1618-48), one of the most destructive European conflicts, involving almost all countries in Europe. Thinkers in Europe started to ask themselves why China was so peaceful, while Europeans waged war on each other. One of the philosophers who used China as an example of how Europe could be better was Voltaire. The researcher studied the philosophers’ reactions to the missionaries’ reports.   “What I looked at was not so much whether the Jesuit missionaries’ reports were right or wrong, but how the European Enlightenment thinkers chose to interpret the reports,” he says.....

3. Professor Derk Bodde: <CHINESE IDEAS IN THE WEST>
 http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/chinawh/web/s10/ideas.pdf

- Introduction: CHINESE IDEAS IN THE WEST Prepared by Professor Derk Bodde for the Committee on Asiatic Studies in American Education Reprinted with permission in China: A Teaching Workbook, Asia for Educators, Columbia University

- Author's Introduction: 

Today civil service is an accepted institution in all modern democracies. In the year 1941, for example, nearly 2,500,000 men and women took examinations for positions in the United States government. So fundamental is the principle of choosing public servants on the basis of fitness that one might almost suppose it had been a cornerstone of our national thinking ever since our nation's beginnings. Yet, though few people stop to consider it, the fact is that this matter of efficiency in government is a relatively new idea in America. The first hundred years of our nation's history were racked with scandalous corruption as a result of the notorious spoils system. Not until 1883, two years after a president of the United States had been assassinated by a disgruntled office seeker, did the public wake up and demand a system of civil service examinations that would ensure the selection of most government employees on the basis of merit rather than party loyalty. The civil service idea did not originate in our country, however, nor in Europe, though it is true that in passing this legislation, Congress followed the immediate lead of Great Britain and France, both of which had taken similar action a few decades earlier. The first county to install the merit system was China. In the year 165 B.C., China inaugurated what later became a widespread system of competitive government examinations. And during the greater part of the time from that early date until 1905, shortly before the Empire passed out of existence, the majority of Chinese applicants for public office had to prove their ability by passing one of these tests. A picture of the examination halls in Peking in which applications were locked while taking these Chinese civil service examinations is included below. Civil service is but one of many ideas the West has received from China — ideas that have contributed significantly to our civilization in such fields as politics, economics, and literature. The extent of this contribution is not generally appreciated by Americans. Accustomed as we are to ascribe our cultural heritage to Egypt, Greece, Rome, and northern Europe, we tend to dismiss Asia as a distant continent of alien cultures possessing no possible common denominator with our own. It is not generally realized that prior to the sixteenth century, the West received more from Asia, including distant China, than it gave in return. A previous article in this series, China's Gifts to the West, depicts the many material things which China has contributed to our Western world. This pamphlet tells a similar story of the nonmaterial ideas we have received from China. …....

4. William Duiker，Jackson Spielvogel: <World History, Volume II: Since 1500 - Europe, China and Scientific Revolutions>, Belmont, CA : Thomson/Wadsworth, ©2007.

 http://www.worldcat.org/title/world-history/oclc/191077656
 
- Citation:

An interesting question that arises is why the Scientific Revolution occurred in Europe and not in China In the Middle Ages, China had been the most technologically advanced civilization in the world. After 1500, that distinction passed to the west (see the comparative Esay “The Sicientific Revolution” on p. 507) Historians are not sure why. Some have contrasted th esense of order in Chinese society with the competitive spirit existing in Europe. Others have emphaized Chins's ideological viewpoint that favored living in harmony with nature rather than trying to dominate it. One historian has even suppested the China's civil service system drew the best and the brightest into government service. To the detriment of other occuptions.

5. Benjamin Elman: CHINA AND THE WORLD HISTORY OF SCIENCE, 1450–1770

https://www.princeton.edu/~elman/documents/China_and_the_World_History_of_Science.pdf

- Citation

For over a century, Europeans have heralded the success of Western science and assumed the failure ofscience elsewhere. Since 1954, Joseph Needham had stressed the unique rise of modern science in Europe, but at the same time acknowledged the achievements in traditional Chinese science and technology until 1600. In the decadessince Needham answered his provocative question, “why didn’t the premodern Chinese develop modern science?,”  we have increasingly acknowledged that our focus on the “failure” of Chinese science to develop into modern science is heuristically interesting but historiographically misguided. We are now forced to reassess how the global history of science should be rewritten.... we as teachers also need to tell that quieterstory of longstanding Chinese interestsin the natural world, medicine, commerce, the arts and crafts, all of which set the stage for interaction with European science, technology, and medicine after 1600....

愚：前輩，吃不消哩，那麼多，還是英文！

智：哈哈，除了第一本參考書的作者是華人外，其他的都是西方學者，認為西方學者才客觀的無話可說吧；不要緊，隨自己興趣吧，反正不用考試。還有，老人家要遠遊數月才回來，你大可以慢慢欣賞了！

愚：哦，好的，祝前輩旅途愉快，再見！