Mr. Yi Zhongtian told an interesting story.
It is said that there is an independent bookstore next to the university that invited the famous thinker Mr. Li Zehou to give a lecture, and the notice was seen by the students in the school, and then ran to tell each other: Great, Li Zekai is coming!
Li Zekai and Li Zehou, the names are only one word apart, but the characters are very different. The former is the second generation of the super-rich who are deeply involved in the gossip storm, and the latter is called the "spiritual leader" of a generation. Such a wrong eye is somewhat poignant.
丨Li Zehou: A pivotal figure in the ideological worldAnyone who has walked through the 1980s probably doesn't know the name of Mr. Li Zehou. Mr. Li Zehou is the author of "The Course of Beauty", "Critique of Critical Philosophy" and the three-volume "Theory of the History of Chinese Thought", which set off a wave of "Li Zehou Trend" as soon as it was published.
Li Zehou's thinking is known for his originality and high degree of speculation, and he provided an excellent "think tank" for the 80s, which had just bid farewell to the extreme age of dogma and rigidity. Some scholars have called Li Zehou "the first violinist of contemporary humanities in Chinese mainland, the most sober and talented scholar and thinker who has risen from a difficult and thorny environment." "If the vocation of public intellectuals is to criticize, then the vocation of thinkers is to reflect, and reflection on history is the first to bear the brunt. Mr. Li Zehou's most insightful historical reflection is the theory of "salvation overriding enlightenment" put forward in "The Double Variation of Enlightenment and Salvation". In Li Zehou's view, since 1840, China has been hovering between the two missions of "enlightenment" and "salvation": from the late Qing Dynasty to the **, the intellectual elite realized the importance of institutional reform and concept improvement to the transformation of traditional China, from the Westernization Movement to the New Culture Movement, the introduction of Western learning, opening up their eyes to the world, and opening up the wisdom of the people has always been a main axis of history. However, after the First Sino-Japanese Naval War, the pressure on the country's survival rose sharply. Gradual institutional reform and the opening of people's wisdom have been unable to cope with the crisis, and people's calls for "saving the world and trying to survive" are getting louder and louder, and it has spread from the intellectual circles to the whole society. After World War I, the success of Soviet Russia gave the Chinese hope. Thus, the May Fourth Movement broke out, and enlightenment eventually gave way to "salvation", cultural movements gave way to political movements, and conservative gradualism gave way to radical revolution and struggle, which continued until the 80s. As soon as this thesis was put forward, it set off an uproar in the historical and ideological circles, and soon became the basic theory for understanding modern Chinese history, and it can even be said that the paradigm of "enlightenment-salvation" has become another consensus with the highest acceptance from the 80s to the present. Mr. Li Zehou is 90 years old this year, and although he has long since faded out of public view, he has always been an indispensable figure in thinking about China's issues. 
Mr. Li Zehou.
However, the reason why the tree of life of thought is evergreen does not lie in the natural correctness and greatness of a certain thought, but on the contrary, it comes from whether the thought itself can withstand constant questioning and criticism. Since the advent of Mr. Li Zehou's thesis that "salvation overwhelms enlightenment", there have been constant voices of discussion, questioning, and criticism. A recent discussion from Professor Wang Renbo, a well-known constitutional scholar.
In the "How to Think About China" section of his new book "China Since 1840", Professor Wang Renbo reiterates the theory of "enlightenment-salvation", and discusses with Mr. Li Zehou from the perspectives of Fang**, concepts, and facts. 丨Simplified party**,It obscures complex historiesThere are two main approaches to modern Chinese history. The most mainstream method is the "class struggle" theory: the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom was the peasant class rebelling against the landlord class, the Xinhai Revolution was the overthrow of the feudal landlord class by the emerging bourgeoisie, and the May Fourth Movement brought the proletariat to the political stage. After 1840, there was another foreign power on the track of history, the revolutionary class at home, against the external invaders. On the contrary, the class that is the object of the revolution often colludes with external forces to betray national interests and defend its own position. Objectively speaking, the explanatory power of this side is getting weaker and weaker, but it is still the stereotyped thinking of the vast majority of people to understand history. The other way is Mr. Li Zehou's "enlightenment-salvation" theory. Compared with the single thinking of "class struggle", "enlightenment-salvation" not only added a dimension to understanding history, but more importantly, provided the Chinese at that time with the opportunity to speak freely about "enlightenment". At the level of ideological emancipation, the "enlightenment-salvation" proposal is of great significance, but it is still debatable in terms of improving historical cognition. In "China Since 1840", Mr. Wang Renbo believes that "enlightenment-salvation" is still a dualistic analytical framework. History is divided into the two main axes of "enlightenment" and "salvation", and there is no third way. Such a framework cuts complex history into opposing poles, artificially simplifying the relevance of history itself, and obscuring more dimensions of historical cognition. 
China since 1840.
In the final analysis, any reflection on history is added to the reflector's own intention, and it is also the reflector's grasp of the pulse of reality, as the so-called "all history is contemporary history". In that special period in the 80s, Mr. Li Zehou, as a thinker, had the mission of finding a way out for the nation. Therefore, the theory of "enlightenment-salvation" is not so much a reconstruction of history as Mr. Li's admonition to reality. Since 1840, China has been dragged into individualism-based modernization. Therefore, the "enlightenment" of the individual is always where the "hope" lies. However, the result of China's modern history, the enlightenment that was overwhelmed by salvation, is regrettable after all. Therefore, under the framework of "enlightenment-salvation", a part of history is assigned to the pole of "hope" and the rest to the pole of "regret". Because history has regrets, the historical appearance of "hope" has not appeared;If the "regrets" are eliminated, history will naturally be rewritten. In other words, the difficulty that China has gone in modern times is because "salvation overwhelms enlightenment", so if you want to be smooth in the future, you need to return to "enlightenment". Theoretically speaking, we will fall into what Popper called the "poverty of historical determinism." "History never fulfills the wishes of the living, it has its own way of living."Human beings can neither change the ifs of history, nor the direction of history. Any paradigm is an interpretation of "hindsight", and "enlightenment-salvation" is no exception. Therefore, it is not an objective record of the historical process, but a re-sorting of this process from a certain "custom principle". Of course, as long as the reflection on history is logically consistent and can justify itself, it is reasonable. However, it would be somewhat blasphemy to let history shine into reality. 
丨Context and conceptParadox
If Fang ** is still able to see his opinions, then the problems of concept and historical facts are a magnifying glass.
Concepts are problematic because of contextual differences. In "China Since 1840", Mr. Wang Renbo believes that many concepts in modern China have been translated from Spanish, which is not only a language conversion, but also a local reset of the culture that uses the language. It is hoped that a modern language civilization that has been formed will pull the backward Chinese society.
Li Zehou also recontextualized the concepts of "enlightenment" and "salvation" in order to confront the reality of reform in the 80s. However, this conceptual reset, based on a particular context, falls into the trap of ".It cannot be expressed without the help of Western concepts, but not with the help of Western conceptsAccurate expressionThe dilemma. Teacher Wang Renbo said that this is the most fundamental dilemma of the intellectual circles.
For example, the original meaning of "enlightenment" is the awakening of self-rationality, and the ability to get out of the state of ignorance through self-independent thinking. To put it simply, enlightenment is an individual's own business, and it is an endogenous state of mind of a person. On the other hand, the "enlightenment" under the paradigm of "enlightenment-salvation" presents a trend of "educating others and borrowing culture". The ideological enlightenment represented by the "New Culture Movement" in modern China was the result of intellectuals using Western civilization to educate and criticize the Chinese people who had been immersed in traditional Oriental culture for thousands of years. This not only deviates from the original intention of the Enlightenment and moves towards "anti-Enlightenment", but also drifts away from the Chinese people because of the top-down stance. In addition, enlightenment represents a state of thought, the result of which does not necessarily fit into concrete actions. The young students who were "awakened" by the New Culture Movement did not stop at the state of being "awakened", but put their borrowed "concepts" and passions into action. Most of these young students are idealists, who project their ideas into reality and practice their "utopia" in their hearts. The idea of social mismatch is not that the concept is wrong, but that the society is wrong, therefore, to transform society in a drastic way, this falls into "rational arrogance". When the practice of transforming society is frustrated, and then looking at the reality, we find that the poverty of society lies in the "economy". So,Solving the "economic right" became themThe key to the final solution of China's problems. The fundamental change in the social structure achieved by changing the economic base has become the "new enlightenment" of a large number of Chinese intellectuals. Since the 20s, the new path and new ideas of the revolution have originated from this.
Enlightenment was supposed to bring about an awakening of the mind and a change in ideas, but it was eventually replaced by material needs. As a result, the more "enlightenment" there is, the greater the need for "enlightenment", not only in China's modern history, but also in the 80s when Mr. Li Zehou lived, and how can it be true today. Another example is the concept of "salvation".
The historical paradigm of dualistic thinking is an either/or expression, and therefore all actions that are not part of enlightenment under this framework are grouped under the category of "salvation". In this process, concepts do not exist to explain historical facts, but become "tailor-made" for concepts based on historical facts. Specifically:
After 1840 and until the First Sino-Japanese War, China's actions and practices were generally defined as "self-improvement" rather than salvation. The pressure of "saving the country and trying to survive" actually began with the First Sino-Japanese WarThe collapse of the Qing Dynasty and the establishment of China were regarded as the beginning of a new state, so it was not strictly a "salvation";In 1937, the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression broke out, and "revolution" and "salvation" during this period were not the same thing. It was not until the second cooperation between the Kuomintang and the Communist Party that the "salvation" was promoted. It can be said that in the paradigm of "enlightenment-salvation", the extension of "salvation" has been expanded, which not only weakens its original explanatory power of history, but also forms a deep-rooted social cognition, and understands any intention of foreign invasion as a threat to the country's "salvation and survival", which must be eliminated. Any opposition is overwhelmed by the "political correctness" of "salvation." 丨History needs paradigms, and it is also necessary to ask real questionsMr. Li Zehou's historical narrative of "enlightenment-salvation" is a reflection on "farewell to revolution", which is commendable. Mr. Wang Renbo admitted frankly in the book that it is somewhat unfair to comment on things from thirty years ago with the perspective of thirty years later. However, there are many interrelated factors in the evolution of modern Chinese history, and it is not appropriate to forcibly break these factors apart and make them into an analytical framework. For a complex modern Chinese history, any dualistic structure is inappropriate. Whether it is Mr. Li Zehou's "enlightenment-salvation" paradigm, or the "radical-conservative" model of other scholars. The term "paradigm" was first coined by Thomas Kuhn in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, and today it is used to refer to a way of thinking or model for studying problems in a certain field. Although the historiographical paradigm of dualistic structure can be simplified, the chaotic historical context can be clearly seen, and trivial historical issues can be placed neatly. For research, this is necessary, even a must.
However, if we construct a paradigm to explain history and project this paradigm onto reality for the sake of practical needs, we are obviously replacing the real problems of history with a simplified framework. All history is contemporary. The significance of history to reality lies not in the historical paradigm, but in historical knowledge. For China since 1840, the most important knowledge is to focus on the real problems of modern history, and to use the real questions to accommodate different historical paradigms. For this reason, I sincerely recommend Mr. Wang Renbo's book "China Since 1840", which faces the real problems of modern Chinese history. If the historical dialogue with Mr. Li Zehou is an inconspicuous "breakthrough" in the preface of the book, then the main body of the book is from the perspective of political science or "public law" (constitutionalism).Focusing on the real issues of modern history, such as the nature and structure of the state, the ** and belonging of power, and how to conclude relationships between people, the key figures and major events since 1840 are reconnected. Fan Xin, the publisher of this book, said that "China Since 1840" combines the insight of historians, the rigor of jurists, and the wisdom of philosophers into one book, discusses the evolution and transformation of modern China, and asks the real questions of history. Click on the product card below to view more book content.