In intellectual and cultural circles, the discussion on the "humanistic spirit" was very lively for a while in the first two years, but now it tends to be depressed again. Just like all kinds of "craze" in China, it seems to be just another round of fashion. I think about whether we should always give birth to something truly profound and lasting from the topics that people once debated so carefully, so that they can precipitate from the academic and theoretical circles, and even form a philosophy that truly reflects the "spirit of the times", so that our way of thinking and theoretical level can be truly improved.
In my opinion, one of the most prominent characteristics of the current zeitgeist is a trend of "cultural self-negation" that permeates all fields and levels of social life, which cannot be resisted and blocked by all cultural conservatism, because it is rooted in the drastic changes in contemporary life and follows its own path in accordance with the "dialectic of negation" first revealed by Hegel. Regrettably, no one has yet thought of seeking a philosophical expression for this zeitgeist.
The "new criticism" of culture that I have recently proposed is aimed at this "cultural self-denial". Of course, this is not just a cultural theory, but fundamentally a philosophical point of view. Marx said: "It is impossible for the development of any field not to deny its former form of existence"; Hegel asserted: "The life of the spirit is not a life of fear of death and survival from its ravages, but a life that dares to accept death and survive in death It dares to face up to the negation face to face and stay there". In the final analysis, dialectical philosophy is a philosophy of self-denial, and this kind of self-denial is not abandonment, but "renunciation". Cultural self-denial is not cultural nihilism, but cultural self-reflection, self-transcendence, and self-criticism, which is the development mode and active survival activity of culture itself.
Therefore, what I call "new criticism" has the following four important characteristics:
1 It is a kind of self-criticism of cultural traditions, in other words, it is neither to use foreign culture (mainly Western culture) to criticize Chinese culture (such as the critique of "May Fourth"), nor to use Chinese culture to criticize or "save" other cultures, (such as the "Sinocentrism"), but to re-examine and reflect on itself under the stimulus of contemporary real life.
2 It is an individual's self-criticism of the cultural traditions in which he or she is immersed. However, this kind of criticism goes beyond the examination of one's own shortcomings, character, mistakes, or a specific one (such as the "selfish criticism" of the "Cultural Revolution"), but the suspicion and retrospection of the ideological premises and ways of thinking that have always been like this and that everyone has never doubted, or even thought of. Thus, while the critic is seeking a new self, he is also making self-confession on behalf of the whole nation.
3 For this reason, the New Criticism is not politically the ultimate goal, as was the case with the past (such as the "Great Criticism" of the Cultural Revolution), but is first and foremost personal, in order to establish one's own truly "human" and complete life. It is not even just a critique of "national character", but a critique of human nature. Thus it is for all mankind.
4 Finally, this critique is not a critique of real life with a fictional ideal or fantasy (e.g., the utopian critique of the Frankfurt School), but a thorough critique of all outdated sentimentalist ideals (e.g., the Confucian ideal of "Datong") in terms of the tendencies of real life and the living spirit of the times. Therefore, it is also different from the Kantian transcendental (surreal) "pure" critique, but the consciousness that it is the embodiment of the contradictions and conflicts of real life itself, the focus of all contemporary problems and the way out of all difficulties.
In short, the "newness" of the "New Criticism" is by no means a fashionable newness, but a difficult and life-and-death breakthrough made in view of the inherent contradictions and sufferings of our brand-new era, which has not been seen in 5,000 years.
I am an old friend of the Journal of Social Sciences of Changsha Institute of Hydropower and Hydropower, and I have been paying attention to her growth and progress, and her style of insisting on and encouraging serious academic ** has always attracted me. I'm delighted with what she's achieved in 10 years. On the occasion of the 10th anniversary of the founding of the Social Science Journal of Changsha Institute of Hydropower Engineering, I would like to congratulate you on this article.