中西文化差异英文论文-1
2007-01-15 14:02阅读：
Lines and Circles, West and East
NOTHING IN THE WORLD IS ABSOLUTE. Everything is relative, cultural
difference being no exception. Culture, as the total pattern of
human behavior and its products, oversteps geographical limits and
historical conditions in many ways, and it is characterized by its
strong penetrativeness and fusibility.
The advancement of the globalized economy and the rapidity and ease
of modern communication, transportation, and mass media have
resulted in an ever increasing exchange between cultures,
unprecedented in scale, scope, and speed. Consequently, an increase
in universality and a reduction in difference between cultures is
an inevitable trend. It is no surprise to see phenomena
characteristic of one culture existing in another. As a result,
some people even fear that the world will become a dull place when
all the different nationalities behave exactly alike.
Nevertheless, the “cultural sediment” formed through long-range
accumulation is not to be ea
sily removed, and the cultural tradition handed down from
generation to generation shows great consistency and continuity.
The cultures of different regions and nations still have their own
distinctive peculiarities, and therefore significance still needs
to be attached to the study of the individualities of different
cultures against the background of their universality.
By and large, linearity and circularity can be used to indicate the
major difference between Western and Chinese cultures. “Western
culture” here is a general term, putting aside its interior
regional diversities in order to contrast it with Chinese culture.
A circle is a round enclosure. A line is a narrow continuous mark.
The contrast between the linearity of Western culture and the
circularity of Chinese culture embodies itself in such aspects as
worldview, core value, outlook on time, and mode of thinking.
Worldview: Linear Division and Circular Enclosure
A line divides an area while a circle encloses one. As far as
worldviews are concerned, Western linearity is displayed in the
general belief that the Universe is divided into two opposites with
a clear-cut demarcation line drawn between the two: man and nature,
subject and object, mind and matter, the divine and the secular.
Chinese circularity manifests itself in the prevailing viewpoint of
combining the two opposites and enclosing them. Although opposites
are acknowledged in both cultures, Western culture emphasizes their
coexistence and opposition, whereas Chinese culture stresses their
interdependence and integration.
The linear nature of the Western worldview can be traced back to
such ancient Greek philosophers as Thales, Heracleitus, Plato, and
Aristotle. They all advocate dividing the world into two opposing
parts: element and soul, reality and reason, matter and form. Their
theories laid the foundation for the further development of the
one-dividing-into-two view adopted by Western culture. Archimedes
said more than two thousand years ago, “Give me but one firm spot
on which to stand, and I will move the earth.” A proverb says,
“Nature is conquered by obeying her.” Conquering or obeying, human
beings in the West consider Nature as their opposite.
Christianity holds that God creates human beings and human beings
sin against God. Throughout the Bible the theme of the redemption
of mankind is developed. There exists a clear division between God
and humanity. Later hypotheses like those of Descartes and Hegel
consolidated the theoretical basis though they introduced different
notions, such as matter and mind and real object and absolute
spirit. The dividing worldview is the starting point of Western
culture’s exploring and transforming Nature and explains the rapid
development of science and technology in the West.
The circular Chinese worldview originates from the notion of Tao in
the proposition “Tao consists of Yin and Yang” in the Book of
Changes (about 600 BC). Lao-tzu, who lived about 500 years before
Christ, further enunciated the concept of Tao in chapter 42 of his
Tao Te Ching: “Tao gave birth to the One; the One gave birth
successively to two things, three things, up to ten thousand. These
ten thousand creatures cannot turn their backs to the shade (Yin)
without having the sun (Yang) on their bellies, and it is on this
blending of the breaths (both Yin and Yang) that their harmony
depends” (Arthur Maley’s translation). It is obviously the One, the
blending, and the harmony that are emphasized in the explanation of
Tao.
Two centuries after Lao-tzu, Chuang-tzu (369 –286 BC) used orderly
philosophic discussion rather than poetic intuition to clarify the
concept of Tao. He believed in “the One reality which is all men,
gods, and things: complete, all-embracing, and the whole; it is an
all-embracing unity from which nothing can be separated” (Gardener
Murphy’s translation). When it comes to the relationship between
humanity and Nature, he proposes that “the perfect man has no self
because he has transcended the finite and identified himself with
the universe.” Thus the concept that human beings are part of
Nature is rooted in the minds of the Chinese people. Dong Zhongshu
(179 –104 BC), a philosopher of the West Han dynasty, again
developed the Oneness worldview. He assumed that “the energy of
heaven and earth is a unified one. It consists of Yin and Yang and
manifests itself in four seasons and five elements.”
A number of Chinese expressions mirror the idea of identifying
human beings with Nature rather than separating them. Here are some
examples:
Nature affects human affairs and human behavior finds response in
Nature (Tian ren ganying).
The law of Nature and the feelings of humanity are in unison (Tian
li ren qing).
Nature accords with human wishes (Tian cong ren yuan).
Nature is angry and people are resentful (Tian nu ren yuan).
Nature’s will brings about human affinity (Tian yi ren yuan).
Nature and humankind turn to one. (Tian yu ren gui).
The Chinese character “tian” is translated as “Nature” in the above
expressions, although “tian” carries a wider sense than the English
word. “Tian” (Nature) and “ren” (human) always react to and comply
with each other. They can never be separated. The Oneness worldview
also finds expression in Chinese poems:
Flowers smile on the happy occasion.
Birds sing with the joyful congregation.
(Wang Wei)
Trees sway in a mournful gale.
Waves surge like hill and dale.
(Cao Zhi)
Catkins scattered by wind, my motherland is being
disintegrated.
Rain striking duckweed, I sink against the tide,
broken-hearted.
(Wen Tianxiang)
As the above lines show, things in Nature like flowers, birds,
trees, waves, wind, and rain all respond to such human feelings as
happiness, sadness, anger, and sorrow. Humanity and Nature blend
into a harmonious identity.
Core Value: Linear Individuality and Circular Integrity
A line is a point moving continuously onward, whereas a circle is a
centripetal ring. In terms of core value, Western linearity is
embodied in the priority given to developing individual
potentialities, realizing individual objectives, and seeking
individual interests; Chinese circularity is embodied in the
importance attached to harmonizing community relationships,
actualizing community objectives, and safeguarding community
interests.
For most Westerners, individualism is undoubtedly a positive core
value. In fact, the social systems of various Western nations, and
especially the United States, are based on “rugged individualism,”
as described by Herbert Hoover in 1928. The pursuit of individual
rights and interests is considered utterly legitimate.
Self-actualization and the maximal realization of individual
potential are supreme aims in life. It is fully justified for
individuals to protect their private interests when they are in
conflict with those of the community or the state. Weight is given
to the individual rather than to the community, as Margaret
Thatcher said in a speech in 1987: “There is no such thing as
society. There are individual men and women.” Westerners prefer to
discipline themselves rather than be disciplined by others. They
take pride in their independence and their right to make their own
decisions. They go their own way, not caring much about what others
might think about their doings.
In Western culture, an individual is like an independent point,
moving forward continuously in a self-chosen direction, forming a
line of self-fulfillment. If different people’s lines run parallel,
they will each smoothly attain their own aims in life. As one
American professor put it: “You are selfish and I am selfish, but
you don’t stand in my way and I don’t stand in your way. We are
both selfish, and we are both happy.”
However, if two lines intersect, the stronger line must cut off the
other one in order to keep moving on itself, thus conforming to the
law of the survival of the fittest. Guided by linear
competition-oriented value, everyone seeks independence and
self-reliance, and everyone feels insecure and makes unremitting
efforts. The linear road of an individual’s life is made and
extended by the individual’s own feet, and success is achieved
through individual effort.
Chinese culture, on the other hand, takes circular integrity as the
basis of its value. An individual is incorporated into the
integrity of the whole. The center of the circle represents the
community’s interests and serves as the common objective of all its
individual members. The individual exists in the community and
finds the meaning of his existence through it. An individual in
isolation has no meaningful existence.
More than two thousand years ago, Confucius advocated that “a
public spirit should rule everything under the sun and a gentleman
should put others’ interests above his own.” An ancient Chinese
would consider it the primary aim in life “to cultivate his own
moral character, put family affairs in order, administer state
affairs well, and pacify the whole world.” It is evident that the
interests of the small circle (family), the intermediate circle
(state), and the large circle (world) come above one’s own, and one
has to cultivate one’s own moral character and to exert oneself in
order to achieve the goal of serving the community’s interests. A
couplet from a Ming dynasty academy of classical learning says,
“The sounds of wind, rain, and reading each come into my ears; the
affairs of family, state, and world are all kept in my mind.” Fan
Zhongyan, a Song dynasty poet, expressed his desire “to show
concern over state affairs before others and enjoy comforts after
them.”
It has been a widely accepted motto that “everyone has a share of
responsibility for the fate of his country.” In present-day China,
prioritizing community interests remains the mainstream value, in
spite of the importation of different values from other cultures.
Jean Brick, as an outsider who has come inside for some time, has
observed the circular group-oriented Chinese value with keen
cross-cultural awareness. She says in her book China, “Private
interests are vested in the group, that is in the family or in the
community, and not in the individual. True self-fulfillment for the
individual lies in fulfilling social responsibilities to the
greatest extent possible. In fact, the establishment of harmonious
social relations is seen as an absolute necessity, without which
any development is impossible.”
