[转载]罗素：《中西文明之对照》（英文）
2013-11-10 17:06阅读：73
I can't deny that civilization is advanced than us ,
but with disadvantages.
Chinese and Western Civilization
Contrasted
by Bertrand
Russell
There is at present in China a
close contrast between our civilization and that which is native to
the Celestial Empire. It is still a doubtful question whether this
contact will breed a new civilization better than either of its
parents, or whether it will merely destroy the native culture and
replace it by that of America. Contacts between different
civilizations have often
加载中...
内容加载失败，点击此处重试
in the past proved to be landmarks in human progress. Greece
learned from Egypt, Rome from Greece, the Arabs from the Roman
Empire, medieval Europe from the Arabs, and Renaissance Europe from
the Byzantines. In many of these cases, the pupils proved better
than their masters. In the case of China, if we regard the Chinese
as the pupils, this may be the case again. In fact, we have quite
as much to learn from them as they from us, but there is far less
chance of our learning it. If I treat the Chinese as our pupils,
rather than vice versa, it is only because I fear we are
unteachable.
I propose in this chapter to
deal with the purely cultural aspects of the questions raised by
the contact of China with the West.
With the exception of Spain and
America in the sixteenth century, I cannot think of any instance of
two civilizations coming into contact after such a long period of
separate development as has marked those of China and Europe.
Considering this extraordinary seperateness, it is surprising that
mutual understanding between Europeans and Chinese is not more
difficult. In order to make this point clear, it will be worth
while to dwell for a moment on the historical origins of the two
civilizations.
Western Europe and America have
a practically homogeneous mental life, which I should trace to
three sources: (1) Greek culture; (2) Jewish religion and ethics;
(3) modern industrialism, which itself is an outcome of modern
science. We may take Plato, the Old Testament, and Galileo as
representing these three elements, which have remained singularly
separable down to the present day. From the Greeks we derive
literature and the arts, philosophy and pure mathematics; also the
more urbane portions of our social outlook. From the Jews we derive
fanatical belief, which its friends call “faith”; moral fervour,
with the conception of sin; religious intolerance, and some part of
our nationalism. From science, as applied in industrialism, we
derive power and the sense of power, the belief that we are as
gods, and may justly be the arbiters of life and death for
unscientific races. We derive also the empirical method, by which
almost all real knowledge has been acquired. These three elements,
I think, account for most of our mentality.
No one of these three elements
has had any appreciable part in the development of China, except
that Greece indirectly influenced Chinese painting, sculpture and
music. China belongs, in the dawn of its history, to the great
river empires, of which Egypt and Babylonia contributed to our
origins, by the influence which they had upon the Greeks and Jews.
Just as these civilizations were rendered possible by the rich
alluvial soil of the Nile, the Euphrates, and the Tigris, so the
original civilization of China was rendered possible by the Yellow
River. Even in the time of Confucius, the Chinese Empire did not
stretch far either to south or north of the Yellow River. But in
spite of this similarity in physical and economic circumstances,
there was very little in common between the mental outlook of
Chinese and that of the Egyptians and Babylonians. Lao-Tze and
Confucius, who both belong to the sixth century B.C.. have already
the characteristics which we should regard as distinctive of the
modern Chinese. People who attribute everything to economic causes
would be hard to put it to account for the differences between the
ancient Chinese and the ancient Egyptians and Babylonians. For my
part, I have no alternative theory to offer. I do not think science
can, at present, account wholly for national character. Climate and
economic circumstances account for parts, but not the whole.
Probably a great deal depends upon the character of dominant
individuals who happen to emerge at a formative period,
such as Moses, Mohammed, and Confucius.
The oldest known Chinese sage
is Lao-Tze, the founder of taoism. “Lao-Tze” is not really a proper
name, but means merely “the old philosopher.” He was (according to
tradition) an older contemporary of Confucius, and his philosophy
is to my mind far more interesting. He held that every person,
every animal, and every thing has a certain way or manner of
behaving which is natural to him, or her, or it, and that we ought
to conform to this way ourselves and encourage others to conform to
it. “Tao” means “way”, but used in a more or less mystical sense,
as in the text: “I am the Way and the Truth and the Life.” I think
he fancied that death was due to departing from the “way”, and that
if we all lived strictly according to nature we should be immortal,
like the heavenly bodies. In later times Taoism degenerated into
mere magic, and was largely concerned with the search for the
elixir of life. But I think the hope of escaping from death was an
element in Taoist philosophy from the first.
Lao-Tze’s book, or rather the
book attributed to him, is very short but his ideas were developed
by his disciple Chaung-Tze, who is more interesting than his
master. The philosophy which both advocated was one of freedom.
They thought ill of government , and of all interference with
nature. They complained of the hurry of modern life, which they
contrasted with the calm existence of those whom they called “the
pure men of old”. There is a flavor of mysticism in the doctrine of
the Tao, because in spite of the multiplicity of living things the
Tao is in some sense one, so that if all live according to it there
will be no strife in the world. But both sages have already the
Chinese characteristics of humor, restraint, and understatement.
Their humor is illustrated by Chaung-Tze’s account of Po-Lo, who
“understood the management of horses”, and trained them till five
out of every ten died. Their restraint and understatement are
evident when they are compared with Western mystics. Both
characteristics belong to all Chinese literature and art, and to
the conversation of cultivated Chinese in the present day. All
classes in China are fond of laughter, and never miss a chance of a
joke. In the educated classes, the humor is sly and delicate, so
that Europeans often fail to see it, which adds to the enjoyment of
the Chinese. Their habit of understatement is remarkable. I met one
day in Peking a middle-aged man who told me he was academically
interested in the theory of politics; being new to the country, I
took his statement at its face value, but I afterward discovered
that he had been governor of a province, and had been for many
years a very prominent politician. In Chinese poetry there is an
apparent absence of passion, which is due to the same practice of
understatement. They consider that a wise man should always remain
calm, and, though they have their passionate moments (being in fact
a very excitable race), they do not wish to perpetuate them in art,
because they think ill of them. Our romantic movement, which led
people to like vehemence, has, so far as I know, no analogue in
their literature. Their old music, some of which is very beautiful,
makes so little noise that one can only just hear it. In art they
aim at being exquisite, and in life at being reasonable. There is
no admiration for the ruthless strong man, or for the unrestrained
expression of passion. After the more blatant life of the West, one
misses at first all the effects at which they are aiming; but
gradually the beauty and dignity of their existence become visible,
so that the foreigners who have lived longest in China are those
who love the Chinese best.
The Taoists, though they
survive as magicians, were entirely ousted from the favor of the
educated classes by Confucianism. I must confess that I am unable
to appreciate the merits of Confucius. His writings are largely
occupied with trivial points of etiquette, and his main concern is
to teach people how to behave correctly on various occasions. When
one compares him, however, with the traditional religious teachers
of some other ages and races, one must admit that he has great
merits, even if they are mainly negative. His system, as developed
by his followers, is one of pure ethics, without religious dogma;
it has not given rise to a powerful priesthood, and it has not led
to persecution. It certainly has succeeded in producing a whole
nation possessed of exquisite manners and perfect courtesy. Nor is
Chinese courtesy merely conventional; it is quite as reliable in
situations for which no precedent has been provided. And it is not
confined to one class; it exists even in the humblest coolie. It is
humiliating to watch the brutal insolence of white men received by
the Chinese with a quiet dignity which cannot demean itself to
answer rudeness with rudeness. Europeans often regard this as
weakness, but it is really strength, the strength by which the
Chinese have hitherto conquered all their conquerors.
There is one, and only one,
important foreign element in the traditional civilization of China,
and that is Buddhism. Buddhism came to China from India in the
early centuries of the Christian era, and acquired a definite place
in the religion of the country. We, with the intolerant outlook
which we have taken over from the Jews, imagine that if a man
adopts one religion he cannot adopt another. The dogmas of
Christianity and Mohammedanism, in their orthodox forms, are so
framed that no man can accept both. But in China this
incompatibility does not exist; a man may be both a Buddhist and a
Confucian, because nothing in either is incompatible with the
other. In Japan, similarly, most people are both Buddhists and
Shintoists. Nevertheless, there is a temperamental difference
between Buddhism and Confucianism, which will cause any individual
to lay stress on one or the other even if he accepts both. Buddhism
is a religion in the sense in which we understand the word. It has
mystic doctrines and a way of salvation and a future life. It has a
message to the world intended to cure the despair which it regards
as natural to those who have no religious faith. It assumes an
instinctive pessimism only to be cured by some gospel. Confucianism
has nothing of all this. It assumes people fundamentally at peace
with the world, wanting only instruction as to how to live, not
encouragement to live at all. And its ethical instruction is not
based upon any metaphysical or religious dogma; it is purely
mundane. The result of the coexistence of these two religions in
China has been that the more religious and contemplative natures
turned to Buddhism, while the active administrative type was
content with Confucianism, which was always the official teaching,
in which candidates for the civil service were examined. The result
is that for many ages the government of China has been in the hands
of literary skeptics, whose administration has been lacking in
those qualities of energy and destructiveness which Western nations
demand of their rulers. In fact, they have conformed very closely
to the maxims of Chaung-Tze. The result has been that the
population has been happy except where civil war brought misery;
that subject nations have been allowed autonomy; and that foreign
nations have had no need to fear China, in spite of its immense
population and resources.
Comparing the civilization of
China with that of Europe, one finds in China most of what was to
be found in Greece, but nothing of the other two elements of our
civilization, namely, Judaism and science. China is practically
destitute of religion, not only in the upper classes, but
throughout the population. There is a very definite ethical code,
but it is not fierce or persecuting, and does not contain the
notion “sin”. Except quite recently, through European influence,
there has been no science and no industrialism.
What will be the outcome of the
contact of this ancient civilization with the West? I am not
thinking of the political or economic, but of the effect on the
Chinese mental outlook. It is difficult to dissociate the two
questions altogether, because of course the cultural contact with
the West must be affected by the nature of the political and
economic contact. Nevertheless, I wish to consider the cultural
questions as far as I can in isolation.
There is, in China, a great
eagerness to acquire Western learning, not simply in order to
acquire national strength and be able to resist Western aggression,
but because a very large number of people consider learning a good
thing in itself. It is traditional in China to place a high value
on knowledge, but in old days the knowledge sought was only of the
classical literature. Nowadays it is generally realized that
Western knowledge is more useful. Many students go every year to
universities in Europe, and still more to America, to learn science
or economics or law or political theory. These men, when they
return to China, mostly become teachers or civil servants or
journalists or politicians. They are rapidly modernizing the
Chinese outlook, especially in the educated classes.
The traditional civilization of
China had become unprogressive, and has ceased to produce much of
values in the way of art and literature. This was not due, I think,
to any decadence in the race, but merely to lack of new material.
The influx of Western knowledge provides just the stimulus that was
needed. Chinese students are able and extraordinarily keen. Higher
education suffers from lack of funds and absence of libraries, but
does not suffer from any lack of the finest human material.
Although Chinese civilization has hitherto been deficient in
science, it never contained anything hostile to science, and
therefore the spread of scientific knowledge encounters no such
obstacles as the Church put in its way in Europe. I have no doubt
that if the Chinese could get a stable government and sufficient
funds, they would within the next thirty years, begin to produce
remarkable work in science. It is quite likely that they might
outstrip us, because they come with fresh zest and with all the
ardour of a renaissance. In fact, the enthusiasm for learning in
Young China reminds one constantly of the renaissance spirit in
fifteenth century Italy.
It is remarkable, as
distinguishing the Chinese from the Japanese, that the things they
wish to learn from us are not those that bring wealth or military
strength, but rather those that have either an ethical and social
value, or a purely intellectual interest. They are not by any means
uncritical of our civilization. Some of them told me that they were
less critical before 1914, but that the war made them think there
must be imperfection in the Western manner of life. The habit of
looking to the West for wisdom was, however, very strong, and some
of younger ones thought that Bolshevism could give what they were
looking for. That hope also must be suffering disappointment, and
before long they will realize that they must work out their own
salvation by means of a new synthesis. The Japanese adopted our
faults and kept their own, but it is not impossible to hope that
the Chinese will make the opposite selection, keeping their own
merits and adopting ours.
The distinctive merit of our
civilization, I should say, is the scientific method; the
distinctive merit of Chinese a just conception of the ends of life.
It is these two that one must hope to see gradually
uniting.
Lao-Tze describes the operation
of Tao as “production without possession, action without
self-assertion, development without domination.” I think one could
derive from these words a conception of the ends of life as
reflective Chinese see them and it must be admitted that they are
very different from ends which most white men set before
themselves. Possession, self-assertion, domination, are eagerly
sought, both nationally and individually. They have been erected
into a philosophy by Nietzsche, and Nietzche
给此博文留言吧！
有机会上热评榜！
攒金币兑换礼品！
好的评论会让人崇拜发布评论
