文章内容

CHALLENGE AND RESPONSE:Bertrand Russell on “The Outlook of China”Revisited-A Chinese Solution to the Western Puzzle

George C. H. Sun,James D. Kidd

　　〔提要〕：本文摘自十五年前完成的一長篇研究論文，題目是《羅素重新評價中國文化》。在廣大西方讀者的眼裡，榮獲1950年諾貝爾文學獎的羅素，不論在科學、數學、符號邏輯學還是分析哲學領域，都是了不起的巨人。然而他在比較哲學，特別是中西比較哲學方面所做的貢獻卻鮮為人知。用孫中山的話來說，“在衆多的西方學者中，只有像羅素和杜威那樣偉大的哲學家，才真正同情了解中國、她的人民和她的文化。”
　　It is notoriously well known that the modern condition of China is so deplorably sad that it is often spoken of as “yi-chiung er-pai,” as found to be in the state of “a sheer poverty and twofold blankness.” The present writers venture to take the expression “twofold blankness” in the sense of “twofold blindness” in knowledge, that is, culturally speaking, without being able to “know thyself” and to “know the others.” Here lies the raison d’~^etre of comparative studies in philosophy and culture; comparison is for discovery.
　　Russell’s early work, The Problem of China (1922), testifies to this claim as it provides us with the best case study: highly suggestive, thought-provocative, and full of insight:Of particular relevance to our purpose are those salient points hightlighted in the course of presentation where attempts have been made (1) to begin with a brief survey of Russell’s general observation on the problem of China as primarily and fundamentally a cultural problem which can not be solved on the economical and political leveis alone (for the cultural questions are the most important both for China and for the whole world); (2) to review critically his account of Chinese civilization in contrast to the Western, by doing maximum justice to both his strength and limitations as critic, such as his partial, inadequate and even superficial views on Confucianism and Buddhism alike; (3)to lay greater emphasis on his most insightful and sympathetic appreciation of the Taoist wisdom of life by reference to (a) pacificism and a nti-militarism, (b), non - interference and opposition to power litics, (c)〔Fabian〕 socialista, (d)large measure of tolerance in the spirit of compassion, (e)contemplative wisdom to see the passing events under the aspect of eternity; and, finally, (4)to recapitulate his sagacious advice as to what China should become in light of a broader context as provided by contemporary Chinese thinkers.The last point deserves serious considerations, especially for all Chinese reformers to come,because it lays out the proper role China is going to play, one “for which she is fitted,” deserving therefore “a foremost place in the esteem of every lover of mankind.” Thus, while discussing the problem of China he has located the problem of the whole world, too, as the source of trouble today;and in studying Taoist philosophy he has found a “way - out” both for China and for mankind as well. The clue is suggested in Laotzu’s aphorism “Creation without possession; action without self - assertion; development without domination.” In these few words one shall be able to see a “just conception of the ends of life, both individually and nationally.” Hence, our subtitle - “a Chinese solution to the Western puzzle.”
　　Fina]ly, all winds up in an “Outlook for China” in three chief requisites: (1)the establishment of a strong and orderly government; (2)industrial development under Chinese control; and(3) spread of education for the purpose of liberal democracy. Or, to put it differently, China’s way of salvation consists in (1) preserving the virtues of her culture; (2)combining it with Western science;and(3) abstaining from war and devoting to the cause of world peace. For the distinctive merit of the Western civilization, he argues, is the scientific method while the distinctive merit of the Chinese, is the just conception of the ends of life. And it is these two that one must hope to see gradually uniting. The same problem that both China and the world face is the question how to combine industrialism with a humane way of life or, if one so wishes, how to combine technologies with the humanities. For all these, he strongly urges, China does not demand Western philosophy of life - which is pugnacious and aggressive　in character.

Prologue What Sort of Future Can We Expeot?

　　For nearly a wholy century mankind has been living under the shadow of the World Wars. Historians like Arnold Toynbee and philosophers like Bertrand Russell have both cautioned us: Beware of the Middle East! Even early in the 50’s Russell had already thus warned against the possible immediate precipitating causes for global destruction: “Perhaps it will be a dispute about Persian oil, perhaps a disagreement as to Chinese trade perhaps a quarrel between Jews and Mohammedans for control of Palestine.”⁽¹⁾As a modern writer welt obesrves on the Persian Gulf War early this year (1991):
　　…U. S. and allied forces are bombing Iraq and Kuwait. .. In the absence of the striving for an authentic understanding of “the other” the only interaction that will result is violence in one form or another... Philosophy may be viewed by the non-philosopher as something esoteric, divorced from the realities of global politics and world diplomacy, but our work in comparative, cross - cultural philosophy has an important contribution to make towards the future well being of our planet. In the absence of the quest for authentic understanding cross cultures what sort of future can we expect?⁽²⁾
　　The current Middle East Crisis, though no more than a tip of the iceberg of the whole issue, is a teaching lesson alarming enough for all of us today livng as members of the human family on this tiny planet known as “the Earth.” Any failure on our part, whether due to the lack of ability or good will, to solve the human problems peacefully and wisely is, in the words of the Pope, “a grave defeat for all mankind!”“Weapons cannot solve all the problems; they only create more new problems!” Under such circumstances, naturally we are obliged to “reflect critically upon what we are actually doing in our world,” i. e., “to philosophize,”⁽³⁾ - -nay, to philosophize comparatively!

Ⅰ. Introduotion:The Middle - Heart Crisis

　　We have often heard it said that the causes and motivations of war are of various kinds, such as breed, creed, and greed, all leading to bleed. But we wish to point out, first and foremost, that the source of trouble is not to be located here or there, geographically, in the outside world; rather, they have their psychological root deep in the innermost of human nature. The Middle - East Crisis, if thought out, is a Middle - Heart Crisis! With both Freud and Einstein we agree that all wars come from the human mind. To the question “Why War?” the answer they give is even more chilly than the question itelf: “Why Not?” In as much as we remain in the status quo of human nature, with the same mind ser inhered from time immemorial, wars are inevitable - and hopelessly. “We are a combative race”, so we are told; as Hermann Keyserling put it, “We Westerners are essentially fighters,” whose motto is “You or I.”⁽⁴⁾ No you, therefore only I;hence, all winding up me - ism.
　　Next, we wish to stress that such a pugnacious, aggressive, war - like mentality has a long story in the West:It has been bred in a long tradition of moral self - righteousness, religious intolerance and theological exclusiveness,⁽⁵⁾ a tradition that has continued for over four thousand years from the ancient down to the present times - one that can be traced at least back to the days of Abraham, father of Ishmael and Isaac who, as half brothers to one another, had each become the ancestor of the Arabs and Jews, respectively.⁽⁶⁾ Arnold Toynbee even spoke of the suicidalness of militarism:“Militarism has been by far the commonest cause for the breakdown of civilizations during the last four or tive millenia which have witnessed the score or so of breakdowns that are on record up to the present date.” Or, to put it in the formula of the Greek tragedy, “Pride goes before the fall” 〔kóros - hubrid - áte〕 ⁽⁷⁾ Russell in his article, “Can Religion Cure Our Troubles? a dmitted frankly, “That the world is in a bad way is undeniable, but there is not the faintest reason in history to suppose that Christianity offers a way out. ... What the world needs is reasonableness, tolerance, and a realization of the interdependence of the parts of the human family.”⁽⁸⁾ Virtues such as these -- essentially Chinese in motif--constitute what he calls a “positive ethics” in contradistinction to the “negative ethics” in the old sense:The latter is based on the doctrine of sin further turned into the doctrine of cruelty by vindictive punishment;the former is based on the “encouragement and opportunity for all the impulses that are creative and expansive.” Such a new outlook, such a new way of thinking and feeling makes possible a new way of life, enabling us to view the so called warrior’s morto of “You or I” as a bad habit in the mode of thought known as the fallacy of vicious bifurcation;a false bel ief in economics known as economical nationalism; a poor strategy in p olitics or policy-making known as segregationalism or racialism; in one word, as a colossal example of stupidism or, in Sanskrit, avidya as the root of evil. The enlightened ethical outlook is based on a simple but great conviction as the guiding principle for a more humane way of life, both interpersonally and internationally, an insight whose validity the heart can spontaneously perceive:Discard the false belief in bad economics, that one’s gain is based on other men’s loss; and the false belief in wrong psychology and ethics that one’s happiness is based on other men’s suffering. Instead, the entightened ethical outlook teaches: “That it is not by making others suffer that we shall achieve our own happiness; but that happiness and the means to happiness depend upon harmony with other men.” Thus, Russell concludes, “lf men could think and feel in this way, not only their personal problems, but all the problems of world politics, even the most abstruse and difficult, would melt away.”⁽⁹⁾ But, regrettably, all this still remains but a big “if!” Isn’t he here simply echoing Laot zu’s dictum as cited above or elsewhere?!
　　The more one lives for others,
　　The more rich one is in his worth;
　　The more one gives to others,
　　The more plentiful one is on this earth.⁽¹⁰⁾

Ⅰ. The Problem of China Revisited

　　1. Cultural Perspective
　　To most modern readers, Bertrand Russell (1872-1969), Nobel Laureate for Literature in 1950, is best known as an outstanding figure in mathematics, symbolic logic, sciences, analytic philosophy as well as a leading voice in Pacifist Movement. Few have been able to fully appreciate him as a comparative philosopher of culture;but, in the words of Sun Yat-sen, he is fully recognized;: “Among the Westerners, only great philosphers such as Bertrand Russell and John Dewey have truly sympathetic understanding of China, her people and her culture,” On the other hand, Russell spoke highly of Sun, too, though they had never met with each other:

　　The number of men who determine the character of an age is small. The important men in the age that ended about 1930 are Edison, Rockefeller, Lenin and Sun Yat-sen. With the exception of Sun Yat-sen, these were men devoid of culture, contemptuous of the past, self-confident, and ruthless.⁽¹¹⁾
　　What a remarkable coincidence in their mutuai admiration, by meeting each other on the　ground of culture! ⁽¹²⁾ Especially for Sun as a statesman, no higher tribute is conceivable! It is chiefly from such a cultural perspective that Russell approached the problem of China “much essa political entity than a civilization—the only one that has survived from ancienttimes.”⁽¹³⁾
　　Much has been said about “China” and “things Chinese” since the beginnng of this century. To mention a few：Bertrand Russel, The Problem of China(1922); Hermann Keyserling, The Travei Diary of a Philosopher (1925), Creative Understanding (1929); F.S.C. Northrop, The Meeting of East and West (1967). Russell’s work, based on his one year’s experience in China (1920-21), was published in 1922 as his report to the West about this old civilization as be saw it, and the proper role China was expected to play in the future.
　　As a comparative philosopher, Russell may not have the metaphysicial subtlty of Keyserling, the methodological neatness of Northrop, and the “spiritual depth” of Alfred North Whitehead; but his book on China has a unique charm of its own: presented in his characteristically lucid, brief, and witty style, it is highly suggestive and full of insights. Even reread today, nearly seventy years after its first appeara, nce, it still remains a rare classic, unsurpassed, in the field of China studies. Unlike most works by those so called “China hands” or “China watchers” in the West whose interests are primarily or solely political, economical, or journalistic. The Problem of China is a book written with an unusual perspicuity, profound sympathy, anda long range perspective into the the cultural heritage of Chinese civilization, its future and that of the whole world. Thus, much of what has been said therein remains unchallenged, especially those non-topical parts, and many of his insightful prophecies abou t the destiny of China turn out to be well justified. For example, his pessimistic view of the two alternatives China would be forced to take: militarism and/ or communism, were the the Westem powers not to relieve their pressure on her. “I love the Chinese.” he said later in 1951, “But it is obvious that the resistance to hostile militarism must destroy much of what is best in their civilization. They seem to have no alternative except to be conquered or to adopt many of the vices of their enemies.” Further he remarked in 1956, “There was much-that I found admirable in the Chinese tradition, but it was obvious that none of this could súrvive the onslaughts by Westem and Japanese rapacity.” “I fully expect to see China transformed into a modem industrial state as fierce and militaristic as the powers that was compelled to resist. I expected that in due course there would be in the world only first class Powers --America, Russia and China--and that the new China would possess none of the merits of the　old. These expections (in 1920)are now being fulfilled.”⁽¹⁴⁾--For better or for worse, events tend to favor his predictions.

Ⅱ. Chinese and Western Civilization Contrasted

　　1. The Make -up of Chinese and Western Mentality
　　The three fundamentai elements that account for the mentality of the West, in Russell’s analysis, are found to be (1) Greek culture, (2)Jewish religion and ethics, and (3) modern industrialism:
　　Westem 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 remain singularly separate 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 fervor, 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 scientific races. We derive also the empirical method, by which all real knowledge has been acquired. These elements, I think, account for most of our mentality. None of these three elements has had any appreciable part in the devetopment of Chin a. ⁽¹⁵⁾
　　On the other hand, similarly, the three elements that make up the Chinese mentality are designated as (1) Confucianism, (2) Taoism, and (3) Buddhism:

　　I must confess that I am unable to appreciate the merits of Confucius. His writings are largely occupied withy trivial points of etiquette, and his main concern is to teach people how to behave correctly on various occasions...
　　His system, as developed by his followers, is one of pure ethics, without religious dogmas; 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....
　　There is one, and only one, important foreign element in the traditional civilization of China, and that is Buddhism. ⁽¹⁶⁾

　　Here we notice at once both Russell’s strength and his timits as a critic on cross cultures. Temperamentally, it is true, he was “unable to appreciate the merits of Confucius,” the sage of China who, recently elected as the topmost of the greatest men of world history, is far more than a “master of ceremony” or a “social genius”;and his treatment of Buddhism as cited here is far too sketchy, though he fully recognized the toterant outlook of both Confucianism and Buddhism, saying “Of all religions of history, I prefer Buddhism, especially in its earliest forms, because it has had the smallest element of persecution.”⁽¹⁷⁾

　　2. Superior Peroeption of Taoism
　　It is only of Taoism, nevertheless, that he had a “superior perception”; he was at his best in criticizing Western civilization from the Taoist point of view：

　　The oldest known Chinese sage is Laotzu, the founder of Taoism . . . Laotzu describes the operation of Tao as “creation 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 the reflective Chinese see them, and it must be adnitted that they are very different from the ends which the white men have set before themselves. Possession, self-assertion, dominaton, are eagerly sought, both nationally and individually....
　　Comparing the civilzation 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....
　　What will be the outcome of the contact of this ancient civilization with the West.⁽¹⁸⁾

　　Indeed, the last question is of crucial importante both for China and for the whole world. Russell urged that China should by no means follow the example of Japan:
　　The Japanese adopted our faults and keep their own, but it is possible 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 the Chinese is a just conception of the ends of life. It is these two that one must hope to see gradually uniting. ⁽¹⁹⁾

　　3. China and Ancient Greece
　　As cited above, China and ancient Greece have great deal in common so far as their cultural achievements are concerned: For example, (1)both take philosophy and art as the determainative factors in their cultural traditions; (2) both represent knowledge of culture; and (3)both love beauty, harmony, and wisdom as exhibited especially in the virtue of fiexibility. To illustrate the first observation we may quote the late Professor Thomé H. Fan：
　　Each culture has its own determinative factor. For instante, in Hebraic and Islamic cultures, religion decides everything;all features other than religious life will be of less importante. In the contemporary European and American branches of world-culture, seience is the predominant factor, and everythinng has to fit in with science. So far as I know, it is only the Chinese and Greek cultures which, alike, find their master-key in philosophy and art. India in classical antiquity, I should add, would pursue the madhymapratipad --the middle path--in the matter of culture.⁽²⁰⁾

　　Max Scheler, the late German philosopher of comparative culture, has distinguished human culture into three types corresponding to three types of knowledge, maintaining that both Indiah and judeo-Christian cultures represent knowledge of salvation; Chinese and Greek cultures, knowledge of culture; and modem Western culture, knowledge of work and technology.⁽²¹⁾
　　Moreover, just as the determinative factors in the Chinese and Greek traditions are philosophy and art, and both are the standard bearers for knowledge of culture, it follows that their cultural ideais, their ways of life, and their value-orientations are superbly distinguished by the love of wisdom, of beauty, andof harmony (though with a difference in inclination towards the dynamic or static mode of harmony, respectively). For the Greeks, as for the Chinese, wisdom is a matter of Pericles in his famous Funeral Oration, “the happy and gracious flexibility,” or “the happy and right mean,” stands for a quality “by which Athens is eminently representative of what is called Heilenism.” This quality is concretely best exemplified in (1) lucidity of thought; (2) clearness and propriety of language; (3) freedom from prejudice and freedom from stiffness; (4) openness of mind; and (5) amiability of manners.⁽²²⁾

Ⅲ.Summary & Conolusion:New Hope

　　Surely, Russeli’s admiration of Laotzu and the Taoist philosophy of life is not without good reason. He even cited the sublimely simple and terse aphorism “Creation without possession, action without seif-assertion, development without domination” on the front page of his Roads to Freedom (1918), and adopted Creative Impulse as the master principle of all his socio-po-liticai writings from Principles od Social Reconstruction (1916) to New Hopes for a Changing World (1952)⁽²³⁾
　　Laotzu’s work abounds in perennial themes of great relevance to our world today, such as, to mention a few:(1)pacifism and anti-militarism; (2)non-interference; (3)liberal /democratic socialism; (4)tolerant spirit and outlook; and (5)contemplative wisdom 〔whereby we are enabled to view the passing events sub species eternitatis 〕. But, owing to the space limit of this short paper, we are unable to go into the details of discussion on any of them here.⁽²⁴⁾
　　“I set for China to seek a new hope.” thus, Russell stated in The Problem of China. What constitutes such a new hope?
　　I believe that, if the Chinese are left free to assimilate what they want of our civilization, and to reject what strike them as bad, they will be able to achieve an organic growth from their tradition, and to produce a very splendid result, combining our merits with theirs.
　　What is bad in the West --its brutality, its restlessness, its readiness to oppress the weak, its preoccupation with purely material aims--they see to be bad, and not wish to adopt .
　　The Chinese... do not wish to construct a civilizaion just like ours;and it is precisely in this that the best hope lies. If they are not goaded into militarism, they may produce a genuinely new civilization, better than any that we in the West have been able to create.⁽²⁵⁾
　　He repeatedly emphasized, “the cultural questions are the most important, both for China and for mankind.” He made many far-sighted observations in “The Outlook for China.” To sum up: The Young China should aim at (1)the establishment of an orderly govemment; (2)industrial development under Chinese control; and (3)the spread of education under Chinese direc-tion for the purpose of creating a new generation of public-spirited citizens, inspired by an enlightend patriotism, who can use and appreciate Western knowledge without being the slaves of Westem follies, and who are neither de-nationaled, nor have a slavish attitude towards Western civilization. China’s way of salvation consists in (1)preserving the virtues of her traditional culture; (2) combining it with Western science;and (3) abstaining from war and devoting to the cause of world peace. For all these, the Chinese do not demand the adoption of the Western philosophy of life. Why? The reason is not far to seek:

　　Our Western civilization is built upon assumptions which, to a psychologist, are rationalizing of excessive energy. Our industrialism, our militarism, our love of progress our missionary zeal, our imperialism, our passion for dominating and organizing, all spring from a superflux of the itch for activity. The creed for efficiency for its own sake, without regard for the ends to which it is directed, has become somewhat discredited in Europe since the war, which would have never taken place if the Western nations had been more indolent. But in America this creed is still almost universally accepted; so it is in Japan....
　　The Great War 〔World War I〕 showed that something is wrong with our civilization; experience of Russia and China has made me believe that those countries can help to show us what it is that is wrong. The Chinese have discovered, and have practiced for many centuries, a way of life which, if it could be adopted by all the world, would make all the world happy. We Europeans have not. Our way of life demand strife, exploitation, restless change, discontent and destruction. Efficiency directed to destruction can only end in annihilation, and it is to this consummation that our civilization is tending, if it cannot learn some of that wisdom for which it despises the East.
　　The Chinese are a great nation, incapable of permanent suppression by foreigners. They will not consent to adopt our vices in order to acquire military strength; but they are willing to adopt our virtues in order to advance in wisdom. I think they are the only peopie in the world who quite genuinely believe that wisdom is more precious than rubies. That is why the West regards them as uncivilized.
　　When I went to China, I went to teach;but every day that I stayed I thought less of what I had to teach them and more of what I had to learn from them.... I wish I could hope that China, in return for our scientific knowledge, may, give us something of her large tolerance and contemplative peace of mind.⁽²⁶⁾

Appendix

　　(1)“Culture”-- Notice that this terms is extremely multiguous. It can be used in any of the following senses: (1)generally, as interchangeable with “civilization”; (2) specifically, as op-posed to “civilization” as its destiny. Every kultur has its period of flowering called “culture” and its phase of decade called “civilization”(Oswald Spengler); (3)as an anthropological concept ser in contrast to paideia 〔ideals of culture〕and areté〔excellence〕as an axiological concept designating “a deliberately pursued value or type” (Werner Jaeger); (4)as “education” in the widest sense as “the growth and cultivation of one’s spiritual personality,” attainable through profundity, not through expansion (Hermann Keyserling). Cf. Oswald Spengler, The Decline of the West, Werner Jaeger, paideia, especially Vol. I Hermann Keyserling, The Travel Diary of a Philosophy, especially Vol. II, etc.
　　(2)“Wisdom”-- As to the question “What is wisdom?” I am afraid no human being is wise enough to provide any perfectly satisfactory answer. Most likely, the more one thinks about it, the more confused one will be, in a manner reminiscent of St. Augustine who, when pressd for a definition of “Time,” said, “If you don’ask, I know; If you ask, I don’t.” For it is ah open concept, in that no exhaustive list can be provided for both its necessary and sufficient conditions as is the case with defining “water” in terms “H₂O.” Roughly speaking says Russell, wisdom can be understood as “the harmonious working of knowing, willing and feeling,” --a tentative definition, not free from the tincture of the 19th century faculty-psychology. In his essay “Knowledge and Wisdom,” however, the question takes on a different form: Instead of asking “What is, or what is meant by, wisdom?” let us ask, “What makes wisdom?” By means of some such constituents or ingredients, we then be able to promot e our wisdom. In his analysis wisdom is seen to be composed of eight constituents: (1) a sense of proportion 〔including the proper sense of relevance, importance and priority〕; (2) a comprehensive vision; (3)an awareness of the ends of life; (4)intellect combined with feeling; (5)impartiality or fair-mindedness in attitude; (6)love, not hatred; (7) a pacifist temper of mind 〔not war -like or belligerent〕; and (8) a cosmopolitan outlook of life as the citizens of the world 〔not narrow, bigot nationalism, nor aggressive, offensive patriotism〕. Similarly, we may formulate the Chinese view of wisdom as composed of (1) creativeness; (2) humaneness; (3)flexibility and timeliness; (4)intellect and feeling perfectly blended; (5) equilibrium and harmony; (6)authenticity and intelligence as intercomplementary 〔for mutuai enrichment and reinforcement〕; (7) cate and concern; and (8)practice or, so to speak, experientialism. Though the Indians are, as a rule, distrustful of any sort of verbal formulation of the pr ofound experience of wisdom of life, they are nevertheless so remarkably insightful into the nature of bodhi, or enlightenment, as consisting precisely inthe unity karūna and prajnā, that is, compassion and intelligence.
　　(1)Russell, Unpopular Essays (NewYork: Simon and Schuster, 1950),p. 135.
　　(2)Jeffrey R. Timm, “Message from the Editor,” SACP Forum, Society for Asian and Comparative Philosophy, No.16. Spring 1991,2. All the boldfaced in the text are, as a rule, added by the author.
　　(3)Josiah Royce, Spirit of Modern Philosophy (New York:Houghton, Mifflin, & Co., 1896), p. 1.
　　(4)Hermann Keyserling. The Travei Diary of a Philosopher, tr. J. Holroyd Reece (New York:Harcourt Brace and Co., 1925), Vol. II, p. 303.
　　(5)Cf Moses’ first Commandments in “The Bible:Thou shalt have no other gods before me;”“for I thy Lord am a Jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generaton of them that bate me;and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commancdnents.” Cf. Russell, New Hopes for a Changing World(London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1952), pp. 116- 9.
　　(6)Cf. The Bible, especially “Genesis,”“Joshua,“and book of Revelation,” etc.
　　(7)Cf Arnold Toynbee, A Study of History, Abridgement of Volumes I - VI by D.C. Sommervell (New York and　London:Oxford University Press, 1947), P. 190, pp. 336-337.
　　(8)Cf. Russell, Why I Am Not a Christian, selectcd in Robert E. Ehner and Lester E. Denonn, eda., Thc Basic Writings of Bertrand Russell(New York: Simon and Schuster, 1956), p. 604.
　　(9)Russell, “Current Perplexitics,” Ibid., p. 698.
　　(10)Cf. Laotzu, The Way and Its Power, Chapters 2, 10,51,81;tr. by the author.
　　(11)Cf Ou Tsiun-Chen, Selected Essays on Education and Culture (Taipei:The Commercial Pubishing Co., Ltd., 1972), p. 450;Bertrand Russell, The Scientific Outlook ((London: George Allen & Unwin, 1931), p. 276;The Autobiography of 8ertrand Russell (Boston: An Atlantic Monthly Press Book, 1968), II,p. 180, where the author expressed his “lasting regret” for having missed the opportunity of meeting with Dr.Sun while they were both in Shanghai, China, 1921. As to his versatility and manysideness as writer and thinker, we have learned from his own account that, early in his student days (1894-98)at Cambridge, he had already planned to write “a series of books in the philosophy of science, growing gradually more concrete”passing from mathematics to biology, and also to write “a series of books on social and political questions, growing gradually more abstract.”“At last I would achieve a Hegelian synthesis in an encyclopaedic work dealing equally with theory and practice.” Cf. “My Mental Development” in　Egner and Denonn, eds., op. cit., p.43.
　　(12)Notice that the term “culture” is extremely multiguous. For further reference, see Appendix (l)at the end of this paper.
　　(13)Russell, Tbe Problem, p. 208. Here, if other traditions such as India and Israel are omitted in this account, it is because the book was wirtten in 1922 when India was still subject to the British colonialism and Israel as a new country was yet to be seen.
　　(14)Cf. Russell, “My Mental Develolpment,” in Egner and Denonn, eds., op cit., p. 48; Russell, Portraits form Memory (London:George Allen & Unwin, Ltd. 956), p. 38.
　　(15)Russell, The Problem of China, p. 186.
　　(16)Ibid., p. 189-90. Here is saying “Buddhism is the one, and only one, important foreign element in the traditional civilization of China, “Russell seems to have over -simp[ified the case for, as a matter of the historical fact, both Nestorianism and Mohammedanism were introduced into China early in the 7th century during the great Tang Dynasty;the Muslims have formed one of the five major races of the Chinese nation:Christianity was introduced into China no later than the Ming Dynasty during the 15th to the 17th centuries. Unfortuntely, the intellectual tie between China and the modern West was cut off in the early 18th century by Emperor Yung Cheng of the Ch’ing Dynasty, chiefly out of political motivation;from then onwards China’s door was closed to the West until the Opium War (1840-42)which marks the beginning ofa series of tragedies in her history of recent times.
　　(17)Cf. Russell, “What is an Agnostic?’in Egner Denonn, eds., op.cit.,p.584.
　　(18)Ibid.,p. 192.
　　(19)Ibid., p. 194.
　　(20)Cf. Thomé H. Fang, “Poetry and Life,” Address to the Second Congress of Poets, Taipei, Republic of China;included in Fang, Creativity in Man and Nature (Taipei:Linking Pub[ishing Co., Ltd., 1980),p. 128
　　(21)Cf. Max Scheler, Philosophical Perspectives (Boston:Beacon Press, 1958), p.43
　　(22)Cf. Mattchew Arnold, Mixed Essays (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1908), pp. 413-6. For further clarifieation of the eoneept “wisdom,” see Appendix (2) at the end of this paper.
　　(23)Laotzu’s little work, The Way and Its Power, is composed of roughly 5000 Chinese characters, perhaps the world’s shortest, yet the most translated, of all philosophical classics, Up to the late 80’s, more than three hundres translations in a variety of Western languages have been available. According to Karl Japsers, “In a single short chapter all four elements (of metaphysics, cosmogony, ethies and politics) ean appearat once.”See The Great Philosophers, tr. by Hannah Arendt (New York: A Harvest Book, 1966), vol. Ⅱ, p. 88. For textual scholarship we recommend Professor Yen Ling-fung’s new version (Taipei: Chinese Culture Publishing Inc., 1954, 1965), Vols. Ⅰ & Ⅱ; for in-depth treatment and insightful interpretation we recommend Professor Thomé H. Fang’s Chinese Philosophy:Its Spirit and Its Development (Taipei:Linking Publishing Co. Ltd., 1981), pp. 119-128, wherein Laotzu’s system is giv-en a fourfold construction:ontologically, cosmogenetically, phenomenologically and eharaeterologieal ly.
　　(24)For further reference, Cf. George Sun, Quo Vadis, Sinica? --Bertrand Russell on Chinese Civilization Reappraised, pp. 104-133.
　　(25)Russell. The Problem of China, p. 13;p. 208.
　　(26)Ibid., pp. 16-7., p. 198;p. 225.