Transcendence and Non-Naturalism in Early Chinese Thought

Description

Contemporary scholars of Chinese philosophy often presuppose that early China possessed a naturalistic worldview, devoid of any non-natural concepts, such as transcendence. Challenging this presupposition head-on, Joshua R. Brown and Alexus McLeod argue that non-naturalism and transcendence have a robust and significant place in early Chinese thought. This book reveals that non-naturalist positions can be found in early Chinese texts, in topics including conceptions of the divine, cosmogony, and apophatic philosophy. Moreover, by closely examining a range of early Chinese texts, and providing comparative readings of a number of Western texts and thinkers, the book offers a way of reading early Chinese Philosophy as consistent with the religious philosophy of the East and West, including the Abrahamic and the Brahmanistic religions. Co-written by a philosopher and theologian, this book draws out unique insights into early Chinese thought, highlighting in particular new ways to consider a range of Chinese concepts, including tian, dao, li, and you/wu.

Alexus McLeod is Associate Professor in Philosophy and Asian/Asian American Studies at the University of Connecticut, USA. He has published numerous books and articles in Chinese and Comparative Philosophy. Theories of Chinese Philosophy (Rowman and Littlefield International) has appeared in print, and Philosophy of the Ancient Maya: Lords of Time is forthcoming (Lexington Books). Joshua R. Brown is Assistant Professor in Theology at Mount St. Mary's University, USA. He has published several articles in the fields of comparative and systematic theologies, focusing on Confucian Philosophy in the Pre-Qin through Han periods. He has articles forthcoming in Theological Studies, The Heythrop Journal, Pro Ecclesia, and Nova et Vetera.

[T]he greatest value of Brown and McLeod's study consists in that they have made an extremely convincing case for comparative theologians, philosophers and interreligious scholars on Chinese thought to abandon the binary "the same or not" mindset identified at the beginning of this review. With a further respect towards the historical and traditional nature of classical Chinese thought, I believe their work can lead to even more fruitful conversations on how to harmonize classical Chinese thought and Western thought without making them uniform. * Journal of Interreligious Studies * Whether it is a discussion of the non-naturalism of dao or tian, Brown and McLeod demonstrate the intellectual value of comparative philosophy as one formidable approach to early Chinese philosophical writings. * China Review International * [What] Brown and McLeod try to accomplish in this book is to prove there are a number of texts of early Chinese thought ... which can be interpreted fruitfully by means of a conversation with Western thinkers rich on transcendence and non-naturalism ... I celebrate that, because of their sophisticated analyses of so many early Chinese texts, Brown and McLeod have accomplished their goal. * Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews * Challenging the popular scholastic view that early Chinese thinkers lacked non-naturalistic concepts, Brown and McLeod robustly demonstrate the importance and varied ways of non-naturalist and transcendental concepts in early China, presenting an invaluable contribution to the field of Chinese philosophy and comparative philosophy. * Jinhua Jia, Chair Professor of Humanities, Yangzhou University, China *