Page 14 - 2022(1) International Confusion Studies
P. 14

Int. Confucian Stud. 2022; 1(1): 7–25


           Roger T. Ames*
           Reflections on Lao Sze-Kwang and His
           Double-Structured “Intra-Cultural”

           Philosophy of Culture


           https://doi.org/10.1515/icos-2022-2003

           Abstract: In his own time, Lao Sze-Kwang formulated his own intra-cultural
           approach to the philosophy of culture that begins from the interdependence
           and organic nature of our cultural experience. In this article, I will address three
           questions: Why did Lao abandon his early reliance on the Hegelian model of
           philosophy of culture and formulate his own “two-structured” theory? Again,
           given Lao’s profound commitment and contribution to Chinese philosophy and its
           future directions, why is it not proper to describe him as a “Chinese philosopher”?
           And why is the much accomplished Lao Sze-Kwang not installed in the Chinese
           University of Hong Kong pantheon as yet one more of the great “New Confucian”
           philosophers that are associated with this institution?

           Keywords: intra-cultural, philosophy of culture, Hegel, new-confucian philoso-
           phers, double-structured philosophy of culture, “aspectual” language

           Lao Sze-Kwang (劳思光 1927–2012) was an “intra-cultural” philosopher. As the
           progeny of a distinguished and much accomplished family lineage, Lao in his
           early years had had the benefit of a traditional Chinese education that set the
           foundation for his continuing studies. He attended Peking University and then
           Taiwan University for his studies in philosophy. Beyond this formal training, he
           as a consummate teacher over a long lifetime continued to pursue his prodigious
           intellectual intimacy with both the Western and Chinese philosophical canons.
           He was thus philosophically ambidextrous, as comfortable with Confucius as he
           was with Kant. And through an assiduous personal discipline, his singular
           contribution to the best kind of “intra-cultural” or “world philosophy” has made
           him one of most distinguished philosophers of culture in our times.


           Article note: This article was first published in Chinese in Issue 1, Volume 1 of International Studies
           on Confucianism (I国际儒学J) in 2021. Some updates and adaptation have been made for this
           English version.

           *Corresponding author: Roger T. Ames, Department of Philosophy, Peking University, Beijing,
           China. E-mail: rtames@hawaii.edu

             Open Access. © 2022 the author(s), published by De Gruyter.  This work is licensed under
           the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19