Page 153 - 2022(1) International Confusion Studies

146 M. Li

2
revival” (Guo & Liao, 2018) in recent years has at least three elements to it. Firstly,
Confucianism has proved that it is no longer a “relic” of the past (Levenson, 1968)
but is in fact dynamic. Secondly, it has been associated with China’s national
rejuvenation; it is a cultural icon and a by-word for national identity. Thirdly,
research into Confucianism has seen stellar results in numerous areas, especially
in its theoretical construct of Confucianism in the context of reality. This amply
demonstrates that the study of Confucian thought has undergone a qualitative
change since its recent “resurrection.” Hitherto, the subject was usually integrated
into Chinese philosophy and individual study. Seen in the context of today’s world,
however, these new changes necessitate an urgent re-examination of how and
what aspects of Confucianism should be researched.
Post-2000, Confucianism has undergone a resurrection; its revival has seen it
termed a “wandering soul.” Though Confucian thought as an object of study and
Confucianism as an integral part of modern humanities research are difficult to
distinguish, at least now they have been separated, unlike the last century.
As far as the reconstruction of the Confucian tradition is concerned, in today’s
world, it is impossible to avoid the problems posed by modernization, and the
changes that have taken place through that evolution. Both society and culture, as
well as modern academic research—including research into Confucianism, have
undergone fundamental shifts, compared to centuries earlier. Whether Confu-
cianism, which was integrated into the fabric of ancient Chinese society and its
institutions, is still able to transcend the boundaries of disciplines and specialties
and “permeate” all societal, institutional and legislative aspects of life (Zhang,
2003), and whether the ideas and concepts of China’s classical age can be “directly
adapted” legitimately to contemporary society, pose inevitable debates for scholars.
This article considers these questions on the basis of reviewing Confucianism
and the “Confucian revival” in the context of the recent history of scholarly study
and of intellectual thought.

10 entries per year and a total of 50 for the five years) jointly published by the Journal of Literature,
History & Philosophy (《文史哲》 and China Reading Weekly (《中华读书报》), there are 10 entries
)
directly related to Confucianism. The launch of National Social Science Foundation of China
projects in recent years can also illustrate the unprecedented flourishing of Confucianism. Ac-
cording to statistics, from 1991 to 2009, there were 200 Confucianism research projects funded by
the National Social Science Foundation of China, accounting for 30% of the total number of
projects; and from 2010 to 2015, 464 Confucianism research projects were launched, accounting for
70% of the total number of projects.
2 Guo Qiyong (郭齐勇), a renowned scholar of research into Confucianism, summarized it by saying,
“So far, the evolution of Confucianism in the 20th century and its development over the four decades
since the introduction of political reforms following the adoption of China’s reform and opening up
policy, undoubtedly shows a comprehensive movement towards a revival in Confucian thought.”