Abstract

This article attempts to self-meta-level, the general so-called "Chinese philosophy" make reflective thinking. "" Chinese philosophy "concept is not doubt about it? Chinese philosophy is really set up as an object of study it? Chinese philosophy, this is really the same thing?" Faced with these problems, first of all, this is self-positioning, mutatis mutandis, after the current Let the discussion of ethics and epistemology, that is located after the commencement of their own disciplines to think of philosophy but also of the discipline itself maturity. Secondly, the paper analyzes the "Chinese philosophy" and "Chinese philosophy and methodology of the" two-word description of its ambiguity: the former can be referred to as "philosophy in China" and "Chinese philosophy"; which can be referred to as "Chinese philosophy, research methodology" and "China philosophy of self-cultivation theory "or" work theory. " Thirdly, to Feng's work as a case study of the object, Feng discussed the "Chinese philosophy" concept, from the general philosophy of "philosophy in China," slip swing to the traditional teachings of the science of "Chinese philosophy." Further, the face of "Chinese philosophy" concept of this issue, this article lists four responses, and demonstrate their own difficulties and limitations. And for "research methods", the paper describes four "research program." Finally, the article pointed out: At this stage the study of Chinese philosophy, with a heavy 'History of Chinese Philosophy, "responsible for, or even that the study of Chinese philosophy, Chinese philosophy that studies the history of full or partial; However, knowledge of history or philosophy of knowledge is not rational knowledge. This paper attempts to offer a perspective on so-called Chinese philosophy from a meta-level reflective thinking. According to my and some others' observation of the present condition, Chinese philosophy scholars have been confronted with the hardest problem: what is Chinese philosophy, or, more fundamentally, is there the thing so called "Chinese philosophy" on earth? The paper first argues that the two terms, "Chinese philosophy" and "the methodology of Chinese philosophy", is ambiguous. Secondly, I take Fung Yu- lan's discourse on this issue into case study, and discuss some responses to the problem stated above. Thirdly, with respect to the current study of Chinese philosophy, four research programs are enumerated and depicted in this paper, the validity of each of which is yet to be examined respectively. At last I point out that the current study of Chinese philosophy is overweighted with studies of history of Chinese philosophy. There is a need to distinguish rational or philosophical knowledge from historical knowledge as Kant argued for.