User:Mscarles

Wikipedia Preparatory Assignment

Xiong Shili

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xiong_Shili

The Wikipedia page on Xiong Shili was the first I decided to look at for this assignment, because I'm interested in his ideas, particularly his shift from Yogacara philosophy towards his own variety of New-Confucianism. The page is rather small, and gives a brief and succinct description of his life, (i.e. born and died, his major positions at Peking University, Nanjing University, and Tianjin Nankai High School. The entry has one major paragraph, relating to the period of his life in the 1920s where the Chancellor of Peking University was looking for someone to teach Buddhist Logic and Yogacara philosophy in the Philosophy Department of Peking University. Upon being invited to Peking University, Xiong destroyed his draft of "An Outline of Consciousness-only" and presented his major work, "A New Treatise on Conciousness-only". This is the work wherein he criticized the old Yogacara Masters and their theory of seeds and the eight conciousnesses. The entry goes on to list his major works and an outline of his life. This entry could be vastly improved by adding the dates to the publication of his major works, which is missing from the page, as well as creating pages for any of these works. None of them have a hyperlink to another article. This is an area where we might be able to add as a class, although it would take some advanced knowledge of his writings. Furthermore, the outline of his life trajectory has no other links to it either; while understandable because he isn't vastly famous in the U.S., I'm curious to know whether the page on him in Chinese is much more full. From our reading from Makeham we are able to add the dates upon which he published some of his works- like 'A General Account of Yogacara Learning' (1923), and Treatise on Yogacara (1930). These specific writings aren't even mentioned on his page, although it's unclear to me whether they're listed as another title on this page.

Liberalism in China

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism_in_China

The page on Liberalism in China has a header on it that asks for additional citations for verification, and can be improved by adding citations to reliable sources. There is a definite possibility here for some major improvements by our class. The article itself offers a vague history of which philosophers influenced the introduction of Liberalism into China, including John Stuart Mill, Immanuel Kant, and Jean-Jaques Rousseau. The article offers a historical account of the ascendence of Liberalism in China, without offering a definition as to what that might stand for until the middle of the article. The tenets that the page mentions are intellectual freedom, the separation of powers, civil society, and the rule of law. I think it would be useful to move these concepts up to the top of the page in a short summarizing paragraph rather than placing them halfway down the page. Furthermore, the article refers to it as the "forlorn 'third force,' able to only admonish authoritarian regimes of the Left and Right," which aren't clearly defined in this article. I think it would also be helpful if this entry were divided up into sections, particularly labeling the definition of Liberalism in China as one part, and the historical trajectory of liberalism in another. The article mentions a few Chinese philosophers associated with liberalism, but I was surprised to see no mention of Luo Longji and his concepts of innate human rights that the state must recognize for the greatest social good for all, not just the intellectuals.

Nishi Amane

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nishi_Amane

Seeing as our topic for this entire semester is Modern Chinese Philosophy, I thought it would be a good idea to take a look at the Wikipedia page for Nishi Amane. As one of the preeminent philosophers who helped to introduce Western Philosophy into mainstream Japanese education, and therefore served as a foundational force in Chinese philosophy as well. The page has a small history of his life, which isn't particularly fleshed out, but that's not where this page would relate to Chinese Philosophy necessarily. Rather, it is interesting to note that the section on his 'Legacy' contains next to nothing, although it claims he is the father of Western Philosophy in Japan. According to the reading we looked at by Barry B. Steben, Nishi Amane was in fact much more influential than this page suggests. As the creator of the word zhexue and author of "A New Discourse on the Unity of the Hundred Teachings," I would like to see more on his philosophies themselves on this page, rather than just his self-history. From this page, it would be possible to create an entirely new section on his definitions of civilization, human happiness, and the ties running throughout his work to the Confucian tradition.

Opportunities and Challenges

In writing for Wikipedia about a complex topic like Chinese philosophy, I think that it will be difficult to embed links to all of the appropriate sources and pages that contain similar information. For example, I'm sure there is more information on Wikipedia 'somewhere' pertaining to Xiong Shili, Liberalism in China, and Nishi Amane, but the process making that information searchable through links will be a challenge. There is definitely a feeling of responsibility towards the other users of Wikipedia and towards the topics we'll be covering in general; the organized and professional-looking layout of Wikipedia can serve as a disguise for something entirely false, or at the very least, misinformed. I hope that with our limited knowledge from a few primary sources we'll be able to do the topics justice. In writing a standard encyclopedia entry, I would imagine that there is a formula for the way things are covered, and a standardized group of people whose careers are encyclopedia-writing. In Wikipedia, the beauty (and the beast) of it is its open-format. There could be a scholar behind those links or a 7th grade student. A standard philosophical or intellectual essay chooses an area of focus to argue over, citing details that support the case at hand. An encyclopedia entry, on the other hand, is meant to be a fair entry that covers the topic at hand without bias. Obviously, this entirely fair treatment isn't something that can be assured-- but we can try!