Search

Ecological discourse, as object of ecolinguistics and cultural discourse studies, has far-reaching implications for fostering human beings’ ecological consciousness. However, European ecological discourse is inapt for promoting ecological consciousness due to its roots in critical discourse, Eurocentralization and Cartesianism. This paper aims to pursue a Confucian–Daoist inquiry to Chinese ecological discourse concerning its Confucian–Daoist dimensions in Chinese discursive, cultural and philosophical traditions. This Confucian–Daoist inquiry can be conducted in three parts: a conceptual inquiry into Chinese ecological discourse, a comparative inquiry into Sino-European ecological discourses and a constructive inquiry into a harmonious discourse based on harmosophy. This approach has an important twofold role: first, it can offer profound discursive and spiritual recourses for fostering ecological consciousness in addressing the global ecological crisis. Second, and more importantly, it can help European ecological discourse transcend the negative influences from its roots, which may underplay its role in ecological consciousness. By so doing, an intercultural dialogue for a harmonious world can arise for mutually dealing with ecological problems. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article argues against the strong “holist” position that the early Chinese lacked any concept of mind–body dualism, and more broadly against a “neo-Orientalist” trend that portrays Chinese thought as radically different from Western thought. In the first half, it makes the case against strong mind–body holism by drawing upon traditional archeological and textual evidence. In the second, it turns to resources from the sciences, arguing that large-scale quantitative–qualitative analyses of early Chinese texts suggest that they embrace a quite vigorous form of mind–body dualism, and further that a huge body of evidence coming out of the cognitive sciences suggests that this is not at all surprising. In this section, the role that deep humanistic knowledge can, and should, play in scientific approaches to culture is also explored. The article concludes by suggesting that a mutually informed, humanities–scientific approach to religious studies is the best way for our field to move forward. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]