Ding Yun

　　School of Philosophy, Fudan University

　　Abstract:In modern Chinese thought, “philosophy” and the whole disciplinary system rooted in it have had a far-reaching influence on the Chinese understanding and interpretation of their own tradition. If we are to avoid a and simplistic final interpretation of traditional thought, the most prudent and reliable way to go about it is to ponder the whole framework and realm on which this understanding is based before we proceed to understand tradition. Before the inevitable problematization of “Chinese thought,” we should try to problematize “philosophy.” This demands that we find, in the constant rise and fall of philosophical trends, the view of philosophy by which Chinese thought is generally judged, and make it the object of questioning. Mou Zongsan’s attempt to reinterpret classical Chinese thought, based directly on Aristotle’s theory of the four causes, cannot be viewed as a success. The so-called first beginning of philosophy means establishing, led by the question of being—ontology, a system in which cheng (completion) is prior to and identical with sheng (generation). Now that Chinese thought has encountered Heidegger and thus rediscovered Aristotle and the whole of classical Western thought, the time is ripe for us to reexamine and assess the beginning of philosophy in terms of the complete and original experience whence Chinese thought arose.

　　Keywords: Chinese thought, theory of the four causes, Aristotle, Mou Zongsan, Heidegger