Bulletin Number Two 1985

Professor Shu-hsien Liu, Chairman of the organizing committee ， has kindly written, at the request of the Editor ， an article on the Conference ， from conception to conclusion. About two years ago, Dr. Dieter Stollwerck of Goethe Institut asked me to consider the possibility of organizing an international conference of philosophy at The Chinese University of Hong Kong. For the suggestion of a possible theme of the conference he had put it in a rather humorous way: 'Let us not just talk about Xiao-ping, we may also talk about Tai-ping .' As you know well, Xiao-ping is the given name of the Chinese leader Deng, meaning small peace, while Tai-ping means great peace. This gave me an inspiration. I proceeded to design an International Conference of Philosophy on Harmony/ Strife in consultation with my colleagues. In order to have a broad appeal to philosophers of different nationalities and scholars in related fields, we decided to call for four different kinds of papers as stated in our proposal: (1) Purely conceptual analysis of ideas of harmony and/or strife; (2) Different schools of thought on ideas of harmony and strife, such as Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism, Hegelianism, Marxism or Existentialism; (3) The influence of such ideas on actual development of intellectual history or culture; (4) Comparative studies of ideas of harmony and strife. In the summer of 1983 I went to Toronto and Montreal to attend two international philosophy meetings and got enthusiastic responses from professors Cheng, Neville, and Smith. After I came back to Hong Kong, we decided to go ahead with the project. Finally we have put together a programme which spanned seven days, from 10th to 16th March, 1985. As this was the first international conference on such a big scale ever organized by the Department, naturally we were hampered by inexperience. Although the participants had to put up with all kinds of inconveniences, and we had to go through the disappointing moments to learn that some scholars could not come to the conference, as well as the moments of anxiety for waiting and suspense, yet all seems to be well that ends well. Now I am happy to report that we have earned far more positive than negative remarks both in terms of the form and the content of the conference. Indeed we have made history, as this is the first time ever that an international conference of philosophy held in Hong Kong had involved scholars from four continents: North America, Asia, Australia and Europe, representing various philosophical traditions, East and West. At the short opening ceremony on Monday the 11th, Professor Shu-hsien Liu, Chairman of the Department of Philosophy, outlined how the conference was conceived and organized. Then Dr. Erhard Staedtler ， Director of Goethe Institut, was asked to speak a few words, and Dr. Lin Ma, the Vice- Chancellor, gave his opening address. Dr. Staedtler's reference to Leibniz and Dr. Ma's reference to East and West were thought to be most appropriate. Although the topics of the papers were chosen by the individual participants, yet the programme emerged to be a rich and balanced one as i f under the guidance of an invisible hand. Professor Karl Otto Apel provided us with a broad spectrum to start with, and he was immediately followed by Professor John E. Smith of Yale who offered his reflection on mediation as a possible way to resolve conflicts and to bridge over differences. After such a rousing start, the momentum of the conference was built up. In the afternoon, two papers by two senior scholars from the East were presented. Although Professor Hajime Nakamura could not come in person to present the Buddhist view of harmony because of delicate health, Dr. Robert E. Allinson had ably given a synopsis of his paper. Then Mr. Yung-wei Lao of the Department of Philosophy discussed three Confucian views of harmony from a critical point of view. The first day's programme was thought to have hit the right note. The second-day programme offered further exploration of the Oriental perspectives. Professor Genjun Sasaki discussed the changing phases of conflict in the history of Buddhist thought. He was to be followed by Professor David Kalupahana's paper on 'Buddha's "Middle Way" as a Vehicle of Culture'. However, because of some misunderstanding in communication, Professor Kalupahana did not arrive at the campus until Tuesday morning. Hence Dr. Yuk Wong was asked to present the Taoist view of strife which turned out to be just the right complement to Professor Sasaki's paper. His paper was commented by Professor Mei-Lai Choy from Taipei. In the afternoon, Professor Shu-hsien Liu made an attempt to give an in-depth study of Chu Hsi's (1130-1200) strife after the way to realize equilibrium and harmony. Chu Hsi was the most influential Neo-Confucian philosopher since Sung dynasty, his was nothing short of a paradigm case for a Chinese approach to the problem. Then Professor Paul Jiang from Australia gave his reflections on the central theme of ‘Unity of Heaven and Man' in Neo-Confucian thought. The 2 NEWS