China and the Primal Episteme

The ancient possibility of knowledge that China possesses is well placed to resonate effectively with the Primal episteme. This is because it incorporates a knowledge of mankind alongside that of other things.

The ancient possibility of knowledge that China possesses is best appreciated in contrast to the dominant possibility of knowledge in the Modern Western world. One of the key defining features of the Modern Western world is the Modern episteme as defined by Michel Foucault. Within the Modern episteme the role of “epistemological man” is central and definitive (Foucault 1970; Birkin & Polesie 2011). Briefly the significance of “epistemological man” means that knowledge in the Modern Human sciences is a knowledge that has been created

of man, by man and for man.

This means that knowledge in the Modern Human Sciences is made possible by reflexive self-referencing; a kind of species-solipsism. This helps to explain how Modern progress has benefit man at the expense of the natural world. It has done so because knowledge in the Modern human sciences did not recognise a natural world as may be proven by a quick examination of any standard Modern text explaining how mankind is to be organised to increase its own wealth; i.e. economics, accounting and management where  nature per se does not exist. This is a key driver of unsustainable development.

So how does ancient China differ? It differs in many ways that for the moment we can represent simply by Tian Xia which may be translated as “All under Heaven”. The concept of Tian Xia is closely associated with civilization and order in classical Chinese philosophy, and it has formed the basis for the world view of the Chinese people and nations influenced by them since at least the first millennium BC. A first point to notice is the age of this concept - the first millennium BC - which is indicative of its intrinsic sustainability. (In contrast the Modern episteme in the West lasted a mere 200 years old before it undermined its own existence with unsustainable forms of development.)

We should be aware that Tian Xia in its application and development in China was not of course all good. It did for example underpin the idea that the Chinese emperor acted with a Mandate from Heaven and as such was effectively the centre of the world and all powerful.

However, the significance of Tian Xia for present purposes is that it was not based on a possibility of knowledge that referred its own origins back to itself as in the Modern episteme’s knowledge of man, by man and for man. Tian Xia embraced – as it says – “All under Heaven”.

Tian Xia or "All under Heaven"

The ancient Tian Xia world view recognised nature and furthermore gave nature an active presence that permeated human affairs notably as the Way or Tao which is the “natural” source and the driving force behind everything that exists. This is a point of marked contrast to Western Modern thinking in the Human sciences which regards nature as passive (Birkin and Polesie 2011, pp. 116-129).

In a recent study, Wang (2012) explains in greater detail just how Tian Xia resonates well with the Primal episteme’s recognition of the role of active nature in mankind’s affairs and with Western science that has now come to acknowledge the interdependence and interactions of the living world as a whole; this is described empirically by Ecology and theoretically by the mathematics of Complexity. In essence mankind no longer lives in isolation – in a self-made Modern solipsism – but within a fabric of relations to the rest of the world:

“Writing on this side of the world, I have drawn from them a different lesson: the cosmologies of contraries, as practiced in politics, performed in ritual, and evoked in world conceptions throughout pre-modern times have made a contribution to the critique of our own time. Having been re-presented, the old world-scapes offer us a lesson. Because one civilization is no more the measure of the other, in this globalized age of a world of ―warring state —if I may so call it—further evocations and mutual understanding of different perspectives of the world, including different ideas of the Other in different societies, are urgently needed. As I believe, in spite of all its shortcomings, its sketchiness and partiality—for which I must apologize—and with all the diverse historical and cultural moments of tianxia yet to be fully understood, this brief outline has one merit: it fits into a framework of reflexive reciprocation in which our own ways of the world are situated in an ecology of relationships with other ways.” (Wang 2012, p. 370)

The Primal episteme is based upon the knowledge that science now provides of the world in which we live. The Modern episteme is based on an outdated, 200 year-old view of the world that science now shows to be wrong. An inclusive Ancient Chinese world view and the latest Western science need to merge in order to develop new sustainable ways of organising ourselves, our economics, our accounting and our business management, goals and strategies.  

References

Birkin, F.K. and Polesie, T. (2011). Intrinsic Sustainable Development: epistemes, science, business and sustainability. Singapore, World Scientific Press.

Foucault, M. (1970). The Order of Things. London, Routledge.

Wang, M. (2012). All under heaven (tianxia):  Cosmological perspectives and political ontologies in pre-modern China. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 2(1), pp. 337–383.