This thesis intended to be a comparison and an examination of the differences between Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming in their interpretations of the concept "ko-wu" (格物) in the Ta-hsueh ( 《大學》,the Great Learning)....[ Read more ]

This thesis intended to be a comparison and an examination of the differences between Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming in their interpretations of the concept "ko-wu" (格物) in the Ta-hsueh ( 《大學》,the Great Learning).

As is well-known, Chu plays a significant role not only in reaffirming the importance of the Ta-hsueh as the basis curriculum for self-cultivation, but also in adding a supplement to the text, claiming that it embodies the original meaning of the lost chapter on "ko-wu". In this supplement, Chu maintains that to "ko-wu" means to "chiung-1i" ( 窮理), that is, to investigate the principles inherent in things. Quite to the contrary, in the conviction that "chih liang-chih" ( 致良知), that is, to extend the innate knowledge of the good, is the most crucial in the learning process, Wang defines "ko-wu" as "cheng-shih" (正事), which means to rectifying things.

This thesis will illustrate the following points: (1) "li" ( 理, the principle) in Chu's system actually represents both the principle of morality and the laws according to which things run. (2) This very fact will inevitably cause theoretical problems to Chu's moral philosophy. (3) In an attempt to solve these problems, Wang confines the meaning of "li" to moral principle. (4) In so doing, Wang, however, has actually reverted the order of the learning process originally outlined in the Ta-hsueh. (5) In additions, Wang's action will deceptively lead people to considering him a proponent of subjective idealism.

This thesis will conclude that as strong advocates of the significance of self-cultivation as they are, their theories of "ko-wu" entail special ontological commitments, the validity of which is, nevertheless, difficult to prove or disprove, without mentioning the detrimental effects they may cause to their moral philosophies.