Bridging Chinese and western knowledge systems : a study of Chinese academics in the humanities and social sciences

Abstract

Globalization has brought intense knowledge exchanges, requiring contemporary knowledge workers to constantly learn and understand others. However, the continuation of Western centrism upholds unequal knowledge dissemination. Non-Western scholars are placed in a state of intellectual dependence, while gradually acknowledging that Western epistemology might not be able to address certain global challenges or the unique needs of their societies. The humanities and social sciences (HSS), in contrast to science and technology, deserve special attention because they are rooted in the indigenous context of society and culture, and thus encounter more tensions between local and global, traditional and modern epistemic practices. Chinese HSS scholars are among those confronting this issue. Against such a backdrop, this doctoral thesis investigates how Chinese HSS academics bridge Chinese and Western knowledge systems. It is based on in-depth interviews with 20 Mainland Chinese HSS scholars born between the 1960s and the early 1980s, and on reading dozens of their academic publications and relevant resources. Some phenomenological methodology approaches were borrowed to examine and analyze data. The findings address the research question in three parts. First, Chinese HSS academics stress the significance of bridging Western and Chinese knowledge systems. While acknowledging the contentious nature of the terminologies of “Chinese,” “Western,” and “knowledge systems,” participants recognize the application of these concepts. They dynamically clarify the fundamental characteristics of traditional Chinese knowledge and its transformation, which relates closely to the dominance of Western knowledge systems throughout modern intellectual history and to the current trend of internationalization. Second, the study highlights two primary forms of bridging Western and Chinese knowledge systems: (1) knowledge exchange within global academia, which is from the perspective of the external function of knowledge, and (2) knowledge production in research, which is from the perspective of the intrinsic function of knowledge. Regarding knowledge exchanges, international academic mobility and academic works are seen as two of the most common channels. Regarding research, efforts to integrate the two knowledge systems include conducting Western-style research, revisiting traditional knowledge, advocating for comparative research, promoting dialogues in research questions, theories, and methodologies, and synthesizing the two knowledge systems, particularly in philosophy. Third, the study has identified necessary competencies for effectively incorporating Chinese and Western knowledge systems, a triple practice of attitudinal-epistemic-merit. The first aspect is fundamental attitudes, characterized by an equitable approach to two systems and a constructive outlook on managing their relationship. The second component concerns basic knowledge and skills, including language proficiency, traditional Chinese knowledge, and modern Western knowledge. The third aspect is excellent capabilities, including the ability to follow a role model, develop relevant perspectives and senses, and cultivate Chinese spirit and ethos. Overall, this thesis study sheds light on the perceptions and practices of Chinese HSS academics in bridging Chinese and Western knowledge systems, offering a framework for theoretically and practically developing bicultural intellectual minds in non-Western higher education. While exploratory, it has implications for future research and education in global academia.