Chinese New Confucianism

1. Introduction

Chinese New Confucianism (Xin Ruxue / Xin Ru jia 新儒學 / 新儒家) designates a modern movement that seeks to reinterpret the classical Confucian tradition in sustained dialogue with science, democracy, and global philosophy. Emerging in the early 20th century amidst the collapse of the Qing empire and the rise of new nation-states, it treats Confucianism not as a static imperial orthodoxy but as a living philosophical resource capable of modernization.

Most scholars identify three overlapping “generations.” First-generation and proto–New Confucian thinkers (such as Xiong Shili and Liang Shuming) responded to May Fourth iconoclasm and cultural crisis by constructing systematic, often metaphysical, philosophies that defended the value of “Chinese culture.” Second-generation philosophers (including Mou Zongsan, Tang Junyi, Xu Fuguan, and Qian Mu) worked mainly in Hong Kong and Taiwan after 1949, elaborating comprehensive moral metaphysics, accounts of human nature, and Confucian theories of democracy and human rights. A looser third generation, associated with figures like Tu Weiming and Cheng Chung-ying, extended New Confucian themes into intercultural and global debates from the 1970s onward.

New Confucianism is often characterized by four interrelated emphases: a moral metaphysics that understands ultimate reality as intrinsically ethical; a renewed focus on self-cultivation as creative transformation; an attempt to reconcile Confucian values with modern institutional life (law, democracy, markets); and an aspiration to articulate a distinctive yet dialogical “Confucian humanism” within global philosophy.

At the same time, the label “New Confucianism” is contested. Some historians treat it as a clearly bounded 20th-century movement with specific manifestos and canonical figures; others argue that it shades into broader “contemporary Confucianisms” and should be used more loosely or even abandoned. This entry adopts the term as a historically grounded but internally diverse category, tracing its development, main doctrines, internal debates, and wider influence without presupposing its unity or finality.

2. Chronological Boundaries and Periodization

Debates over the chronological boundaries of New Confucianism center on when the movement begins, how many “generations” it includes, and whether it has ended or transformed into broader contemporary Confucianisms.

Competing Starting Points

Scholars propose several starting markers:

Generational Periodization

A widely used three-generation scheme is:

Some researchers propose a fourth phase (“Global and Plural Confucianisms,” from ca. 2000) to capture the diffusion of Confucian discourse beyond the self-identified New Confucian school, the entry of non-ethnically Chinese philosophers, and the rise of “Political Confucianism” and feminist Confucianism.

Endpoints and Continuity

There is no consensus on an “end” to New Confucianism. One view treats it as largely a 20th-century movement defined by Cold War conditions and exile; later Confucian thought is then described as global or contemporary Confucianism. Another view holds that as long as philosophers continue the strong moral-metaphysical Confucian project exemplified by Mou and Tang, New Confucianism remains an ongoing, though evolving, current.

This entry follows the flexible scheme already outlined in the overview: roughly 1911–present, with internal sub-periods corresponding to key political and intellectual shifts.

3. Historical Context: From Empire to Modern Nation-States

New Confucianism arose in a century-long transformation from imperial order to modern nation-states in East Asia. Its evolution is closely tied to political upheavals and state-building projects that redefined Confucianism’s social role.

Late Qing Collapse and Republican Experiments

The late 19th and early 20th centuries saw mounting external pressures (imperialist encroachment, unequal treaties, the Sino-Japanese War) and internal crises. The abolition of the imperial examination system in 1905 and the 1911 Revolution dismantled key institutional bases of classical Confucianism. Early Republic reforms introduced Western-style constitutions, parliaments, and universities, prompting intense debate about whether Confucianism was an obstacle to, or condition for, national survival.

The New Culture and May Fourth movements (1910s–1920s) cast Confucianism as synonymous with “feudal” backwardness. Simultaneously, some thinkers attempted to recast Confucian values in modern philosophical and political forms, laying foundations for New Confucianism.

War, Revolution, and the Bifurcation of Chinese Worlds

Japanese invasion (1931–1945), civil war (1945–1949), and the establishment of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1949 reshaped the intellectual landscape. On the mainland, Marxism–Leninism became state orthodoxy; Confucianism was criticized as reactionary, especially during the Cultural Revolution (1966–1976). In contrast, the Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan, British Hong Kong, and overseas communities cultivated Confucianism as a cultural and ideological resource against both communism and Western secularism.

This bifurcation produced distinctive New Confucian trajectories: exile-based New Confucians in Hong Kong and Taiwan developed elaborate philosophical systems in relative academic freedom, whereas Confucian discourse on the mainland was largely suppressed until the late 1970s.

Reform, Globalization, and New Nation-State Projects

Post-1978 economic reforms in the PRC, together with the search for a “spiritual civilization” and post-socialist values, enabled partial rehabilitation of Confucius and renewed scholarly interest in Confucianism. In Taiwan and Hong Kong, democratization and localization movements reframed earlier “Chinese cultural” discourses.

Across East and Southeast Asia (e.g., Singapore, South Korea), rapid industrialization and discussions of “Asian values” provided new contexts for reevaluating Confucian ethics in relation to nation-building and governance. These shifting political settings continually shaped how New Confucians conceptualized the relation between Confucian tradition, national identity, and modern state institutions.

4. The Zeitgeist: Tradition, Modernity, and Cultural Crisis

The intellectual atmosphere in which New Confucianism emerged was marked by pervasive cultural crisis: questions about the value of Chinese tradition, the legitimacy of Western imports, and the possibility of alternative modernities.

Cultural Crisis and the Fate of Confucianism

The experience of military defeat, economic underdevelopment, and political instability fostered a sense of national humiliation. Many early 20th-century intellectuals argued that Confucianism had contributed to China’s weakness by promoting hierarchy, patriarchy, and anti-scientific attitudes. Others contended that Confucianism, properly reinterpreted, contained moral and spiritual resources vital for renewal.

This tension between iconoclasm and cultural defense formed the backdrop to New Confucian thought. New Confucians shared the iconoclasts’ critique of superstition and rigid authority but rejected the wholesale repudiation of the classical heritage.

Modernity as Problem and Opportunity

Modernity was experienced not simply as technological progress but as a comprehensive transformation of social life: bureaucratic states, mass education, industrial economy, and new individualist ethics. Many New Confucians viewed Western modernity as both attractive and threatening—promising science, democracy, and human rights yet associated with materialism, spiritual emptiness, and imperialism.

Against this backdrop, they articulated the idea of “multiple modernities”: the belief that societies could modernize along different cultural paths, with Confucianism grounding a specifically East Asian form of modern life.

Recasting Chinese Identity

The zeitgeist also involved shifting ideas of “Chineseness.” Earlier notions rooted in dynastic loyalty and imperial cosmology gave way to ethnic nationalism, then to broader concepts such as “Chinese culture” or “Cultural China” that included diasporic communities. New Confucians generally emphasized a civilizational identity anchored in Confucian moral and spiritual values rather than in ethnicity alone.

Philosophy as Systematic Reconstruction

Finally, the rise of modern universities and contact with Western philosophy encouraged a new self-understanding of Confucianism as systematic philosophy. Instead of primarily commentarial scholarship, New Confucians sought to construct explicit theories of metaphysics, ethics, and politics. The zeitgeist thus combined anxiety over cultural survival with confidence in philosophical reconstruction, setting the stage for the movement’s core aims.

5. Core Aims and Self-Understanding of New Confucianism

New Confucian thinkers repeatedly reflected on what they were trying to achieve and how they differed from both classical Confucians and Western philosophers. Their self-understanding can be summarized under several interconnected aims.

Reconstructing Confucianism as a Living Philosophical Tradition

New Confucians generally describe their work as reconstruction (chongjian 重建) rather than mere preservation. They seek to extract what they regard as enduring Confucian insights—about human nature, moral cultivation, and cosmic order—while rearticulating them in terms compatible with modern science, democracy, and academic philosophy.

They often contrast their project with what they see as “dead learning” (si xue) of late imperial scholasticism. For them, Confucianism must become a creative, systematic philosophy capable of contributing to global discourse, not simply a body of classical exegesis.

Providing a Spiritual and Cultural “Home”

Especially among second-generation figures, a central aim is to offer a “spiritual home” (jingshen jiayuan 精神家園) for Chinese people dispersed by war, revolution, and migration. They present Confucianism as the core of a distinct “Chinese culture” that can sustain dignity and continuity amid rapid change.

Later thinkers, such as Tu Weiming, extend this aspiration to a broader “Cultural China” and even to humanity as a whole, envisioning Confucianism as one possible spiritual resource in a pluralistic global context.

Integrating Moral Cultivation and Modern Institutions

New Confucians understand Confucianism primarily as a way of life centered on self-cultivation, but they also aim to relate this to modern institutions—constitutional government, legal systems, science, education, and markets. Many see themselves as mediating between personal morality and public order, exploring how Confucian virtues can inform democratic citizenship, human rights, or alternative political arrangements.

Positioning Confucianism in Global Philosophy

From early on, New Confucians consciously locate themselves within a world philosophical conversation. They engage Kant, Hegel, phenomenology, analytic philosophy, and Christian theology, often aiming not only to defend Confucianism but to contribute to universal questions about metaphysics, ethics, and the meaning of modernity.

Some portray Confucianism as a “third way” between Western secular rationalism and theistic traditions, emphasizing a distinctive Confucian humanism grounded in the immanent moral structure of reality.

Movement Identity and Labels

Finally, New Confucians have differed over how explicitly to call themselves a “school.” The 1958 manifesto explicitly uses the term “New Confucianism”, presenting it as a coherent intellectual movement. Others downplay school identity, preferring to speak of “contemporary Confucian philosophy” to avoid sectarian overtones. Nonetheless, most share the conviction that Confucianism can and should be renewed as a modern, globally conversant philosophy.

6. Central Philosophical Problems and Debates

New Confucianism is organized around a set of recurring philosophical problematics. These do not exhaust its content but structure many of its major debates.

Confucianism and Modern Science

One central issue is whether Confucian notions such as Heaven (Tian), li (principle), and moral nature can be reconciled with modern scientific explanations. Some New Confucians argue that science describes empirical regularities while Confucianism addresses normative and metaphysical dimensions; others seek more direct syntheses, drawing on developments in physics or biology to support holistic or processive cosmologies. Critics, both internal and external, question whether appeals to science are philosophically rigorous or merely rhetorical.

Moral Metaphysics vs. Anti-Metaphysical Approaches

New Confucianism is often defined by its moral metaphysics—the thesis that ultimate reality is intrinsically ethical and that metaphysical inquiry is inseparable from self-cultivation. Yet some affiliated thinkers and sympathetic critics worry that such strong metaphysical claims are difficult to justify in a pluralistic, scientifically informed context. They advocate more hermeneutic, pragmatic, or historically oriented reconstructions of Confucianism that bracket or weaken metaphysical commitments.

Self-Cultivation, Emotions, and Authenticity

Debates over self-cultivation (xiushen) focus on whether Confucian moral transformation rests primarily on rational understanding of principle, emotional refinement, ritual practice, or social engagement. Xu Fuguan, for instance, emphasizes the role of emotions and aesthetic experience; others stress intellectual insight or ritual habituation. Contemporary discussions explore how Confucian self-cultivation relates to modern concepts of autonomy, authenticity, and psychological well-being.

Democracy, Rights, and Political Order

The relation between Confucianism and democracy, liberal rights, and modern state structures is another central problematic. Some New Confucians defend democracy as the best institutionalization of Confucian concerns for human dignity and moral government. Others promote alternative models of Confucian constitutionalism or meritocracy, where moral elites play a special role. Critics argue over whether such proposals can accommodate equality, pluralism, and legal protections for individuals.

Cultural Identity and Universality

New Confucians grapple with how to interpret Confucianism as both distinctively Chinese and potentially universal. Earlier generations often spoke of a unique “Chinese culture” grounded in Confucian values; later thinkers introduce concepts such as multiple modernities or dialogical universalism to avoid cultural essentialism while still affirming Confucian contributions to global ethics and philosophy.

Religion, Transcendence, and Secularity

Finally, there is ongoing debate about whether Confucianism is best understood as a religion, a philosophy, or a civil ethic. Some New Confucians adopt language of transcendence and “faith in Heaven,” suggesting quasi-religious dimensions; others stress compatibility with secular institutions and resist equating Confucianism with church-like religion. These disagreements shape differing approaches to ritual, spirituality, and interreligious dialogue.

7. Generations and Internal Chronology of the Movement

Scholars typically describe New Confucianism’s internal chronology in terms of overlapping “generations,” each shaped by distinct political contexts and intellectual agendas.

First-Generation and Proto–New Confucians (ca. 1911–1949)

This phase includes thinkers such as Xiong Shili, Liang Shuming, Feng Youlan, Zhang Junmai (Carsun Chang), and sometimes Ma Yifu and He Lin. Working mainly in Republican China, they responded to the New Culture critique by:

• Defending the value of Confucian tradition,
• Constructing new metaphysical systems (e.g., Xiong’s Xin Weishi Lun),
• Comparing “Eastern” and “Western” cultures (Liang’s civilizational typologies),
• Participating in early constitutional and rights debates.

They are called “proto–New Confucian” by some because the label “New Confucianism” was not yet widely used, but their work laid the philosophical groundwork.

Second-Generation / Classical New Confucianism (ca. 1950–1975)

After 1949, key Confucians relocated to Hong Kong, Taiwan, and overseas. The core figures—Mou Zongsan, Tang Junyi, Xu Fuguan, and Qian Mu—are often treated as the canonical New Confucians. Hallmarks of this period include:

• Systematic moral metaphysics influenced by Song–Ming Neo-Confucianism and Kant,
• Articulation of Confucian humanism, democracy, and human rights,
• The 1958 New Confucian Manifesto, which explicitly framed their project.

This phase is often viewed as the movement’s most cohesive and programmatic.

Third-Generation and Reform-Era Revivals (ca. 1978–2000)

Economic reform and intellectual liberalization in the PRC, along with globalization, produced new conditions. Figures associated with this phase—Tu Weiming, Cheng Chung-ying, Liu Shu-hsien, Lee Ming-huei, and others—emphasize:

• Intercultural dialogue with Western, Buddhist, and Christian thought,
• Themes of multiple modernities and civil society,
• English-language presentations of Confucianism for global audiences.

They build on second-generation metaphysics but often shift focus toward hermeneutics and cultural theory.

Global and Plural Confucianisms (ca. 2000–present)

The early 21st century witnesses a proliferation of Confucian discourses:

• Political Confucianism (e.g., Jiang Qing, Kang Xiaoguang) advocates Confucian constitutional models,
• International scholars (e.g., Stephen C. Angle, Daniel A. Bell, Roger T. Ames) contribute to Confucian ethics and political theory,
• Feminist, environmental, and diasporic perspectives diversify the field.

Some historians treat this as a new stage beyond “New Confucianism” proper, while others see it as a continuation and transformation of the original project. The boundaries between “generations” remain heuristic rather than rigid.

8. Key Figures and Intellectual Networks

New Confucianism developed not only through individual thinkers but also through dense intellectual networks spanning mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, North America, and beyond.

Generational Clusters of Key Figures

Institutional Hubs and Collaborative Projects

Key institutional nodes included:

• New Asia College (Hong Kong), founded by Qian Mu, Tang Junyi, and others, later integrated into the Chinese University of Hong Kong. It became a major center for Confucian teaching and publication.
• Universities in Taiwan (e.g., National Taiwan University, Tunghai University), where New Confucians held influential posts and trained students.
• Overseas universities, especially in North America (Harvard, University of Hawaii, University of Toronto), which provided platforms for third-generation New Confucians and facilitated English-language dissemination.

The 1958 “Manifesto on Chinese Culture to the World” itself was a collaborative effort, exemplifying how personal friendships and shared exile experiences shaped doctrinal development.

Transnational and Intercultural Networks

From mid-century onward, New Confucians engaged Japanese, Korean, and Western scholars in conferences and translation projects. For example:

• Mou Zongsan’s writings on Kant sparked dialogues with German idealism specialists.
• Tu Weiming’s work on “Cultural China” involved extensive engagement with overseas Chinese intellectuals and comparative philosophers.
• Scholars like Roger T. Ames and David L. Hall developed process-oriented interpretations of Confucianism partly inspired by and in conversation with New Confucian themes.

These networks helped transform New Confucianism from a primarily Chinese diasporic movement into a global academic conversation, even as some New Confucians remained wary of excessive Westernization.

9. Major Texts and Systematic Treatises

New Confucianism is distinguished by the production of large-scale philosophical works that seek to rival Western systems in scope. Several texts have become canonical reference points.

Representative Major Works

Characteristics of New Confucian System-Building

These works typically:

• Combine reinterpretation of classical texts (Analects, Mencius, Zhu Xi, Wang Yangming) with engagement with Western philosophers (especially Kant, Hegel, and phenomenologists).
• Integrate metaphysics, ethics, and political theory into comprehensive accounts of reality, human nature, and history.
• Aim to show that Confucianism offers not only cultural identity but a philosophically rigorous worldview.

Critics sometimes argue that such system-building risks essentializing “Chinese culture” or imposing anachronistic systematicity on premodern texts. Supporters see these treatises as evidence that Confucianism can function as a modern, globally conversant philosophy.

10. New Confucian Metaphysics and Moral Ontology

A defining feature of New Confucianism is its development of moral metaphysics (daode bentilun 道德本體論): the thesis that ultimate reality is intrinsically ethical and that ontology and ethics are inseparable.

Reality as Morally Structured

Building on Song–Ming Neo-Confucianism, figures like Mou Zongsan and Tang Junyi argue that the fundamental structure of the cosmos—often expressed through concepts such as li (principle), xin (heart–mind), or Tian (Heaven)—is inherently value-laden. Moral norms are not arbitrary human conventions but expressions of this ontological order.

Mou, for example, reinterprets Kant to claim that humans possess “intellectual intuition”, allowing them to participate in and partially know the noumenal moral reality. Tang develops a layered ontology of personal, communal, and transcendent levels of existence, all oriented toward the realization of moral goodness.

Human Nature and Self-Transcendence

New Confucian metaphysics typically affirms a good human nature (xing shan 性善) with an intrinsic tendency toward self-transcendence. Self-cultivation is thus not an external imposition but the unfolding of an already present moral ground. This view underwrites a strong Confucian humanism: humans are seen as capable of co-creating moral order with Heaven.

Some thinkers, influenced by Buddhism, emphasize the emptiness or dynamic processual character of reality, while still insisting that moral value emerges intrinsically from this process.

Varieties of Metaphysical Position

Despite common themes, internal variations are significant:

• Xiong Shili develops a monistic metaphysics of “substance–function” (ti–yong 體用), where a single reality manifests in diverse phenomena; consciousness is central.
• Mou Zongsan elaborates a sophisticated hierarchy of ontological levels, distinguishing between the phenomenal realm governed by causality and the noumenal moral realm accessible through self-cultivation.
• Tang Junyi emphasizes personalism, treating the ultimate as a “transcendent person-like” reality while resisting full theism.

Critiques and Alternatives Within the Movement

Some later Confucians question whether such robust metaphysics is necessary or plausible. They propose:

• A weak metaphysics, focusing on moral experience and practical reasoning rather than claims about ultimate reality.
• Hermeneutic approaches that treat Confucian ontological language as historically situated expressions of ethical orientation, not literal cosmology.

Nonetheless, the core New Confucian conviction—that moral value is woven into the fabric of reality and that philosophical reflection must engage this moral ontology—remains a central, though contested, hallmark of the movement.

11. New Confucianism, Science, and Rationality

New Confucianism confronts modern science not as an external threat but as a partner in rethinking the Confucian worldview. The key issues are the scope of scientific explanation and the nature of rationality.

Distinguishing Scientific and Moral Domains

Many New Confucians argue that science and Confucianism operate in complementary domains:

• Science describes empirical facts, causal relations, and physical processes.
• Confucianism addresses questions of value, meaning, and self-cultivation.

On this view, conflicts arise only when science is interpreted scientistically, claiming exclusive authority over all forms of knowledge. Proponents hold that Confucianism offers a broader conception of practical and moral rationality that can incorporate scientific findings without reductionism.

Holism, Process, and Contemporary Science

Some New Confucians and their interlocutors appeal to developments in physics (e.g., quantum theory, relativity) or systems theory to support a holistic or process-oriented cosmology congenial to Confucian relational thinking. They suggest that the older mechanistic worldview, which seemed to marginalize moral and spiritual concerns, is being replaced by models more open to interconnectedness and emergence.

Critics contend that such appeals sometimes rely on speculative analogies rather than rigorous scientific argument, and that Confucian cosmology should not be retrofitted onto contemporary science too quickly.

Rationality and Modern Philosophy

New Confucians engage Western epistemology and logic to defend Confucian rationality. For example:

• Mou Zongsan reinterprets Kantian critical philosophy to argue that moral knowledge involves a special kind of intellectual intuition, thus expanding the concept of rationality beyond empirical cognition.
• Cheng Chung-ying develops onto-hermeneutics, seeking a rational framework that integrates being, language, and value in a way that contrasts with, but dialogues with, analytic and continental traditions.

Alternative approaches within the broader Confucian revival advocate more pragmatist or fallibilist conceptions of rationality, emphasizing shared practices and communal inquiry rather than metaphysical guarantees.

Science, Technology, and Ethical Challenges

New Confucians also address ethical issues raised by modern science and technology—environmental degradation, biotechnology, and consumerism. They propose that Confucian emphases on harmony between humans and nature, family responsibility, and self-restraint can complement scientific and policy responses.

These discussions illustrate the movement’s effort to position Confucianism not as a pre-modern relic opposed to science but as a tradition that can critically appropriate scientific knowledge while maintaining an independent moral and spiritual standpoint.

12. Ethics, Self-Cultivation, and Confucian Humanism

Ethics and self-cultivation lie at the heart of New Confucian thought. The movement reinterprets classical practices for a modern, often urban and pluralistic, context while emphasizing a distinctive Confucian humanism.

Self-Cultivation as Creative Transformation

New Confucians understand self-cultivation (xiushen) as an ongoing process of moral and spiritual transformation rather than mere conformity to external norms. Influenced by thinkers like Wang Yangming, they emphasize the unity of knowledge and action and the intrinsic moral capacity of the heart–mind.

Tu Weiming characterizes this as “selfhood as creative transformation”: individuals continuously expand their concern from self to family, community, nation, and ultimately all humanity and nature, embodying the classical idea of forming “one body with all things” (yu wanwu wei yi ti).

Virtues, Emotions, and Everyday Life

Ethically, New Confucians focus on virtues such as ren (humaneness), yi (rightness), li (ritual propriety), and zhi (wisdom). They discuss how these virtues can be realized in modern roles—professional life, citizenship, and intimate relationships.

Xu Fuguan, among others, stresses the moral significance of emotions and aesthetic experience, arguing that properly cultivated feelings are central to Confucian humanism. This contrasts with portrayals of Confucianism as rigidly rationalistic or authoritarian.

Human Dignity and Perfectibility

New Confucian humanism affirms the inherent dignity and perfectibility of every person, grounded in their participation in the moral order. This is often presented as an alternative both to reductionist naturalism (which sees humans as mere biological entities) and to theistic doctrines that place ultimate value outside human moral activity.

Some New Confucians elaborate this into an ethic of responsible personhood, where autonomy is understood relationally—in terms of responsibilities to others, family, and community, rather than isolated individual choice.

Adaptation to Modern Pluralism

A key ethical question is how Confucian self-cultivation functions in societies marked by religious and cultural pluralism. Some New Confucians propose a “dialogical” humanism, where Confucian virtues are seen as one path among many toward shared human values such as respect, care, and responsibility. Others maintain stronger claims about the superiority or universality of Confucian ethical orientation.

There are also internal debates over issues such as gender equality, family hierarchy, and sexual ethics. Critics argue that traditional Confucian norms can conflict with contemporary commitments to equality and individual rights; reform-oriented New Confucians seek to reinterpret core virtues (such as ren and yi) to support more egalitarian relationships while preserving a relational view of the self.

13. Politics, Democracy, and Political Confucianism

New Confucianism devotes considerable attention to political philosophy, especially the relation between Confucian values and modern institutions.

Early New Confucian Views on Democracy

First- and second-generation thinkers such as Zhang Junmai, Tang Junyi, and Mou Zongsan generally endorse constitutional democracy and human rights, arguing that:

• Confucian respect for human dignity and moral autonomy can support democratic participation.
• The ideal of moral rulers aligns with systems that allow citizens to hold leaders accountable.
• Rights provide necessary institutional safeguards for self-cultivation and social harmony.

They often distinguish Confucian democracy—emphasizing virtue, responsibility, and communal concern—from what they see as Western individualistic or interest-based democracy.

Political Confucianism and Meritocratic Models

From the 1990s onward, a more explicit Political Confucianism emerges, associated with thinkers like Jiang Qing and Kang Xiaoguang. They critique both liberal democracy and authoritarianism, proposing:

• A Confucian constitutional order with a tricameral legislature representing the people, cultural tradition, and meritocratic elites.
• Institutionalized roles for Confucian scholars or “sages” alongside elected officials.
• Symbolic or legal recognition of Confucian classics as sources of constitutional authority.

Supporters argue that such arrangements better reflect Confucian emphases on moral leadership and historical continuity. Critics question their feasibility, democratic legitimacy, and compatibility with pluralism.

Rights, Duties, and Communitarian Perspectives

New Confucians often frame politics in terms of a balance between rights and duties. They generally accept the importance of legal rights but stress that rights should be embedded within a network of familial and societal obligations. This has led some scholars to classify New Confucianism as a form of communitarian political theory.

Debates persist over whether this communitarian orientation risks subordinating individuals to family or state, or whether it offers a corrective to what New Confucians see as excessive Western individualism.

Relations with Existing States and Regimes

New Confucian political thought has been received differently across political contexts:

• In Taiwan and Hong Kong, it intersected with debates on anti-communism, democratization, and cultural identity.
• In the PRC, some ideas—especially those emphasizing social harmony and respect for authority—have been selectively echoed in official discourse, while more independent Political Confucian proposals remain controversial.

The movement thus encompasses both normative theories of ideal political order and more contextual reflections on how Confucian values might reform or supplement existing institutions.

14. Religion, Spirituality, and Intercultural Dialogue

New Confucianism occupies an ambiguous space between religion and philosophy, and its thinkers have often engaged in deep dialogue with other spiritual traditions.

Is Confucianism a Religion?

New Confucians disagree on whether Confucianism should be classified as a religion:

• Some, following figures like Tang Junyi and Tu Weiming, describe Confucianism as a “spiritual” or “civil” religion—a comprehensive way of life oriented toward ultimate concern, analogous to religion but lacking dogma and institutional churches.
• Others prefer to present Confucianism as a philosophical and ethical tradition compatible with secular political arrangements, wary that the label “religion” might invite state control or misrepresent Confucianism’s character.

This debate shapes their views on ritual, transcendence, and public legitimacy.

Heaven, Transcendence, and Faith

Many New Confucians emphasize experiential participation in Heaven (Tian) or a transcendent moral order. They speak of:

• “faith in Heaven” as trust that moral efforts resonate with a larger cosmic order,
• The immanence of transcendence, where the ultimate is realized within human relationships and self-cultivation rather than in a separate supernatural realm.

Some articulate a quasi-personal understanding of the ultimate, while others prefer more impersonal, processive, or symbolic descriptions.

Dialogue with Buddhism and Daoism

Historically, Confucianism has long interacted with Buddhism and Daoism, and New Confucians continue this engagement:

• Xiong Shili’s metaphysics draws heavily on Yogācāra Buddhism, reinterpreted in Confucian moral terms.
• Mou Zongsan develops comparative studies of Buddhist emptiness and Confucian moral ontology.
• Several thinkers explore Daoist themes of naturalness and non-coercive action, integrating them into Confucian ethics.

Some view this as a continuation of the “Three Teachings” synthesis; others argue for clearer boundaries to preserve Confucian identity.

Dialogue with Christianity and Other Global Traditions

New Confucians have also engaged Christianity and Western religious thought. They compare:

• Christian notions of God, grace, and salvation with Confucian ideas of Heaven, self-cultivation, and moral transformation.
• Concepts of personhood and human dignity in Christian and Confucian humanisms.

Interlocutors include both Christian theologians in East Asia and Western philosophers of religion. Some New Confucians see Confucian humanism as offering a non-theistic yet spiritually rich alternative; others stress potential convergences.

Intercultural Philosophy

From the late 20th century, New Confucians actively participate in intercultural philosophical dialogues, often framing Confucianism as one voice in a global conversation about ethics, politics, and meaning. They advocate “dialogical universalism”: the idea that universally relevant norms can emerge through cross-cultural engagement rather than unilateral export of Western models.

These interactions have influenced both the self-understanding of New Confucianism and comparative philosophy more broadly.

15. Critiques, Dissident Currents, and Internal Tensions

New Confucianism has been subject to significant critique, both from outside and within, giving rise to dissident currents and revealing internal tensions.

External Critiques

Key external criticisms include:

• May Fourth and Marxist critiques: Confucianism is accused of fostering authoritarianism, patriarchy, and resistance to science. New Confucians are seen as romanticizing the past or providing ideological cover for conservative politics.
• Liberal critiques: Some political theorists argue that Confucian emphases on hierarchy and harmony are difficult to reconcile with robust individual rights and pluralism.
• Postcolonial and cultural studies critiques: New Confucian appeals to “Chinese culture” are sometimes viewed as essentialist or complicit with nationalist projects, obscuring internal diversity and non-Han perspectives.

Internal Philosophical Disputes

Within the movement, several tensions are evident:

• Metaphysics vs. historicism: Strong moral metaphysics (e.g., Mou’s) are questioned by those who favor historically situated, hermeneutic, or pragmatic accounts of Confucian values.
• Religious vs. secular orientation: Some New Confucians stress Confucianism’s spiritual or quasi-religious dimensions, while others insist on a secular ethical-philosophical framework.
• Democracy vs. meritocracy: Pro-democratic New Confucians disagree with Political Confucians over the legitimacy of institutionalized moral elites and the role of popular sovereignty.

Gender, Class, and Social Critiques

Feminist scholars and social critics highlight that:

• Traditional Confucian family hierarchies and gender norms can conflict with contemporary commitments to gender equality and LGBTQ+ rights.
• New Confucian discourse has historically been dominated by male, elite intellectuals, often neglecting perspectives shaped by class, ethnicity, or rural experience.

Some reform-oriented Confucians attempt to reinterpret core concepts such as ren and li to support more egalitarian social arrangements, while others maintain more conservative readings.

Dissident and Hybrid Currents

A variety of alternative Confucian projects have emerged:

• Left Confucianism / Confucian socialism blends Confucian ethics with Marxist or egalitarian concerns, emphasizing social justice and critique of capitalism.
• Critical New Confucianism seeks to retain Confucian ethical insights while jettisoning heavy metaphysics and engaging critical theory, pragmatism, or hermeneutics.
• Some PRC-based thinkers promote institutional Confucianism, advocating state rituals or constitutional recognition of Confucian values; this is contested by those wary of state co-optation.

These debates show that New Confucianism is not a monolithic doctrine but a field of ongoing contestation over how to interpret and apply the Confucian heritage under modern conditions.

16. New Confucianism in Mainland China, Taiwan, and the Diaspora

New Confucianism’s development and reception have differed markedly across regions, shaped by distinct political regimes and cultural dynamics.

Mainland China

In the PRC, Confucianism was largely criticized or marginalized from the 1950s through the Cultural Revolution, limiting New Confucian activity. After the late 1970s, however:

• Scholars began re-evaluating Confucianism as part of broader intellectual liberalization.
• New Confucian works from Hong Kong, Taiwan, and overseas were reintroduced, influencing philosophical debates.
• Some thinkers developed “Mainland New Confucianism”, often more cautious politically and more engaged with Marxism and contemporary social issues.

State-led promotion of Confucian symbols (e.g., Confucius Institutes, official references to “harmonious society”) has created opportunities for Confucian discourse, but also raised concerns about co-optation and ideological instrumentalization.

Taiwan

In Taiwan, New Confucianism enjoyed relatively favorable conditions during the Cold War:

• The government promoted “Chinese culture” as a counter to mainland communism, indirectly supporting Confucian scholarship.
• Institutions such as National Taiwan University, Academia Sinica, and private foundations became centers for Confucian studies.
• Second-generation New Confucians (e.g., Mou Zongsan, Tang Junyi, Qian Mu) had strong institutional presence and influence on intellectual life.

With democratization and localization from the late 1980s, Confucianism’s role became more contested, as Taiwanese identity debates complicated earlier Sino-centric narratives. Nonetheless, Taiwan remains an important site for diverse Confucian scholarship, including critical and feminist approaches.

Hong Kong

Hong Kong served as a crucial refuge and bridge:

• New Asia College and later the Chinese University of Hong Kong provided a home for exiled New Confucians.
• Hong Kong’s colonial status allowed relative academic freedom, enabling the publication and circulation of New Confucian texts to both Taiwan and the diaspora.
• Following the 1997 handover, Confucian discourse has intersected with debates over identity, autonomy, and civic values in complex ways.

Overseas Chinese and Global Diaspora

In North America, Europe, and Southeast Asia, New Confucianism has interacted with diaspora experiences:

• Scholars like Tu Weiming at Harvard popularized Confucian ideas among overseas Chinese communities and Western audiences.
• Concepts such as “Cultural China” broadened the notion of Confucian identity beyond territorial boundaries.
• Diasporic contexts encouraged engagement with multiculturalism, religious pluralism, and minority politics, influencing how Confucianism is reinterpreted.

These regional trajectories illustrate how New Confucianism operates both as a transnational intellectual movement and as a set of locally inflected discourses shaped by specific political and cultural environments.

17. From New Confucianism to Global and Contemporary Confucianisms

By the late 20th and early 21st centuries, the boundaries of “New Confucianism” began to blur as Confucian thought diversified and globalized.

Broadening Beyond the Classical New Confucian Canon

While second-generation figures like Mou Zongsan and Tang Junyi remain central, many contemporary philosophers working on Confucian themes:

• Do not identify themselves as “New Confucian” in a strict sense,
• Question key New Confucian commitments (e.g., strong moral metaphysics or cultural essentialism),
• Draw on analytic philosophy, critical theory, feminism, or environmental ethics.

As a result, some scholars prefer to speak of “contemporary Confucianisms” or “global Confucianism” rather than a single New Confucian movement.

Global Academic and Ethical Engagements

Confucianism now features in wide-ranging debates:

• Political philosophy: discussions of Confucian democracy, meritocracy, and human rights involve philosophers from China, Korea, Japan, North America, and Europe.
• Applied ethics: Confucian perspectives are brought to bear on bioethics, business ethics, and environmental ethics.
• Comparative philosophy and religious studies: Confucian ideas are compared with Aristotelian virtue ethics, communitarianism, liberalism, Christian theology, and Buddhist thought.

New Confucianism provided many of the initial frameworks and categories for this engagement, but the conversation has expanded beyond its original circle of proponents.

Institutional and Public Developments

The early 21st century sees:

• Growth of Confucius Institutes, university centers, and research programs worldwide.
• Renewed interest in Confucian texts among lay publics in East Asia, including reading groups and “national studies” (guoxue) movements.
• Experimental initiatives in Confucian education and ritual revival, sometimes inspired but not always guided by New Confucian theories.

These developments contribute to a plural landscape in which Confucianism functions as academic philosophy, cultural heritage, ethical resource, and, in some contexts, soft power instrument.

Reassessing the Label “New Confucianism”

Scholars differ on how to situate New Confucianism within this wider scene:

• One view treats it as a historically specific movement (mainly 20th century, centered on certain figures and manifestos) whose influence persists but is now part of a larger, more diverse field.
• Another sees New Confucianism more broadly as any modern Confucian philosophy that undertakes systematic reconstruction in dialogue with global thought, thus encompassing many contemporary projects.

This entry distinguishes New Confucianism as a recognizable current while acknowledging that it has evolved into, and coexists with, a multiplicity of contemporary Confucian discourses.

18. Legacy and Historical Significance

New Confucianism’s legacy can be assessed in several dimensions: preservation and transformation of tradition, contributions to philosophy, and impact on cultural and political debates.

Preservation and Transformation of Confucian Heritage

During periods when Confucianism was attacked as feudal or marginalized by state ideologies, New Confucians played a major role in preserving classical texts and concepts, often through new interpretations. They did not simply transmit tradition; they transformed it by:

• Systematizing Confucian thought in modern philosophical vocabularies,
• Integrating insights from Buddhism, Western philosophy, and modern science,
• Recasting Confucianism as a resource for personal and collective life in modern societies.

Historians note that without this reconstruction, Confucianism might have remained primarily an object of historical study rather than an active philosophical option.

Contribution to Global Philosophy

New Confucianism introduced Confucian ideas into global academic discourse, particularly through English- and Japanese-language works. Its influence is visible in:

• Comparative ethics and virtue theory,
• Intercultural philosophy and debates on universalism vs. particularism,
• Discussions of moral metaphysics and the relation between ontology and ethics.

Even critics who reject New Confucian metaphysics often engage with its formulations as reference points in contemporary Confucian studies.

Impact on Political and Cultural Debates

New Confucianism has informed:

• Debates over Asian values, communitarianism, and models of democracy,
• Discussions of Chinese cultural identity in Taiwan, Hong Kong, the PRC, and the diaspora,
• Proposals for Confucian-inspired political institutions and public ethics.

Its ideas have influenced both state discourse (e.g., appeals to harmony and cultural tradition) and civil society initiatives (e.g., Confucian education, local ritual revivals), although the relationship is complex and sometimes contested.

Historiographical Reassessment

Contemporary scholarship increasingly views New Confucianism as:

• A distinct 20th-century movement with identifiable generations and agendas,
• Shaped by Cold War geopolitics, exile, and nationalist narratives,
• Marked by limitations regarding gender, class, and ethnic diversity.

At the same time, historians emphasize its role as a pioneering example of non-Western philosophical modernization, offering a case study of how an ancient tradition can respond creatively to global modernity.

New Confucianism thus occupies a significant place in the intellectual history of modern East Asia and in the broader story of world philosophy, even as its categories and projects continue to be revised, critiqued, and reimagined in contemporary Confucian thought.