Transforming Conflict: A Comparison of Whitehead's Beauty and Laozi's Ziran 自然 (Self-So)

2022·1.5 MB·English

by  Cangfu Wang

TRANSFORMING CONFLICT:
A COMPARISON OF WHITEHEAD’S BEAUTY AND LAOZI’S ZIRAN 自然 (SELF-SO)

A Dissertation
Presented to
the Faculty of
Claremont School of Theology

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy

by
Cangfu Wang
May 2022
© 2022 by Cangfu Wang
All rights reserved
NT S C HOOL OF
T
O H
M E
O
E L
R O
A G
L Y
C
1885

This Dissertation, written by
Cangfu Wang
under the direction of his faculty committee and approved by its members,
has been presented to and accepted by
the Faculty of Claremont School of Theology
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Faculty Committee
Grace Yia-Hei Kao, Chairperson
Philip Clayton
Liu Xiaogan 刘笑敢

Dean of the Faculty
Andrew Dreitcer
May 2022
ABSTRACT

TRANSFORMING CONFLICT:
A COMPARISON OF WHITEHEAD’S BEAUTY AND LAOZI’S ZIRAN 自然 (SELF-SO)
by
Cangfu Wang

This dissertation presents a comparative religious ethics (CRE) study of Alfred North
Whitehead’s value of beauty and Laozi’s value of ziran 自然 (literally, “self-so”). Beauty is the
central value of Whitehead’s thought, just as ziran is the core value of Laozi’s thought.
Whitehead’s beauty means harmony and intensity, and Laozi’s ziran connotes non-domination,
spontaneity, and balanced harmony. By adopting an integrated CRE approach, this study finds
that the two values share similarities in (a) panentheistic grounds, (b) meanings of harmony, and
(c) moralities of transforming conflict. It further finds that the two values can help transform
cultural conflicts between Christianity and Chinese culture, especially the God-reliance of
Christianity and the self-reliance of Chinese culture. These findings overcome the confusion of
whether the two values are religious, the challenge of whether the two distant values are
comparable, and the doubt of whether the two values are morally advisable. This study
contributes to comparative studies between process thought and Daoist thought, Chinese
Christians, and those who participate in dialogues between Western and Chinese cultures for
making a better world.
Acknowledgments
This dissertation would not have been possible without the support of many good people.
This support has come in three forms: academic, financial, and personal. I wish to express my
most sincere appreciation and gratitude to them.
I am deeply grateful to my dissertation committee, Dr. Grace Yia-Hei Kao (chairperson),
Dr. Philip Clayton, and Dr. Liu Xiaogan 刘笑敢, for their guidance, patience, and
encouragement throughout the development of this dissertation. Dr. Kao has been my advisor
and professor for many years, and I am indebted to her for my knowledge of ethics, which plays
a core role in my dissertation. I sincerely thank Dr. Clayton and Dr. Liu, who have been
wonderful professors that I took courses with; their expertise in process philosophy/theology and
Daoism, respectively, helped guide my dissertation.
I would also like to express my deepest gratitude to those who helped secure financial
support from the Foundation for Theological Education in Southeast Asia, the Episcopal Church,
the American Baptist Churches USA, the United Methodist Church, and the June H. Chern
Endowment at Claremont School of Theology for my PhD studies. My mentor and role model
Rev. Dr. Kah-Jin Jeffrey Kuan, the president of Claremont School of Theology, wrote many
strong letters of reference for my applications to the various scholarships. My former professor
Rev. Dr. Manhong Melissa Lin, the academic dean of Nanjing Union Theological Seminary and
associate general secretary of China Christian Council, helped me similarly. Dr. H. S. Wilson,
Rev. Canon Bruce W. Woodcock, and Rev. Dr. Benjamin S. L. Chan helped approve my
applications for the scholarships, respectively. Without their support, I would not have been able
to complete my doctoral studies.
v
I very much appreciate June H. Chern for her kindness in sharing Chinese food weekly to
support my studies. I sincerely thank Jack and Jane Kao for inviting my family and me to move
into their house in the middle of my PhD program. My appreciation also goes out to my friends
and classmates Naeyoun Cho, Pablo Josue Diaz, Tyler R. Huson, Tomeka Jacobs, Lisa Kao,
Ahsah Kyuelna, Shuo-en Liang, Zicong Li, Oliver Zikai Lim, Fiona McMillan, and Esther
Hkawn Nu for supporting my pursuit of this project in various ways.
I also want to express my gratitude to my family, my favorite people on earth. I thank
Enli Cai, my dear wife, for her love and support. When I was down sometimes during this long
journey of studies, she always cheered me up. I thank my daughter Xinran Sharon Wang and my
son Xiuyuan Daniel Wang for sometimes distracting me from my studies; those distractions
reminded me to take breaks, which I needed. Thank you for your company in the past and into
the future.
vi
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... viii
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Chapter One: An Integrated Approach ......................................................................................... 16
I. An Overview of CRE Approaches ................................................................................ 16
II. An Integrated Approach ............................................................................................... 24
III. The Integrated Approach for This CRE Study ........................................................... 33
Chapter Two: Whitehead’s Beauty ............................................................................................... 46
I. Whitehead’s Philosophical Theology of Beauty ........................................................... 46
II. Whitehead’s Concept and Conceptions of Beauty ....................................................... 55
III. Whitehead’s Morality of Beauty ................................................................................. 67
Chapter Three: Laozi’s Ziran 自然 (Self-So) ............................................................................... 79
I. Laozi’s Religious Philosophy of Ziran .......................................................................... 79
II. The Concept and Conceptions of Laozi’s Ziran .......................................................... 90
III. Laozi’s Morality of Ziran ......................................................................................... 101
Chapter Four: Comparing Whitehead’s Beauty to Laozi’s Ziran ............................................... 111
I. Panentheistic Grounds ................................................................................................. 111
II. Meanings of Harmony ................................................................................................ 120
III. Moralities of Transforming Conflict ......................................................................... 128
Chapter Five: Transforming the Cultural Conflict between Christianity and Chinese Culture .. 142
I. The Cultural Conflict between Christianity and Chinese Culture ............................... 142
II. The Humanistic and Theistic Approaches for Transforming the Cultural Conflict ... 151
III. A Beauty/Ziran-Based Panentheistic Approach as an Advantageous Alternative ... 160
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 176
Bibliography ............................................................................................................................... 181
vii
List of Tables
Table 1. Whitehead’s Two Forms of Beauty ................................................................................ 62
Table 2. Ziran 自然 in the Laozi ................................................................................................... 86
viii
Introduction
At the Fourth International Whitehead Conference in Beijing in 2002, John B. Cobb Jr.
delivered a keynote speech entitled “Is Whitehead Relevant in China Today?”1 In his speech,
Cobb stated that traditional Chinese thought is full of profound insights that richly contribute to
the interior and daily life, “the very personal sphere,” of many people in the East and the West.2
To contemporary sociopolitical problems, however, traditional Chinese thought is ambiguous.
Cobb argued that Alfred North Whitehead’s thought could help expand traditional Chinese
thought positively to the contemporary sociopolitical sphere.
At the same conference, David Ray Griffin departed from Cobb’s perspective. In his
presentation, “Whitehead, China, Postmodern Politics, and Global Democracy in the New
Millennium,” Griffin contended that the religious-moral heritage of China and Whitehead’s
thought could take leadership roles in the emergent movement of global democracy that helps
correct the massive injustice, disharmony, and inhumaneness of current global governance.3 In
short, traditional Chinese thought, like Whitehead’s thought, meets contemporary sociopolitical
needs.
Because these two views are different or even opposite, we may naturally or immediately
ask which one is right or more accurate. If we go with Cobb’s perspective, we may agree with
his observation that traditional Chinese thought does little to undergird “a democratic spirit” and
informs too much of “the attitude toward political authority.”4 Cobb is not wrong if we identify

1 John B. Cobb Jr., “Is Whitehead Relevant in China Today?,” in Whitehead and China: Relevance and
Relationship, ed. Wenyu Xie, Zhihe Wang, and George E. Derfer (Frankfurt: Ontos Verlag, 2005), 15–24.
2 Cobb, “Is Whitehead Relevant in China Today?,” 15.
3 David Ray Griffin, “Whitehead, China, Postmodern Politics, and Global Democracy in the New
Millennium,” in Whitehead and China: Relevance and Relationship, ed. Wenyu Xie, Zhihe Wang, and George E.
Derfer (Frankfurt: Ontos Verlag, 2005), 25–38.
4 Cobb, “Is Whitehead Relevant in China Today?,” 15–16.
1
traditional Chinese thought with its dominant components, such as Confucianism. The problem
with this identification is that traditional Chinese thought is more than the dominant components.
Some schools of traditional Chinese thought, such as the Lao-Zhuang school of Daoism, disagree
with Confucianism for promoting sociopolitical hierarchy. Even in Confucianism, there are
different voices; some scholars defend the compatibility between Confucianism and democracy.5
Because Cobb’s perspective faces such difficulties, let us consider Griffin’s view. Griffin
is correct in that the religious-moral heritage of China, especially Confucianism, aids in
formulating an ethical framework of communitarianism that can be part of global democracy.6
Scholars who believe that Confucian communitarianism can help overcome the problems of
Western liberalism or individualism may find an ally in Griffin.7 The problem here, however, is
that this view obscures the limits of Confucian communitarian ethics, such as the emphasis on
obedience to sociopolitical hierarchy with few questions about the problem of justice. Worse,
these limits may lead to a feeling that the enthusiasm of this view for overcoming contemporary
sociopolitical problems is just wishful thinking.
We can seemingly go nowhere because defenses for either of Cobb’s or Griffin’s views
will inevitably fail. This impasse pushes us to reconsider whether our immediate question for
seeking the more accurate view is indeed the right question. While we discern no logical problem
with the immediate question, we are aware of the problems with each of Cobb’s and Griffin’s
views, as discussed above. Despite their differences, each view shares a common problem: they

5 For a discussion on the relationship between Confucianism and democracy, see He Baogang, “Four
Models of the Relationship between Confucianism and Democracy,” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 37, no. 1
(March 2010): 18–33.
6 Griffin, “Whitehead, China, Postmodern Politics, and Global Democracy,” 32–36.
7 Henry Rosemont Jr., “Whose Democracy? Which Rights? A Confucian Critique of Modern Western
Liberalism,” in Confucian Ethics: A Comparative Study of Self, Autonomy, and Community, ed. Kwong-loi Shun
and David B. Wong (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 49–71; Roger T. Ames, “Rites as Rights: The
Confucian Alternative,” in Human Rights and the World’s Religions, ed. Leroy S. Rouner (Notre Dame, IN:
University of Notre Dame Press, 1988), 199–216.
2