MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

“China Problem”, “Western Problem” and “Global Problem”

2010· article· en· W2104035819 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
He-ming Ma, Fang He

Bibliographic record

VenueCross-cultural communication · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChinese history and philosophy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaAdmirationWestern cultureHumanitiesChristianityHistoryEthnologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyArtReligious studiesLawLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emergence of “China Problem” and “Western Problem” accompanied by the global expansion of western capitalism, and the eastward expedition of Christianity, as well as the military aggression of western powers and the oriental movement of western culture. Before the 17th century, the manner of questioning among westerns is generally based on the standing of putting China in a high esteem. The tune of “Western-centric theory” started to burgeon. During the 19th and 20th century, the “questioning” basically followed by a condescending manner and the “Western-centric theory” was initially recognized. After the first and the second World War, the westerners’ questioning partly turned to embody a stance of equal dialog. From the end of the 20th century and the early 21st century, the “Western Problem” and “Chinese Problem” started tp entangle with the “Global Problem”. To trace the history, the conflict between western and Chinese cultures still exists. Yet the tendency of culture merger is irreversible. The purpose of the merger is to retrospect, criticize and intergrate our own culture and the foreign culture. Key Words: “China Problem”, “Western Problem”, “Global Problem”, merger of culture Resume L’apparition du ‘‘probleme de Chine’’ et ‘‘probleme de l’Occident’’ s’accompagne de l’expansion du capitalisme occidental dans le monde entier, le colonialisme, l’expedition a l’est du christianisme, l’envahissement militaire des puissances occidentales et le deplacement de la culture occidentale vers l’Orient. Avant le XVIIe siecle, les Occidentauxs ragardaient les choses avec l’admiration pour la Chine et le point de vue considerant l’Occident comme le centre du monde n’a pas encore forme ; au XVIIIe siecle, ils se rangeaient dans deux camps, le point de vue de l’Occident central commencait a surgir ; du XIXe au debut du XXe siecle, la plupart d’entre eux suivaient un mode de pensee dominant, le mode cognitif regaredant l’Occident comme le centre a ainsi pris forme ; apres la Premiere et la Seconde Guerre mondiale, ils se retournaient partiellement dans une position de dialogue sur un pied d’egalite. Depuis la fin du XIXe siecle et le debut du XXe siecle, ‘‘le probleme de l’Occident’’, ‘‘le probleme de Chine’’ et ‘‘le probleme du monde’’ commencaient a s’enchevetrer. Passant en revue l’histoire, on constate que les conflits entre la civilisation occidentale et la civilisation chinoise existent toujours, mais leur integrationt a deja devenu une tendance irresistible. Ce qui compte, c’est de faire un examan retrospectif et proceder a l’autocritique sur notre propre civillisation d’une part , et d’autre part apprendre a s’inspirer de la civilisation occidentale et l’integrer dans la notre. Mots-cles: le probleme de Chine, le probleme de l’Occident, le probleme du monde, l’integration culturelle 摘 要 “中國問題”與“西方問題”的出現,是伴隨著西方資本主義的全球化擴張、殖民主義化、基督教的東征史以及西方列強的軍事入侵與西方文化東移後形成的。在 17世紀之前西方人的設問方式大致是站在仰視中國的立場上進行的,尚未形成“西方中心論”的格調; 18世紀的設問,逐漸形成了兩派相左的觀點,“西方中心論”開始出現苗頭; 19至 20世紀初則大多沿著居高臨下的思維模式,也即形成了“西方中心論”的認知模式;第一、第二次世界大戰以後,西方人的設問又轉而部分顯現出平等對話的立場。20世紀末 21世紀初以來,“西方問題”、“中國問題”開始與“全球問題”相互糾纏。縱觀歷史,西方與中國文明之間的衝突依然存在,但是文明之間的融合趨勢業已勢不可擋,其要旨在於對自身文明及其他文明的反思、檢討、借鑒與整合。 關鍵詞:“中國問題”;“西方問題”;“全球問題”;文化融合

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.016
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCross-cultural communicationSame topicChinese history and philosophyFrench-language works237,207