THE year 2009 had not yet begun but scientific circles around the world were already busy preparing to celebrate two anniversaries: that of Charles Darwin’s birth (1809) and that of his main work On the Origin of the Species, published in 1859. Probably due to this occurrence, both notions of “evolution” and “creation” have again entered into a new spat of older controversies. One should equally remember the early ages of the Darwinian Theory: the tentative explanation of evolution understood it as a struggle for life, “the survival of the fittest”, to quote Herbert Spencer. In the early twentieth century, this had been abusively applied by some Chinese milieus to the competition among nations towards modernisation. The study published by James Reeve Pusey, China and Charles Darwin (Harvard University Press, 1983) has exposed these distortions in greater detail.

Notwithstanding these misreadings, the present financial and economic crisis has manifested the multiple interconnections that have been building among nations. They give to the present predicament a global scope never experienced before since the Second World War. Should one suppose that the face of the world has “mutated”? The unforeseen result is that, in just one year’s time, many millions of workers, particularly in China but elsewhere also, have lost their jobs. Along that line of reflection, financial specialists and economists would probably agree: the way capitalism has developed itself has reached a turning point. Since it is structuring many if not all the aspects of the world economy affecting the international community, a change is necessary, even if no solution is in view or at hand. This is the call given for a “Life after bankruptcy”, to quote Jürgen Habermas. It addresses ethical issues more than financial matters.

Speaking of “mutation” in this case is yet misleading. In the evolution of the Universe, the world community is not tossing here and there as drifting on the earth like on a tiny “drunken boat”, so to say by borrowing the metaphor from the French young poet Arthur Rimbaud. If there had been a distortion in applying Darwinian evolution theory to the growth of nations, as mentioned earlier, it was in mixing together what belongs to different levels of reality. In other words, between the evolution of life forms and the development of human history, there is a qualitative jump “of no return”. The present-age technological “interconnectivity” that has generated the actual predicament has by itself manifested more than ever before the “inner interrelationship” of the human community, including the poorest of its members. It is an open chance at all levels of the world civil society to grow up in solidarity. But would heads of state and politicians that advise them, be able to face the challenge of their leadership? This is another matter.

It is commonly said that history does not repeat itself because neglecting the lessons of history bears always heavier consequences. The two World Wars claim that truth by themselves. So do the global economic crises that have haunted the peace periods of the last century. It is therefore fortunate that in 2009 “the Darwinian theory gave opportunities to set up a new vision of nature, humanity and God. This vision is under the sign of history. […] We have not yet exhausted all the resources included in this theory,” as François Euvé writes to conclude his contribution. The year 2010 will follow in the same direction. In many places around the world, Matteo Ricci’s spirit and his legacy of friendship among cultures will be commemorated in the quatercentenary anniversary of his demise (May 11th 1610). As a starter for these festive celebrations, this issue presents the formative years of “the most outstanding cultural mediator between China and the West of all time” (W. Franke).


Yves Camus 赵仪文
Editor

back to top ▲