A Contrast between Montesquieu’s and Quesnay’s Thoughts of China Despotism — A Methodological Reflection

• Main Authors: Chi-Lu Lai, 賴奇祿
• Other Authors: Roy Tseng
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2010
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/47530308260047137494

博士 === 國立中山大學 === 政治學研究所 === 98 === This dissertation aims to contrast the differences between Montesquieu’s and Quesnay’s thoughts of China Despotism theory, to analyze the methodology and epistemology used by the two scholars to demonstrate and observe traditional China despotism, and, to expound and examine the description of traditional China despotism in Montesquieu’s and Quesnay’s thoughts. Montesquieu was a rare one among Enlightenment philosophers who profoundly discussed China Despotism in the eighteenth century. In the elaboration of Montesquieu’s China Despotism, there were lots of contradictions in De L''espirt Des Lois. Traditional China government was depreciated by him. From the empirical induce methodology, positivism epistemology and ontology’s point of view, this dissertation tries to deeply analyze and research Montesquieu‘s China Despotism. At the time, there were also some Enlightenment Philosophers who have a different view of China Despotism. The representative was a Physiocrat – Francois Quesnay. In his Le Despotisme De La Chine, he marked traditional China government positively. Quesnay, who developed his view based on the same empirical facts about traditional China according to the eighteenth century’s Jesuits, travelers and businessmen and with the same natural science methodology, had totally different views and thoughts about China Despotism from Montesquieu. This dissertation has a detailed study and review on these differences. Questions will be explored in this dissertation are as below. Did the natural science methodology and epistemology of Montesquieu’s and Quesnay’s China Despotism strengthen the judgment of how they valued traditional China government? Were there pre-judgments in their so-called neutral and objective denouncement about the way they researched China Despotism in the empirical induce methodology and epistemology? Were Montesquieu’s and Quesnay’s judgments about China Depotism enhanced by the natural science methodology and epistemology a kind of western centralism? Did they, in the name of neutral and objective empirical induce methodology and epistemology that could not reason non-western value, refuse and devaluate other non-western value? This dissertation has a deeply reflection on these from the “paradigm” and “incommensurable” methodological concepts of Thomas S. Kuhn’s. If Montesquieu’s China Despotism was the main point of western culture, was the way Quesnay observed traditional China government presenting a different value in the west culture and there were still some admiring this kind of value? Was this kind of evaluation neglected by recent Chinese intellects? This is a serious problem worthy of reconsideration and reflection. Keywords: Montesquieu, François Quesnay, Physiocracy, Despotism, enlightened despotism, China Despotism, natural science methodology, theory laden, Thomas S. Kuhn, paradigm, incommensurable