自辛亥革命(1911)後，儒家思想在「生活世界」（Life World)層面的指引與 影響逐漸式微，當代新儒家反本(道德心)開新(民主、科學)的論點明顯也抵擋 不了西方獨霸解釋的民主、自由、平等、法治、人權、分配等「現代性」概念 之衝激，是以儒家陣營僅能退守於學院一角孤芳自賞而邊緣化，更有論者宣稱 儒家已是「博物館化」（museumization)。海内外總有學人與漢學家宣揚儒學的 「合理性」（rationality)與「現代性」（modernity),欲展現傳統儒學仍然具有的一 定的意義與價值。如今的生活世界是在「現代性」意義下所開展出來的，儒家 必須面對此挑戰。就哲學意義言，「現代性」具有三個特點：一是「人」作為 主體的「主體哲學」（Philosophy of Subjectivity)、二是「表象」（representation) 思維，三是「理性化歷程」展現的「工具理性」（instrumental reason)。可是， 理性異化了，主體過度膨脹，使人淪於理性的牢籠，造成意義與自由的雙重喪 失。本文探討了「現代性」對儒家帶來的三大挑戰：一、「現代性」基本上否定 了形上學，儒家對此除批判之外還能做出甚麼貢獻？二、「現代性」呈顯的現代 文化，尤其是民主與科學的生活世界，儒家應如何面對？三、「現代性」的理性 化歷程所產生的「理性的弔詭」，是儒家除堅持道德理性外是否應當發展工具理 性？吾人認為，一、儒家仍應持續探究形上學，但不限於當代新儒家堅持的心 性之學，持續提供人文理想於當代；二、儒家不應只是專業化中之一環，應恢 復儒家是一種生活方式的哲學；三、儒家亦當發展如「現代性」的工具理性， 吸收其優良面，創立新經典，以創造出前所未有的「儒家民主」之新道統。

This paper is a synthesis of aspects my previous works concerning the formulae of official documents and the communicative dynamics of the imperial court in the Tang Dynasty. The Chinese government maintained an absolute monarchy since its foundation in the Qin Dynasty to its dissolution in the Qing Dynasty. The critical flaw of an absolute monarchy is that the emperor is the legislator and the promulgator of the law, and also is the highest chief administrator and the final arbiter of the law. This paper discusses how the institution of feng-bo in Tang Dynasty official correspondence formed checks and balances to the imperial prerogative to the effect that the emperor exercised restraint. This study finds that, while there were no organizational or individual mandates in absolute monarchy that had veto power over the emperor’s arbitration, the Tang Dynasty bureaucracy tasked the office of the ji-shi-zhong to exercise dissent, and its programmatic edicts, rescripts, and other imperial correspondence formed a systematic check that forced the emperor to exercise restraint, particularly regarding policies of empire-wide consequences and judiciary issues. The result is a reduction of deliberative and administrative errors. In adition, the Tang Dynasty bureaucracy placed a high premium on the communicative stage of policy formulation, because it consolidated manpower and resources to ensure successful implementation. The communicative dynamics recorded in the compendium Zhenguan zhengyao show that the emperor and his court did not meet to discuss one specific item, but rather met continuously and frequently to discuss various matters in order to reach basic consensus on administrative matters. In this way, conflicts of interest were avoided, and mutual trust between the emperor and his court became established, which led to the negation of the element of suspicion, often the undesired product of absolute monarchy.