Xu Fuguan most admired life开山祖师Xiong Shili Neo-Confucianism. He was in 1943 in Chongqing's College Veng North pui to the identity of the initial military Meet Xiong Shili, ask what熊氏should read the book. Wang Fuzhi熊氏taught him to read the "History of Reading." Xu said that the early years have read the book. Xiong Shili to upset the air that you did not read, it should be read. After some time, and then look at the Xiong Shili Xu Fuguan said, "History of Reading" has been read. Xiong asked, what experience? So Xu will be one after another to say he was not quite satisfied with the many places. Xiong Shili not listening to the grievances would reproach Road: "Do you this thing, how could read books! Any book content, are good places and bad places. Why do not you see he's a good first place, but specialized去挑bad; this study is to read 100 1000, you will be subject to what the benefits of the book? reading is to see the benefits of him, and then criticized his disadvantages, is like eating Like, after digestion and intake of "nutrition. Such as "Reading Mirror Theory" for a certain period of how meaningful it is; if a certain period, to understand how profound; Do you remember? Do you understand? Do you read this, really good job too! "This curse, cursed the army, Major General Xu Fuguan dumbfounded. Wandering in their brains, and this gentleman was so terrible curse cursed! That he read with such familiar reading! Original reading is to read every book The significance! as Xu Fuguan said later recalled, which he is brought back to life a curse. I am afraid for all the clever conceit, but did not enter the doors of learning for young people, middle-aged, the elderly, are brought back to life a curse! half after the meeting the impact of its huge, since he is determined to enter the door to academic.
Perhaps the role of experience in politics, Xu Fuguan compared to other Neo-Confucian scholars, the relatively more enlightened. It can be said that he was a neo-Confucianism camp in the most critical feudal autocracy and for democracy, a cry the most ground. Although he did not support him to the liberals in general, but he did claim to own the idea of a "humanistic liberalism." He insisted that the new position of conservative Confucian culture of learning at the same time, in relation to political issues, his basic attitude can be roughly classified as the principles of liberalism. Therefore, saying that, Xu Fuguan is liberalism and political discussions, to conservatism on the school. This largely reflects the two sides of the ideological Schiff.
And other Neo-Confucian scholars compared Xu Fuguan academic achievements instead of the New Confucianism to elucidate the number of new theories, but are more systematically carried out ideological and cultural history of China research, especially the pre-Qin, Han dynasty academic study of the history of ideas, this is the other new Confucian scholars place less attention. It is through this research, Xu Fuguan thinking more and more scholars with a history of color, more clearly see the historical value of Confucian thinking and practical significance, although this view can not avoid with new prejudices Confucian scholars . In his view, the Confucian thought in the long-term under the autocratic politics inevitably occur in some distortion, deformation, but this can only be described as authoritarian political pressure and to prevent the distortion of the normal development of Confucian thought, how can we turn around and say that Confucianism it is the autocratic amulet. Moreover, the Confucian thought in the long-term adaptation, distortion has been able to amend the autocratic regime to ease the poison, and continuously given to the normal social life, the direction and confidence, making the Chinese nation through many a dark age, which is due to the pre-Qin Confucianism is based on moral and rational human nature built up the spirit of the great moral strength. Those who study the history of ideas should be on the specific materials, penetration of Confucian thinking in order to grasp the true internal.
Xu Fuguan appears in the Chinese history of ideas on the main task is to cultural traditions in China have found that good things can be found in Chinese culture and politics of local convergence. Xu Fuguan So for those of Chinese culture had severely criticized the attitude of those who did not deep. In his "Political Thought of Confucianism and democracy, freedom and human rights" that all these years people talk about Chinese culture, whether positive or negative stand on the position, have ignored the cultural character of the different, but only using the same yardstick will be attached to exaggeration. Fan said that Chinese culture is backward, it is done using the Western cultural measure of Chinese culture; who said that Chinese culture is to go beyond, and this is a holder of Chinese culture measure of Western culture. Never dreamed that a measure of the nature of two different cultures, I am afraid this is not is not a mistake. In view of this, Xu Fuguan of modern times has spared no effort to criticize the Chinese culture, low-destroyed Chinese culture, wanton belittle scholars of Chinese culture are extremely dissatisfied that China needed a spiritual movement conscious of Chinese culture is to have re-re-affirmed . Chinese culture of re-affirmed, but the spirit of the awakening of natural to us, but the starting point of awakening. The history of mankind, we have only seen the eradication of some of the nation, but its culture is still there is another national heritage rather than by the fact that absolutely. No nation is not breaking even eradication, we first created by the elimination of their own culture. That is, people born in their own cultural infiltration, and no one can remain outside. Take a purely negative attitude of the people, the actual in his life, is not able to completely deny swap, but only by his lack of conscious feeling, but their culture virtually standing bad. Now write off at one stroke of Chinese culture, and its behavior, and most of China-based scholars habits; under behavior, the only China-based followers of the rogue. Only consciously to acknowledge their own culture in order to stand on their own culture on the one hand, the good. At the same time, for their own culture has a sincere attitude of good will for the division of human achievements of other cultures, it will naturally have a good attitude in a sincere, there is no sleep to be absorbed pursuit of truth.
Xu Fuguan above is very clear that the overall anti-traditional ideas of a criticism, but there is no doubt that he tried to seek traditional Chinese culture to Western culture the soil and conditions for grafting mean, 54 is indeed quite a comprehensive anti-tradition some people have. This ideology seems to be thinking of is a continuation of early Hu. Hu Shih in his famous book "History of Pre-school," wrote China's current political, economic, military, science and technology are obviously lagging behind the West, thus the mental state of the Chinese people in a state of malaise . There is no doubt that China wants to change the passive situation of being beaten behind to self-reliance in the world, first and foremost is the economy, industrial restructuring and revitalization. However, with a glorious history and has created a splendid culture of the nation, in a new cultural challenges will not feel comfortable. Therefore, Hu Shi, China is the current problem lies in economic prosperity, technological advancement, but must also take into account the Chinese people a serious imbalance in the psychological issues, namely, how can we Chinese people in this at first sight with our inherent culture is very different from the new world aplomb? To achieve this goal, Hu believes that, first and foremost is to understand the Chinese culture and Western culture and its inherent nature of the differences can be accommodation of. He pointed out that the very nature of human culture, something the two sides was the same. The reason why the two sides have basically the same as its point, that is because the two sides are starting from a common sense of humanity. In other words, any kind of culture, irrespective of their form, at the beginning of their problems to be solved in the basic starting point are similar, the problems faced and the means to be taken is also very similar. Only later, as a result of changing social conditions, Chinese and Western cultural development between the two sides began difference, began to embark on different paths to development. It is precisely because this is different from Chinese and Western cultures are required to exchange the need for communication. However, cultural exchange and communication is a very complex issue, while the European and American culture is far more advanced Chinese culture, but can not be blindly imported, but must make the best of modern Western culture and Chinese culture inherent in the spirit of genuine link, rather than rejection occurred. To this end, the primary issue is to seek the two sides can communicate with each other, or an opportunity to join the foundation. In other words, must be the land of China to seek out a piece of European and American culture can be grafted soil, and in this intrinsic to reconcile two different cultures based on their new Chinese cultural system.
However, Hu's findings is that the Chinese culture with Western culture For a combination of organic, must be excluded from the stage of Neo-Confucianism, and the basic rule out the possibility of revival of Confucianism. In contrast, the exchanges between Chinese and Western culture and communication, must be to send non-Confucian revival. Because only in those non-Confucianism sent to find a transplant in Western philosophy and science and the best results of suitable soil. From a historical point of view and development of modern Western culture the most important contributions to almost all from non-Confucianism in ancient China who found the idea of sending distant and highly developed pioneer. So from this sense, Hu Xu Fuguan Although awareness of Chinese and Western cultures are basically the same, they are in search of Chinese culture to accept the soil transplantation. They found, however the basis is obviously not the same. Xu Fuguan believe that the idea of China's long tradition of democracy and the West already has the connotation of the scientific spirit, it is these connotations can become grafted Western culture soil. To accomplish this mission, therefore we must first strive to Confucianism also true, because the true spirit of Confucius and Mencius down chasing down, and in politics, must be demanded democracy, only after the establishment of autocratic politics, this spirit had been suppressed. Autocracy in the Western Han Dynasty, the great thinkers such as Jia Yi, Dong Zhongshu, are opposed to tyranny and oppose the home of the world. "Lu's Spring and Autumn" and "Huainanzi" political ideology are for democracy. It is precisely because of this consideration, Xu Fuguan trying to traditional Chinese culture, the democratic spirit of the Central Plains have to re-divert significant excluded from, this is what he expected to go to St. Following绝学; then used to support the spirit of this part of China's modern democracy political, Xu Fuguan appears in Jesus Christ is to open peace.
Xu Fuguan a lot of thinking in the study of the history books, he basically focus on exploring the history of Chinese thought democracy and the idea of him as a factor in progress. As he spoke of Qian Mu's history and its history when the distinction said, "I and Mr. Qian in common are the good side of history should be excavated. However, Mr. Qian was discovered by two millennia of autocratic despotism is not the result that we should be living in the historical tradition of the political system, and what kind of democracy do not have to paranoia. but I have to explore a variety of ways, but is against autocracy, despotism easing in a number of enlightened despotism injecting factors, under the authoritarian how to maintain the vitality of the national first-line heart saints, Hermit's festival, the great historian writer to face the people groaning whimper, as well as people with lofty ideals loyal seekers, in the authoritarian flow in the blood and tears. "This shows that Neo-Confucianism Although scholars have a deep concern for the reality, but they are from China thousands of years of history of traditional Chinese value sought primarily direct their personal feelings for the principle, and therefore they argued that China's traditional Chinese history and culture does not seem to the truth.
Through the study of the history of ideas of Confucianism, especially the re-recognition, Xu Fuguan believe that Chinese culture did not appear in democratic politics, it appears to be the biggest blot on the Chinese culture. However, in the history of Chinese thought, then there is no lack of ideas of democracy or the ideological factor. From this point of view, Xu Fuguan on Confucius people who are trustworthy to carry out a re-interpretation of some of the people on the principles of Mencius also made some very innovative re-interpretation. Based on these explanations, in his view, if the intrinsic Confucian ethics into the political level, despite the Confucian political ideology has its exquisite pure theory, but due to historical conditions,祖述Confucian thought, from the political in this area of view, the status of the rulers always think of a way for the rulers, always living in the status of the rulers in order to resolve political problems, and few have been standing on the status of the rulers to the provisions of the rulers of the political actors to seek a solution political issue. This will enable the West in modern times and the democratic political struggle from the next to go up the development of the situation into a very clear contrast. The main result of China's political establishment is not always up, China's political thinking is not always the people of the move towards democracy. According to this thinking to continue to assume that China's political future course should be based on Western democratic political system to make up for re-Confucian ceremony rule rather than the traditional thinking of the rule of law conclusion.
However, regrettably, Xu Fuguan Confucian thinking based on the new limitations, especially in the West based on democratic development issues in the process of emerging facts, but also a profound sense of the democratic political system of the West
在第二代新儒家的学者中，徐复观可谓情况比较特殊，他半生从政，1946年五十岁之后才以少将衔退役，开始从事学术研究，宣传新儒家的学说。在他的后半生，他写作并出版了十几部学术专著、论文集，发表近百篇学术论文和杂文，是第二代新儒家学者中比较有成就的学者。
徐复观一生最佩服新儒家的开山祖师熊十力。他于1943年在重庆北培勉仁书院以军人的身分初次拜见熊十力，请教熊氏应该读什么书。熊氏教他读王夫之的《读通鉴论》。徐说那书早年已经读过了。熊十力以不高兴的神气说，你并没有读懂，应该再读。过了些时候，徐复观再去看熊十力，说《读通鉴论》已经读完了。熊问，有什么心得?于是徐便接二连三地说出许多他不太满意的地方。熊十力未听完便怨声斥骂道："你这个东西，怎么会读得进书！任何书的内容，都是有好的地方，也有坏的地方。你为什么不先看出他的好的地方，却专门去挑坏的；这样读书，就是读了百部千部，你会受到书的什么益处?读书是要先看出他的好处，再批评他的坏处，这才像吃东西一样，经过消化而摄取"了营养。比如《读通鉴论》，某一段该是多么有意义；又如某一段，理解是如何深刻；你记得吗?你懂得吗?你这样读书，真太没有出息！”这一骂，骂得徐复观这个陆军少将目瞪口呆。脑筋里乱转着，原来这位先生骂人骂得这样凶!原来他读书读得这样熟!原来读书是要先读出每部书的意义！正如徐复观后来回忆时所说，这对他是起死回生的一骂。恐怕对于一切聪明自负，但并没有走进学问之门的青年人、中年人、老年人，都是起死回生的一骂！这次见面对其后半生的影响甚巨，从此使他决心步入学术之门。
或许是从政的经历所起作用，徐复观比起其他新儒家的学者来，相对说来比较开明。可以说，他是新儒家阵营中批判封建专制主义最力和为民主呐喊最勤的一位。他虽然不赞成把他纳入一般的自由主义者，但他确实自称自己的思想是"人文主义的自由主义"。他在坚持新儒家文化保守主义的立场论学的同时，在涉及到政治问题时，他的基本态度大体可以归为自由主义的原则。所以有人说，徐复观是以自由主义论政，以保守主义论学。这大体反映了徐氏思想的两个方面。
和其他的新儒家学者相比，徐复观的学术成就不是对儒家思想的新开展作出多少新的理论阐发，而是比较多、比较系统地进行了中国思想文化史的研究，尤其是先秦、两汉学术思想史的研究，这是其他新儒家学者较少留意的地方。正是通过这种研究，徐复观的思想就比较多的带有历史学者的色彩，比较清楚地看到儒家思想的历史价值和现实意义，尽管这种看法也不免带有新儒家学者的偏见。他认为，儒家思想在长期的专制政治下，不可避免地会发生某些歪曲、变形，但是这只能说是专制政治压歪了并阻止了儒家思想的正常发展，怎么能倒过来说儒家思想是专制的护身符呢。而且，儒家思想在长期的适应、歪曲中，仍能修正缓和专制制度的毒害，不断给予社会人生以正常的方向和信心，因而使中华民族度过了许多黑暗时代，这乃由于先秦儒家立基于道德理性的人性所建立起来的道德精神的伟大力量。研究思想史的人，应就具体的材料，透入于儒家思想的内部以把握其本来面目。
在徐复观看来，中国思想史研究的主要任务，就是要在中国文化传统中发现那些好的东西，发现中国文化中可以和民主政治相衔接的地方。因此徐复观对那些对中国文化持严厉批评态度的人深不以为然。他在《儒家政治思想与民主自由人权》中说，这些年来谈中国文化的人士，不论站在正面或反面的立场，都忽略了文化性格上的不同，而仅拿同一的尺度去夸张附会。凡说中国文化是落后的，这是拿西方的文化做尺度去衡量中国文化；凡说中国文化是超越的，这是拿中国的文化尺度去衡量西方文化。殊不知以一个尺度去衡量两种不同性质的文化，恐怕这不能不是一个错误。鉴于此，徐复观对近代以来不遗余力批判中国文化、低毁中国文化、肆意贬低中国文化的学者极为不满，以为目前中国所需要的一种精神自觉的运动就是要对中国文化有重新的再肯定。对中国文化之再肯定，只是精神觉醒的自然流露，只是觉醒的起点。人类历史中，只看见有的民族消灭了，但其民族的文化却依然有另一个民族所传承而不绝的事实。断乎没有民族未消灭，便首先会消灭其自身所创造的文化。人一生下来即浸润于其自身文化之中，任何人都不能自外。采取纯否定态度的人，实际在他的生活中，并不能将其完全否定掉，而只是由他这种缺乏自觉之情，反而使自己无形中站在文化坏的方面。现在一笔抹煞中国文化的人，其上焉者，多半是中国型的文人习气；下焉者，只是中国型的无赖之徒。只有自觉地先承认自己文化，才能站在自己的文化的好的一方面。同时，对于自己的文化有一副真诚的良好的态度，则对于为人类所分工成就的其他文化，也自然会有一副真诚的良好态度，没有不努力加以追求吸收之理。
徐复观的上述态度显然是对全盘反传统思潮的一种批评，但是毫无疑问，他试图从中国文化传统中寻求以西方文化嫁接的土壤和条件的意思，实为五四全盘反传统中相当一部分人所具有。而这种思想意识似乎也正是胡适早年思想的延续。胡适在其名著《先秦名学史》中写道，当前的中国由于政治、经济、军事、科技等各方面明显落后于西方，遂使中国人的精神状态处于一种萎靡不振的境界之中。无疑，中国要改变落后挨打的被动处境，以自立于世界民族之林，首要的是经济、实业的重整与振兴。但是，一个具有光荣历史以及创造了灿烂文化的民族，在一个新的文化挑战的时候决不会感到自在。因此在胡适看来，中国当前的问题固然在于经济的繁荣，科技的发达，但又必须同时考虑到中国人心理严重失衡的问题，即我们中国人如何能在这个骤看起来同我们的固有文化大不相同的新世界里感到泰然自若?欲达此目的，胡适认为，首要的在于弄清中国文化与西方文化的本质差异及其内在的可通融性。他指出，人类文化就本质而言，东西双方原是一致的。双方之所以有其基本上相同之点，就是因为彼此都是从人类的常识出发。换言之，任何一种文化不论其形式如何，其起初所要解决的问题在出发点上都是基本相似的，所面对的问题和将要采取的手段也是极为相似的。只是到了后来，由于社会条件的不断变化，中西双方的文化发展才开始出现差异，才开始走上不同的发展道路。正是由于这种不同，中西文化才需要交流，需要沟通。然而文化的交流与沟通又是一个十分复杂的问题，虽然现在的欧美文化较中国文化远为先进，但也不是可以盲目引进的，而必须使西方现代文化的精华与中国固有的文化精神真正联结起来，而不发生排异反应。为此，首要的问题是寻求彼此双方可以沟通、联结的基础或契机。也就是说，必须在中国大地上寻求出一块可以嫁接欧美文化的土壤，并在这两种不同文化内在调和的基础上建立中国自已的新的文化体系。
不过，胡适的研究结果是，中国文化如欲与西方文化进行有机的结合，必须排除宋明理学的阶段，并基本排除了儒学复兴的可能性。相反，中西文化之间的交流与沟通，必须有待于非儒学派的复兴。因为只有在这些非儒学派中才能找到移植西方哲学和科学最佳成果的合适土壤。从历史和发展的观点看，现代西方文化最主要的贡献差不多都能从中国古代那些非儒学派的思想里找到遥远而高度发展的先驱。因此从这个意义上说，徐复观虽然与胡适对中西文化的认识基本相同，他们都是为了寻求中国文化能够接受移植的土壤。然而二人所找到的基础则显然不一样。徐复观认为，中国悠久的思想传统早已具有西方民主政治和科学精神的内涵，正是这些内涵足以成为嫁接西方文化的土壤。因此要完成这一使命首先必须努力还儒家思想的本来面目，因为顺着孔孟的真精神追下来，在政治上一定是要求民主，只是在专制政治成立之后，这种精神受到了压抑。在西汉的专制下，大思想家如贾谊、董仲舒，都是反对专制，反对家天下的。《吕氏春秋》和《淮南子》的政治思想都是要求民主的。正是基于这种考虑，徐复观竭力要把中国文化传统中原有的民主精神重新显豁疏导出来，这便是他所期望的为往圣继绝学；然后用这部分精神来支持中国现代的民主政治，这在徐复观看来就是为万世开太平。
在徐复观大量的思想史研究著作中，他着力探讨的基本上都是中国思想史上的民主因素和他视为进步的思想因素。正如他在谈到钱穆的史学与其史学的区别时所说的那样，"我和钱先生相同之处，都是要把历史中好的一面发掘出来。但钱先生所发掘的是两千年的专制并不是专制，因而我们应当安住于历史传统政制之中，不必妄想什么民主。而我所发掘的却是以各种方式反抗专制，缓和专制，在专制中注入若干开明因素，在专制下如何保持一线民族生机的圣贤之心，隐逸之节，伟大史学家文学家面对人民的呜咽呻吟，以及志士仁人忠臣义士，在专制中所流的血与泪。"由此可见，新儒家的学者虽然具有浓厚的现实关怀，但他们从中国数千年历史传统中所寻求的价值却主要是以他们个人的直接感受为原则，因而他们所论说的中国传统似乎并不是中国历史文化的真相。
通过对思想史的研究尤其是对儒家思想的重新体认，徐复观认为，中国文化中没有出现民主政治，这似乎是中国文化的最大污点。但是在中国思想史中，则不乏民主的思想或者说是思想因素。从这点出发，徐复观对孔子的民无信不立进行了重新诠释，对孟子的一些民治原则也作了一些颇具新意的重新解释。基于这些解释，他认为，如果将儒家的内在道德落实到政治层面上，尽管儒家的政治思想有其纯粹的精致的理论，但由于历史条件的制约，儒家所祖述的思想，从政治这一方面看，总是站在统治者的地位为统治者想办法，总是居于统治者的地位以求解决政治问题，而很少站在被统治者的地位去规定统治者的政治行为，以谋求解决政治问题。这样使与西方近代以来的民主政治由下向上去争的发展的情形，成一极明显的对照。因之中国政治的主体性始终建立不起来，中国政治思想也就始终没有从民本走向民主。按照这种思想继续推论，中国政治的未来当然是应该以西方的民主政治制度来弥补儒家的重礼治而不重法治的思想传统的结论。
然而，遗憾的是，徐复观基于新儒家思想的局限，特别是基于西方民主政治发展进程中的问题不断出现的事实，又深刻地感觉到西方的民主政治制度虽然有其合理性和有用性，但是实际上很难解决社会生活中实际存在的个人与全体的矛盾和冲突，因此在不远的将来可能要爆发相当严重的危机。而正是在这一点上，徐复观又感到儒家文化尤其是儒家素来强调的德治政治似乎可以为解决西方政治制度危机提供一条很好的思路和办法。他在《儒家政治思想的构造及演进》中说，如果采用西方近代权力竞争的政治观点，而不承认各个体的基本权力的限制，这种把中西坏的方面揉合在一起的政治，有如中国现代的政治，这便是世界上最不可救药的政治。比如近代法的基本观念，本是规定相互关系，以限制统治、保障人民的。而在这种政治下，则变为压抑人民、放肆统治的工具。所以等于无法，更何有于礼让。据此可知民国以来的政治，既不是西方的民主政治在替我们负责，也不是儒家的政治思想在替我们负责，而是亦中亦西，不中不西的政治路线在作祟。他强调说，我们今日只有放胆的走上民主政治的坦途，而把儒家的政治理想重新倒转过来，站在被统治者的立场上来作一番新的体认。首先把政治的主体从统治者的错觉中移归人民，人民能有力量防止统治者的不德，人民由统治者中的"民本"一转而为自己站起来的民主。知识分子一变向朝廷钻出路、向君王上奏书的可怜心理，转而向社会大众找出路、向社会大众明是非的气概。对于现实政治人物的衡断，再不应当着眼于个人的才能，而应首先着眼于他对建立真正的政治主体，即对民所研发挥的作用。所以今后的政治，先要有合理的争，才归于合理的不争。先要有个体的独立，再归于超个体的共立。先要有基本权力观念的限定，再归于超权力的礼的陶冶。总之，要将儒家的政治思想由以统治者为起点的迎接到下面来，变为以被统治者为起点，并补进中国历史中所略去的个体之自觉的阶段。这样，民主政治则可因儒家思想的复活而得其更高的依据；而儒家思想也可因民主政治的建立而得完成其真正客观的构造。这不仅可以斩断现实政治上许多不必要的葛藤，且可在反极权主义的斗争中为中国为人类的政治前途开一新的运会。