On Literary Reason

Selecting the relation of reason and literature as a point of penetration between philosophy and literature, considering the dispute and bewilderment about this relation in the circles of aesthetics and literary theory in China since 1980s, as well as in the western realm of thought about same problem since modern times, this dissertation tries to sort out some important relevant concepts, and defines and puts forward the concept of literary reason, trying to provide a new moment for the theory about the relation between literature and reason, hoping to expose and criticize the relativism and nihilism in the literary theory and philosophy.This dissertation is divided into four parts.1 Introduction: the contemporary difficult situation in the relation between literature and reasonThe relation between literature and reason has always been one of the inevitable basic questions about aesthetics and literature. This is especially obvious when the society is in transition with ideology changing dramatically. Since 1980s our literan circles have discussed fiercely about this question and have formed three views. The first view emphasizes the role of reason in literature. As the main stream, it agrees that literature is the representation of feelings and human beings, but it attacks irrational literan' concept, and believes rationalism in literature should be advocated. The second view advocates the priority of irrationalism in literature, and holds that irrationalism is the mark of literature in the modern world. The third view is eclectic. which tries to conciliate the two polar ideas.The dispute indicates the ideological and social background when the rational-irrational problem about literature became a focus of discussion after 1980s in China. That is to say, since the Cultural Revolution ended, the rigid ideology was discarded, and the society has been seeking a new existential base point, which is the legitimacy of man's earthly existence. This discussion has reflected and partially realized some request about modernity of poetics. "Literature is humanics". which belongs to the aesthetic activities of human beings. Literature has its own nature, and it is not the tool used in political fights. The voices above have been deeply implanted in the hearts of the people.However, the discussion reflects some serious shortages of theory itself: 1. neglecting construction of academic logic; 2, self-contradictory concepts: 3. giving free rein to theories; 4. mixing up different terms: 5, confusing the classification of philosophers, aestheticians and schools of them. These problems result from the longtime weakness of our poetics academic construction, and they result in somenegative influences, such as corresponding discussions cannot go further; earlier achievements are nullified and so on.2 sorting out some basic conceptsIn order to have a deep probe into the relation of reason and literature, firstly we should sort out some basic concepts about reason and nail down their relative significations of pragmatics, thus build a reasonable foundation for discussion.Rationalism is a concept which obviously has both historical and regional significations, and irrationalism, relative to rationalism, is also mainly a historical concept. Their semantic meanings cannot be extended at will. "Irrational" in Chinese has two meanings actually:" irrational" and "anti-rational". "Reason" can be used in its broad sense and narrow sense. The former means the function of integrating thoughts and intuition, besides clear thinking, while the latter means abstraction and logic reasoning, which is also called "rationality". "Sensation" is the ability of human being to perceive the presentation through senses, while "feeling" is the subjective aftermath of sensation, the object of Kant's aesthetic judgment. "Intuition" means man's ability to discern truth intuitively, which is related closely to imagination.3 the destiny of reason and literature's demand for reasonClearing of concepts makes us find an important phenomenon, that is the turn of "reason" during the process of modernity which directly leads to the conclusion of this dissertation. Since the 17n century, a big turn of "reason" has taken place: the narrowing of reason and "rationalization" supplanting "reason". The mark is that the whole world is divided into three aspects: knowledge, morality and aesthetics. The consequence of this division in literary theory is that the literature has been independent of other domains of social activity and it made literature resistant to the reason through three procedures: first, declaring rationalization belongs to respective aspects and autonomy becomes the base of legitimacy; second, declaring rationalization in other aspects, scientific reason e.g. is illegitimate in the world of literature and art; third, rationality taking up the name of reason, and "reason" is used to represent "rationalization", thus it becomes the target literature attacks. This turn results in "anti-reason paradox": each kind of attack against "reason" is actually aimed at the irrationality of opposite side, and it tries hard to prove itself more rational. The manifestation of the paradox in literature suggests that literature needs reason. First of all. the thinking function of literature has been always regarded important. Aristotle. Percy Shelley and Paul Valery all pointed out that poetry has the nature of philosophic thoughts. What literature cares is the moving-toward of reason, and this is in accordance with the metaphysic nature of literature. Then, as a kind of writing practice, literature cannot be automatic or irrational. Practice is a kind of operation, which has purpose and demands control. Of course this control doesn't build on understanding. Literature needs the care of grand reason.4 literary reasonIn this way, the conception of "literary reason" comes to being naturally. The possibility of "literary reason" builds on four conditions: first, reason can be dipartite: second, there is the concept of grand reason, and it's in accordance with the thinking pattern of literature; third, reason has the function of passive acceptance, which is just how the literary intelligence functions; fourth, according to Kant's theory, aesthetics (literature) is the only domain that is legitimate for metaphysical thinking.However, there have been constant queries on literary reason since from Plato. For Plato, the literature in his era (such as works of tragedy, comedy and epic) is sensational, superficial and degraded, far from rational, thus it should be banished out of Republic. But Aristotle dismantles the wall between idea and reality, endues poetry with probability and necessity, and thus proves that poetry is noble, for it conveys reason and is more philosophic than history. Thomas Love Peacock regards poetry as '"useless'" under the modern condition, where only utilitarian science and technolog> are rational for him. Shelley criticizes Peacock's view in his A Defense of Poetry. pointing out that poets are unacknowledged legislators of the world. Neoclassic Boileau Despreaux and contemporary scholar Paisley Livingston misunderstand literary reason, and demand literature to meet the narrowing rationality, rendering literature being the object of science, thus threaten literary reason from another aspect. At present. Derrida criticizes metaphysics fiercely through exposing the unreality of presence and metaphor. This challenges literature and literary reason whose artistic quality comes from presence and metaphor: is literature not the accessor) of metaphysics? Is literary reason that plays role in literary activity a form of metaphysics? But presence and metaphor in Derrida's theory are different from presence and metaphor in literature. The former are established on the base of unreal hypothesis, which is the originate of metaphysics, while the latter were special depictions built on the base of language, which can be used in anti-metaphysics.The connotation of literary reason is this, that,- there is a unique literary epistemology in the light of cognition. First, literature exerts its function of criticism aimed at its proper target; that is to say, the silliness of human being (Milan Kundera). This critique is always humorous. Second, the knowledge literature provides is limited and of embodiment, for it builds on presence and experiences. Third, literary knowledge takes care of the lifting of spirit, the marginal experiences of existence, and also, through the tension between presence and narration, it takes care of being. difference and contingent. As to writing, the effect of literary reason is to deal with the delicate and creative relation between unsayable impulse and words' operation, avoiding the operative reason becoming instrumental due to it's subjectivity and its usage of canons. From the angle of practice of moral reason, poets supply moral ideals about goodness through something Utopian. The ideal means nothing real in social improvement, but "what should be". However, this moral ideal profoundly influences people's actions in reality, which has been proved by history.