Individual Autonomy and Responsibility in Late Imperial China By ...

the individual.⁹ Self-discipline is then seen as a requirement for both personal and collective autonomy.

Similar considerations have been made also by Yan Fu 嚴復 (1854–1921), the translator of many Western works, among them John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty. However, while Mill regarded individual liberty as an intrinsic value, Yan perceived it as an instrument for advancing the intellect and virtue of the Chinese people and finally strengthening the nation as a whole.¹⁰ In sum, for modern China, we can borrow Klaus Muhlhahn’s conclusions, “[in China] no system developed a concept of individual rights or entitlements that shielded the individual from excesses of state power.”¹¹

Hu Shi 胡适 (1891–1962) elaborated on his own view on individuality that was still perceived mainly in its responsibility toward society. In the final analysis, the “small self” is as a function of the “big self,” because the former is mortal while the latter is supposed immortal, and individual potential is the primary condition of a well-functioning society.¹² Liang Shuming 梁漱溟 (1893–1988), a follower of Western Utilitarianism, a Buddhist convert, and a reinterpreter of Confucianism, opened the way for a new elaboration of the self; the heritage of traditional Confucian self-perfection, the concept of cultivation of the “inner self” (shenxin dayuan 深心大願) is the basis for the independence of the individual. Responsibility to anybody else or the “everlasting immortal big self” is irrelevant to the individual’s pursuit of the meaning of life. It is worthwhile, on the contrary, for everybody to follow their own unique talents and realize their own qi potential. This only leads to autonomous inclusiveness, solidarity (gang 剛), and “universal understanding” (lixing 理性).¹³ Finally, Zhang Foquan 張佛泉 (1907–1994) acknowledged the importance of individuality and personal freedoms to social progress but considered it necessary to reconcile social stability with individual liberty, which requires social control.¹⁴ The development of the debate on the free development of the individual and self-government, however, was very soon blocked by the crisis of the Republic, the Japanese invasion, the