The theories of these people provided Guo Kang with sufficient reasons and inspired him a lot—for example, propaganda and explanation, in fact, there is no need to be too detailed.

These "theories" can be justified by themselves. The key point is not whether its evidence is sufficient and whether its logical arguments are reasonable, but whether it can play a role in improving social efficiency and promoting national development.

After all, these facts prove that both Europe in the Enlightenment era and China in the 20th century were full of violent theories in the "guiding theories" adopted. But this did not prevent them from developing rapidly and finally achieving a comeback.

An example, so to speak, is a special case of a certain civilization. But the fact that two civilizations that were once in opposite positions and who advocated each other should be enough to prove a lot of problems.

These Enlightenment philosophers did have some concepts about the Orient and had an understanding of it. At least they really know the advantages of the imperial examination system and the bureaucratic system, and they also understand that China's history is very long, and even the detailed judgment that "Yongzheng is more industrious than other monarchs" cannot be wrong...... However, their understanding of China is still very one-sided, and the judgments they make and the conclusions they infer often deviate greatly from the facts.

At the end of the day, China is just an argument. European thinkers, when criticizing Aristotle, still used Plato's thinking to praise China as the ideal country. Even when they preached Confucius, they never got rid of the way of thinking that they had learned from the Greeks. In the final analysis, the China they praise is just a perfect country that conforms to European ideals created in accordance with traditional European philosophy and values.

In the same way, Chinese thinkers, when criticizing Confucius, also did the same Confucian thinking, praising Europe as a civilized world with morality and efficiency. Even when they advocated the ancient Greek philosophers, they never got rid of China's own way of thinking. In the final analysis, the Europe they praise is just a fictional perfect country that conforms to China's ideals according to traditional Chinese philosophy and values.

Are Chinese characters really as simple as Guo Kang said? Of course not. If you want to use this set of tools well, it is still not difficult. But his goal was not to prove that Chinese characters were simple, but to inform the other party that he was working on a policy to promote Chinese characters, and that he was confident that it would succeed. In this way, on the one hand, we can show that we are close to the civilization of the Central Plains, and on the other hand, we can borrow the experience of the Central Plains to demonstrate that Rome will become more and more stable.

Anyway, now Europeans are also touting China, and the craze brought by Marco Polo has not disappeared to this day. As a rule of thumb, this passion lasted even into the 19th century, and in that case, it was useless.

He was even ready to prove to the rest of Europe that the introduction of the Chinese language was reasonable. This is also not something he came up with alone, but a direct copy of the British thinking back then.

Before the 19th century, English was in an awkward position. There is an example that everyone should be familiar with: when Magalni visited the Qing Dynasty, he left without reaching any effective results with Qianlong. And the biggest problem with this diplomatic failure is not that the Qing Dynasty is too arrogant, or the British are too stubborn, but the simplest - incomprehensible.

The reason why I can't understand it is not that the Qing Dynasty closed its eyes and listened and did not understand the language of the Europeans. In fact, even after the fall out with the Roman Church, there were a large number of foreign missionaries in the imperial court, as well as specialized translation agencies, with relatively professional translators in French, Latin, Portuguese, Italian, Russian, and even Prussian.

- but there is no English.

During the Qianlong period, the Four Translation Centers were commissioned to compile the Huayi Translation as the official standard foreign language dictionary. It includes the Phraansiya, the Ladino, the Emaniya, the Idaliya, and the Bodadu Kariya. In addition, there is also a book "(Kouying) Card Translation", but the content is full of errors, and the title, format, and signature are also different from those of several other books, and it is suspected that it was added temporarily later, not the same official translation.

You don't really have to look at the content. In ancient times, when transliterating names, the ancient court was quite particular about the use of praise and disparagement. Compare the names "Idaria" and "(Kouying) Ka 唎国", as well as the string of "Yayu" and this exception, to know the attitude of the people at that time.

Not only the Qing people, but also the European missionaries who served the Qing court did not know English. This is also no way, because the serious cultural people in Europe at that time, who learned this thing...... On the contrary, there was a Frenchman who claimed that he could help and find a translator, but Magalny and others did not dare to believe him, which caused the matter to fall through.

In the entire mission, the head of the mission, Magalny, was an old nobleman who knew Latin and could communicate with Qianlong. But others are basically talking about chickens and ducks. Not only that, but the Catholic missionaries also formed groups in the Qing Dynasty, forming gangs and deliberately excluding them.

Bishop Tang Shixuan, Father Sodchao, and others appointed by the Church of Rome will make trouble for the British when they have the opportunity. According to the Dutch envoy Van Brown, when inspecting the astronomical instruments brought by the British, Tang Shixuan and others found that several devices were worn, and some of the parts had inscriptions in German. Obviously, this "national gift" was a patchwork of second-hand things, so it made the Qing government quite angry, and became the main evidence for their final characterization of the mission.

This is also evident in the situation of this language at that time.

Probably because they had no confidence in their own language, English scholars were more radical than the French. In 1668, the Royal Society of England held a special seminar, chaired by Wilkins, one of the founders, to discuss whether it was possible to directly use Chinese characters as the language of science and philosophy in Europe, or at least, to design a simple "ideogram symbol" like Chinese characters to transform the existing English and make it have a Chinese-style "ideographic connotation".

- Guo Kang explained earlier that the introduction of Chinese characters into Greek as lexical codes is a direct way of thinking. The Royal Society has done a lot of in-depth research on this, and has really made arguments and attempts, which are much more serious than those who later demanded the Latinization of Chinese characters, and even took foreign sponsorship to conduct Latinization research. Therefore, their results can also be directly referenced.

In the same way, he could come up with enough theories to call on other Europeans to follow suit, because this was the first 17th-century European research boom. Newton and others were engaged in the study of "universal language" because they believed that Latin was no longer sufficient, and therefore needed a more precise and concise language, preferably with a higher level of universality and abstraction, in order to facilitate the study of natural philosophy.

Newton, who was very obsessed with religion, called this ideal "prophetic language" and devoted a lot of energy. Obviously, the Europeans eat this set of rhetoric.

(End of chapter)