Faced with Guo Kang's explanation, Princess Jeanna was speechless for a while.

Jeanne Jr. tried to speak several times, but Guo Kang was even able to come up with a theological argument to prove that Chinese characters originated directly from the Father and were primordial languages beyond the Tower of Babel. Therefore, it also has extraordinary spirituality and is the most appropriate way to study knowledge.

This is not because Guo Kang suddenly understood and improved his theological knowledge, but because of the same reason - this thing has long been demonstrated by the brightest scholars in Europe at that time. He simply followed a series of conclusions drawn by Europeans around the 18th century.

According to the summary of later generations, during the Renaissance, the objects of European learning and envy were mainly China's material civilization, such as porcelain, silk and other utensils. By the 17th century, attention was paid to Chinese philosophy. By the time of the Enlightenment, the level of learning the advanced civilization of the East had risen to political and economic theories, and even to Chinese religion.

At that time, the study of the Orient by Europeans could be concentrated into three questions:

First of all, there is the question of the concept of talent. Is God a natural, universal idea?

Second, there is the question of the origin of civilization. Are Chinese characters the original language?

Finally, there is the question of ancient history and chronology. Are the accounts of ancient Chinese history credible? If so, what about Europe's record?

These three questions can cover almost all important aspects and even shake the religious and theoretical foundations of the whole of Europe.

For example, the first point is the focus of the research of John Locke, the originator of liberalism.

Locke collected a lot of information, and even wrote on a map of China every day. He did a lot of research on Chinese beliefs and came to the conclusion that in China, educated people mainly hold materialist and atheistic views.

At that time, missionaries led by the Jesuits tended to associate the Chinese faith with Catholicism in order to facilitate missionary work. But a group of scholars led by Locke were more radical, arguing that the study of Confucius, especially Neo-Confucianism from the Song dynasty onwards, was clearly an atheism or materialism.

According to Locke, the core of Confucian thought is that "all things are one." Their God is not the God of Europe, but a general term for the subtle laws that exist between all things in the world. Ancient philosophers such as Confucius pioneered this "sect", and the Chinese emperor was the high priest of the concept of sacrifice.

Thus, he was able to prove that the concept of God is not universal. Locke used this as a basis and argued with those who supported the "divine right of kings": if such an advanced civilization as China does not believe in God, then what reason is there to say that God's faith is innate? If God's faith itself is not innate, how can He be qualified to empower human monarchs?

Locke's doctrine was welcomed by the bourgeoisie and the new aristocracy. Of course, there are those who are simply more radical than him, arguing that while other philosophies turn to divinity, Chinese philosophy has always focused on man. Therefore, Europeans have always looked at human nature with the eyes of divinity, while Chinese have discovered divinity from the theory of human nature and believe that "I am God", resulting in a fundamental difference.

The results of their research were used for hundreds of years. It's just that later generations of Europeans themselves began to oppose reason and Enlightenment thought, so they changed their direction and attacked China in this way.

Of course, in addition to Confucius, Lao Tzu is also one of the objects of touting by Europeans. The word "laissez-faire" was first translated into French by Quenet and his followers.

According to their line of thinking, it can even be said that Lao Tzu and Confucius were the pioneers of liberalism, and Confucianism and Taoism were the source of capitalist development......

The impact of the latter two issues is equally huge.

The concept of "primordial language" was once quite popular. It was Leibniz who perfected this concept.

Leibniz's thinking was influenced by the French "king mathematician" and Jesuit priest Bai Jin. Bai Jin and others admired the Book of Changes, believing that the ancient knowledge in it had started the development of human society. The Chinese characters used for ideograms in the I Ching are the "mother of all inventions" with divinity and the true key to all knowledge.

This idea is actually imbued with the theological logic of Catholicism, but Leibniz and others are convinced of it. They claimed that Chinese characters were philosophical in nature and should be introduced to turn European scripts into such intellectual symbols. He conducted a series of studies, and although he was unsuccessful, his study of the I Ching bore bore fruit, which inspired his binary algorithm. This strengthened the confidence of the people and made them more convinced that the I Ching was really useful.

But this kind of behavior also has a great negative effect. According to posterity, Leibniz's dream has threatened the possibility of truth in European culture. Because, according to their theory, the clumsy languages of Europe were too far removed from true knowledge to develop philosophy, and also natural philosophy.

However, judging from the situation of later generations, the relationship between the development of science and technology and language has nothing to do with it at all. Even English could be used as an international academic language, and Newton didn't dare to think that (Newton himself didn't write books in English). And Leibniz probably can come back to life when he knows it......

And if these two articles still threaten the "authority of the West", the third point is simply to directly deny "Western history" itself. At that time, mainstream scholars were often very opposed to the "legal system" of "ancient Egypt-ancient Greece-Rome-Western Europe" proposed by the church, believing that "ancient Greece" and the church were both stumbling blocks to the development of philosophy and human enlightenment. Many people oppose Aristotle and even deny the original ancient history, arguing that they must be overthrown.

Newton wrote the Chronicles of the Ancient Kingdoms, which he argued that the history before Persia was not credible. The chronology of the Greeks is clearly exaggerated and full of "poetic fiction", and the accounts of Greece and Egypt are clearly fabricated.

Unfortunately, Newton was not very professional in this area, often using myths to dismiss myths and Biblical stories to negate Greek chronology. So the impact of this book is also limited. Of course, he is not the only one, even in addition to Voltaire's extreme view that "ancient European history is copied from China", there are not a few doubters, and even Newton's old enemy Hooke believes that classical history is a lot of fiction to oppose the constraints of the church.

Since then, this question has also been bothering Europeans.

In later generations, in the face of many achievements, few people have questioned the possibility of success of the European alphabet. However, the questioning of history has not stopped. In the 20th century, Spengler still questioned that the source of the so-called "West" could not be in Greece, because it was a "non-literal cultural body". The foundations of Europe's modern achievements could not have come from here, only somewhere else. Furthermore, the syllogism of the classical era - the Middle Ages - the modern era cannot be established.

In the end, this one question is even more tenacious than the vitality of the first two points.

Therefore, Guo Kang is not afraid of other people's suspicions at all. This set of theories has been questioned and reflected on by many European scholars over the past few hundred years, many of whom are famous for centuries. It has been tempered to perfection, and it is only because of its awkward situation that it is not very famous. But it must be enough to deal with the current skeptics.

This month, there are 10 places for fan titles, and according to the rules of the platform, an event will be held in the book review area to draw a lottery.

I forgot to say it before, so I specially remind you. If you are interested, you can go to the book review area.

(End of chapter)