In the 1930s, a polemic on Confucianism took place in the press between Phan Khdi and Tran Trong Kim, then another on idealism vs materialism and on the theory of "art for art's sake" vs "art for life's sake", pitting Hoai Thanh and Luu Trong Lu against Hai Trieu and Hai Thanh. In the first polemic, I did not approve of the ultra-conservative view of Tran Trong Kim, who looked at Confucianism only through the eyes of the Song scholars and stood for the revival of Confucianism during that time of social upheavals. Neither did I take the side of Phan Khoi, who appraised Confucianism only from the pragmatic stance of Hu Shih. In the second polemic, I naturally did (not) share the philosophical and artistic opinion of Hai Trieu. Around 1937, I wrote an essay in which I indirectly aired my views regarding both polemics, and thus my Khong gido phe binh tieu luan (Critical Essay on Confucianism) was published the following year.
展开▼
机译：在1930年代，潘·赫迪（Phan Khdi）和陈卓恩（Tran Trong Kim）在媒体上发生了一场关于儒家主义的争论，然后是一场论唯心主义与唯物主义以及关于“为艺术而艺术”与“为生活而艺术”的理论的争论，Hoai Thanh和Luu Trong Lu反对Hai Trieu和Hai Thanh。在第一个争论中，我不赞成陈金正的超保守观点，他只通过宋学者的眼光看儒家，主张在社会动荡时期复兴儒学。我也没有支持潘奎（Phan Khoi）的立场，潘仅从胡适的务实立场来评价儒学。在第二种争论中，我自然地（没有）分享海特里乌的哲学和艺术见解。 1937年左右，我写了一篇文章，间接地发表了我对两种辩证法的看法，因此，第二年出版了我的《孔子批判》。
展开▼
