To tell you the truth, in spite of my accomplished scholarship in philosophy, I never developed any spontaneously deep love for this so-called "love of wisdom." My attitude toward philosophy can still be found in my poem published in 1966:[1]

Readers of this poem may ask me a question: Why did you concentrate in the field in which you have not been interested? Or, why did you spend your whole academic life working on something without your natural interests? My answer toward this question is that I got an admirable teacher in philosophy at the very beginning of my exploration program in 1960. This admirable teacher is our Professor Lewis E. Hahn.

Now, a very natural question to ask me is this: Before you started the study of philosophy, had you developed any special interest for your academic plan? My immediate answer is "yes." My special interest was Chinese literature. Even when I was a high school graduate, I already established myself as a major of Chinese classical literature.[2] After four years of academic studies in this field, with my B. A. degree I got an opportunity to teach what I liked in a high school. I enjoyed my experience with Chinese culture, including Chinese language, Chinese literature, Chinese art, and even Chinese cooking. I also enjoyed feelings from Chinese friends and students. Unfortunately, my enjoyment of all these was limited to only one year.

Professor Hahn’s contribution in fact has been much more than his teaching performance. He has been an educator in higher education since 1936. Within these several decades he has developed a department of philosophy and a graduate program for three well-established universities of the Midwest. As many of you know about, the first one was University of Missouri at Columbia (1936-1949), the second one was Washington University in St. Louis (1949-1963), and the third one has been Southern Illinois University at Carbondale (1963-present). In each of the campuses he has been a great contributor in administration and educational performance with intelligence and creativity. According to my observation, American educational administrators are usually regulation operators or followers of educational rules. But for Professor Hahn, each act of performance is not simply following a rule or regulation. This can be explained by an idea of John Dewey. When I studied John Dewey’s moral philosophy, I was greatly impressed by his distinction between customary morality and reflective morality.[3] As I observe, Professor Hahn’s educational performance has just practiced a proper distinction between customary education and reflective education. Within his duty of administration, he performs every act with reflection, including educational values, anticipation of consequences, together with the consideration of all the environmental situations of faculty members and students. In addition to his contribution through educational administration, Professor Hahn has performed effectively and successfully in his development of the international relations between the American academic world and the academic world of other countries. Many of us certainly know about the accomplishment of this campus in successful education provided to foreign students.

But, at the same time, Professor Hahn has been very attentive toward international academic meetings as well as opportunities for intercultural development. In the March of 1993, I was given an opportunity to present my paper on Chinese medicine in the International Symposium on East-West Cultural Interflow in Macao of Asia. My most enjoyable time was not the presentation of my own medical essay. It was not even the time when I shared the delicious Chinese dinner. In fact, my most enjoyable time was the period of listening to Professor Hahn’s preaching an admirable lecture for all the social and intellectual members who came from various locations of the world. The title of his lecture was "Enhancing Cultural Interflow between East and West." This lecture is, in fact, not just an essay in comparative philosophy, but also an essay inspiring international action. My academic friends, if you have not read this lecture essay, it is now ready for you in his newly published book, with the same title of this particular essay.[4]

There is still another important educational contribution by Professor Hahn which has not been mentioned. This is the editorship for The Library of Living Philosophers. This library was originally founded in 1938 by Professor Paul Schilpp. Since 1981 Professor Hahn has assumed the entire complicated performance of editorship, recruiting international scholars to contribute critical essays on the selected philosopher to be honored. Now, I apologize for using myself again as an example. But it may make more sense for all of you to understand Professor Hahn. It was three years ago, I received a note from him, inviting me to write a critical comment on Strawson’s logical theory. During that time, I was surprised at his memory of my academic record, having written a doctoral dissertation in logical theory, with a small section on the logical theory of Strawson. In fact, I have forgotten what I had done thirty years ago. Professor Hahn’s admirable memory is indeed one of genius nature or holy power. In order to respect his super-ability and educational spirit, I replied with affirmation. But I had to review Strawson’ s logical theory in order to fulfill my duty properly. Now, The Philosophy of P. F. Strawson has been completed and published.[5] It is just an example of the editorship contribution of Professor Lewis E. Hahn.

What is American philosophy? Does this term refer to only the philosophy of the major pragmatists including Charles Peirce, William James, and John Dewey? If we accept this identification, how do we consider philosophers like Alfred Whitehead, Josiah Royce, and George Santayana? These several people have been considered top philosophers in the United States. Should we just cancel their American academic citizenship? From an international viewpoint, pragmatism is the main representative of American philosophy.[6] But, American philosophy is not limited to only pragmatism. So, an American pragmatist should accept non-pragmatic philosophers, and should even learn from them when it is necessary or valuable. In a certain sense, we have to accept philosophical interaction between pragmatism and other philosophical schools in the development of American philosophy.

First, let us talk about metaphysics.[7] What is metaphysics? Metaphysics is the field exploring what is believed to be ultimately real. Ancient Western philosophers usually identified the ultimate reality with a certain kind of material substance. So, materialism was the relevant metaphysical product. Some modern philosophers, instead of attaching to material substance, identified reality with the human mind. As a result, idealism was developed. But, for the pragmatist, what is ultimately real is neither material substance, nor spiritual or mental force. For them, what is ultimately real is human experience. Nevertheless, the term "experience" needs clarification. First, it is not the same as the British Empiricists’ concept of experience, which means perceptual data without any rational element involved. Secondly, it is not the same as the concept of experience in our common sense life, as opposed to theorization or imagination. From the pragmatist's viewpoint, the term "experience" includes anything in the interaction process between the subject and the object. It includes the subject’s sensation, perception, thinking, imagination, and all kinds of mental operation and feeling. At the same time, it includes all the related existences of the objective world, like a house, a car, a field, a river, a star, and even the sun and the moon. Now, our question is: Since experience is so inclusive, how do we deal with it? Or, how do we explore it? The answer to this question is that we need to learn about the three aspects of experience. They are: (1) quality, (2) relation, and (3) continuity.[8] Through these three, we will be able to understand the nature of experience. Now, let us have a common-sensical case for explanation. Suppose you want to understand your girl friend, the first matter is exploring her qualities. Is she sincere, polite, and friendly? Is she greedy, unreliable, and lazy? Is she frank, honest, and courageous? Certainly there are still many other qualities for observation. The second matter is her relation with other people or the environment. Is she obedient toward her parents? How do her schoolmates treat her? Does she have any other boyfriends? Certainly there are still many other questions about her relation with the environment and other people. Now, the third aspect is continuity which is a historical or a process concept. To understand your girl-friend, now you should ask: Was she brought up in a big family? Was she a good student in the high school? Did she have any boyfriend before knowing you? In fact, the concept of continuity here implies the meaning of growth and development. Within this developmental process, there are different levels of existences. Between a higher level and a lower level, there is usually a genetic-functional relation. Normally the higher level grows out of the lower one, and then it performs the function of directing or regulating the lower. Let us take politics as an example. Political ideals are often developed through politicians' performing actions. But the ideals will perform the function of directing or managing the actions of the future. So, this genetic-functional relation between different levels is in fact a very important aspect of pragmatic metaphysics.

Interesting enough, this genetic-functional relation also plays a very important role in the epistemology of pragmatism.[9] In traditional epistemology, knowledge and action are not logically related. Knowledge can be independent and sufficient without being applied to action. But for pragmatism, action plays the major role of epistemology. Genuine knowledge is never a product of purely abstract reasoning. It is the product of the performance of action in the past. But it will perform the function of directing action in the future. In a certain sense, knowing and working (action) are related in a genetic and functional way. The evaluation of knowledge consists in checking its function, and see if it can properly direct the action of a future plan. So, in pragmatic epistemology, the concept of action is the justification of knowledge. In a certain sense, pragmatism can be called "the philosophy of action."

As to moral philosophy, pragmatism has contributed a very important distinction, as mentioned earlier, the distinction between customary morality and reflective morality. In fact, this distinction is an important challenge to traditional morality which emphasizes the authority of social habits. From the viewpoint of pragmatism, the social habits are not necessarily authoritative, but they are not necessarily wrong either. The validity authority of a moral act has to be determined by reflective thinking through observing environmental situations, considering the moral awareness of the act performer, and evaluating the consequences of the act. John Dewey has written a good text in this field. The book title is Human Nature and Conduct.[10] He considers conduct as interaction between the individual and the environments. Human nature, in moral philosophy, consists in three important elements: impulse, habit, and intelligence. Among these three, intelligence is a leading concept. It performs the function of regulating impulses, managing habits, and even changing the social environment for conduct performance. With this kind of human nature operation, the moral life of an individual is the process of improvement, progress, development, and growth. Please remember, for pragmatism, the process of growth is an important metaphysical concept. So, moral philosophy can be considered an integral aspect of metaphysics, being considered reflectively with moral values and the environments of action.

What has been presented as the spirit of pragmatism includes only some topics in metaphysics, epistemology, and moral philosophy. There are still many areas pragmatism has covered with new ideas, but they are beyond our technical procedures for our discussion.[11] Now, what we ought to do is to go back to our major topic, the philosophical status of Professor Lewis E. Hahn. What is his relation with American philosophy? Is he a representative of pragmatic philosophy? Is he an outsider with a different system of doctrines? Well, what should we think? What should we say in our conclusion?

As the writer of the "Postscript Overview" essay for Professor Hahn’s newly published book Enhancing Cultural Interflow between East and West, I have been given an opportunity to explore his philosophical ideas including his interpretation of pragmatism and his appreciation of Chinese philosophy. According to my understanding of pragmatism, Professor Hahn is definitely a good representative of this philosophy.[12] But, from my observation and understanding of Hahn, he is more than just a representative. First, he has been a student of Stephen Pepper and has inherited a very significant idea of root-metaphor. With the concept of root-metaphor, he is able to provide proper interpretations to all types of metaphysical systems or metaphysical hypotheses. This kind of unique theoretical creativity was not found even in our leading philosopher John Dewey. Secondly, Professor Hahn’s pragmatic philosophy is not just American established, but also internationally oriented. In his newly published book, he encourages the cultural interflow between East and West. He is probably the first pragmatic philosopher who could do comparative work integrating American philosophy and Chinese philosophy together. This important performance has far exceeded what has been performed by our pragmatists leader John Dewey. Thirdly, Professor Hahn has been a pragmatic pragmatist, because he has been a great performer of the pragmatic theory of education, and has contributed a great deal not just to the field of American philosophy, but to the world of international education and culture. In a certain sense, Professor Hahn has been a great performer of pragmatic philosophy, integrating ideas and actions together. Even though he never claimed himself as a founder of new American philosophy, he has exposed himself as a founder through his philosophical performance for several decades. My dear academic friends, now I would like to make a suggestion. If we want to promote the reputation of American philosophy in the world, we should organize a new Society of American Philosophy, and all of us should officially, willingly, seriously, and spontaneously honor Professor Hahn as the founder of this new Society. So, Carbondale will become our new academic capital, and our philosophy ancestor John Dewey will also enjoy his inspirational contribution even he has already retired in another world.

[12] An excellent summary of American philosophy is provided by Professor Lewis E. Hahn in his "A Contextualistic Philosophy of Life," which is the fifth essay of his newly published book.