In the field of phenomenology, there is a special requirement, that is, direct contact with the thing itself, without any intermediary. Husserl's phenomenology of consciousness embodies this spirit.

This requirement distinguishes phenomenology from other philosophical schools.

Although Husserl's theory seems to have been surpassed, phenomenology has always maintained a spiritual core throughout its development in the past hundred years.

The phenomenological spirit is not a monolithic mass, nor a storehouse of propositions or methods.

It advocates that phenomenologists abandon the ideal of constructing philosophical systems.

For example, in the process of research and exploration, it is necessary to go deep into basic research on practical facts that are directly intuitive.

This helps to avoid false theory construction and only focus on digging out the true connotation of facts.

At the same time, this connotation requires abandoning the interference of external factors, such as the influence of authority.

The spirit of phenomenology prompts phenomenologists to engage in research with humility.

This is not a high-level programmatic research, otherwise it would not be able to expand the horizons very well.

Since it focuses on exploring directly presented facts, if you build a theoretical framework with an arrogant attitude, you are likely to deviate from the real situation and fail to obtain more meaningful research results.

Husserl's phenomenology of consciousness was once the key to the field of phenomenology. However, now, like many theories in the history of philosophy, it seems to be facing the challenge of being surpassed.

However, it gave birth to many phenomenological schools after it.

This shows that it has a foundational significance in development, just like a seed giving birth to countless new branches.

In the long course of history, although its independent doctrine seems to have been impacted, the essence of it has penetrated into the emerging academic field.

For example, its concepts of direct grasp of things were absorbed by latecomers.

Judging from the research teams in different regions, the teams that originally focused on Husserl's theory are gradually dispersed and are turning to various derived academic directions.

The spirit of phenomenology is in great conflict with the idea of ​​constructing a philosophical system.

It requires the abandonment of constructing philosophical systems.

This is different from many traditional philosophical schools that pursue the construction of grand systems.

Many well-known philosophers in the ancient West often built large and rigorous philosophical systems to explain the world.

Specifically, after the advent of phenomenology, for a long period of time, its view of not constructing a theoretical system has been in continuous conflict and integration with traditional thinking in the academic community.

From a spatial perspective, this divergence appears particularly prominent in the heartland of European philosophy.

In university seminars, some senior scholars tend to establish theoretical frameworks, while younger scholars place more emphasis on phenomenological ideas.

The foundation of phenomenological spirit in academic research is the study of direct facts.

Take consciousness-only theory as an example. The revival of consciousness-only theory mainly occurs in academic circles. This rejuvenation process effectively dissolves the ambiguities in Buddhist experience.

This promoted the renewal of academic research concepts and the formation of academic atmosphere at a specific time.

Around 1933, the atmosphere of academic research in our country changed, especially in aspects such as logical thinking.

Many Buddhist researchers have benefited from the revival of consciousness-only theory and have found new research directions and techniques. Among the scholar community, many people have gained new research perspectives and methods.

This spirit of pursuing direct factual inquiry ultimately promoted the refinement and in-depth development of the entire academic research field.

At different stages of research, we always dig deeper with the goal of clarifying the facts themselves.

The phenomenological spirit promotes cultural complementarity.

Without a phenomenological spirit to explore underlying realities, cultural complementarity cannot be achieved.

If everyone does not delve deeply into the substantive significance of the facts, cultural exchanges will lose their solid foundation.

In the process of cultural exchanges with different regions, the most fundamental practical foundation must be the starting point, so that mutual understanding and complementation can be achieved.

Specifically, if all countries and nationalities lack in-depth understanding and discussion of the phenomenological spirit in the field of philosophy.

That is just superficial comparison and blind reference.

Western phenomenology has been introduced into our country. If both parties fail to deeply explore its essential connotation, it will be particularly difficult to achieve effective communication and mutual complementation between Chinese and Western philosophical cultures.

The spirit of phenomenology is consistent with the Chinese humanistic tradition.

Mr. Chen Yinke mentioned in his theory that when Buddhist teachings were spread in China, they actually went through the stage of absorption and improvement by the Chinese people.

This process actually reflects a similar spirit to that in phenomenology, which is to abandon external interference and dig deep into the inner meaning.

Observing the evolution of Chinese philosophical thought, we can find that when accepting foreign doctrines, our country always takes a pragmatic attitude, conducts in-depth research and explores its core significance.

It has a similar logic and concept orientation as the exploration of direct facts in the spirit of phenomenology.

This shows that phenomenological thought has a deep dialogue and combination with China's long culture.

What new influences do you think the phenomenological spirit can have in the modern multicultural context?