Bulletin Winter 1977

continuity to any meaningful degree. The traditional university was, o f course, also preoccupied w ith know ledge, but its function as a learned institution was restricted to a transmission o f old knowledge rather than a search o f the new. Within the traditional value system, knowledge was denied its independent status; it must o f necessity be subservient to official ideology o f a politico-ethical kind. Modern University It was highly significant that when Ts'ai Yuan- p'ei delivered his inaugural address as Chancellor o f Peking National University in January 1917 ， he defined the university, above everything else ， as “ a place where advanced research work is to be carried out". He then went on to strike the note that know ledge must be sought from no exterior motives. Thus, w ith a totally modern notion o f knowledge, he began the modernization o f that great institution. His vision o f the modern university as a research-oriented insti tution probably reflected his personal experience in Germany where he studied philosophy for four years. As we all know, the idea o f a research-oriented univer­ sity originated in 19th century Germany. We mentioned earlier that teaching, research, and public service are the three missions o f the modern university. In his book, The University in Transition, James A. Perkins points out that these three missions correspond exactly to the three attributes o f know ledge 一 its acquisition, transmission, and application. Thanks to this ingenious formulation, the identity o f the modern university w ith knowledge is now com­ plete. In fact, in our modem life o f ever-increasing specialization, knowledge has become the monopoly o f universities. In the West, science and scholarship are no longer the works o f amateurs as they once were un til the 19th century. In China the traditional idea o f leisure-time scholarship is also dead. Natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities have all fallen w ithin the almost exclusive jurisdiction o f universities. To a large extent, this development may be viewed as determined by the nature o f modern knowledge, which has outgrown its traditional crust. Today acquisition o f knowledge not only requires university-operated facilities such as research libraries and laboratories but often involves university-based interdisciplinary collabdorations as well. In a world fu ll o f hostilities and crises like that o f today's, knowledge is increasingly playing a key role — i f not the key role 一 in the national survival o f all countries. This is especially true for the so-called "underdeveloped" as well as "developing" countries in their different stages o f modernization. In view o f the nature o f knowledge, described above, moderniza­ tion w ithout the modern university is inconceivable. The development o f the modern university is easier said than done. Physical facilities alone seldom, if ever ， make a university modern. Our own modes o f thinking are also involved. It is in the nature o f know­ ledge to grow and flourish in an environment in which relative academic autonomy and relative intellectual freedom are tolerated. I used the word "relative" advisedly. For I do not believe that there can be absolute academic autonomy and absolute intellectual freedom in any type o f society. I am even prepared to concede that it is the responsibility o f each state and society to set a general direction for its academic institutions, if a higher national purpose can thus be better served. But there is a fundamental difference between general guidance and operational interven­ tion. As far as the operation o f the university is con­ cerned, direct intervention from outside would inevitably reduce academic autonomy and intellectual freedom to nonentity and thereby make the campus not hospitable to knowledge. In closing, I wish to add, w ith all my emphasis on the role o f knowledge in modern life, I am far from suggesting that knowledge as a value must be placed above all other values. Nor, in my plea for relative academic autonomy and relative intellectual freedom, am I trying to resuscitate the "ivory tower" image o f the university, now long dead. As long as we can strike a dynamic balance between the three a ttri­ butes o f knowledge, and, correspondingly, between the three missions o f the modern university, we are steering a safe intellectual course toward moderniza­ tion. Some sixty years ago, long before modernization had become a central intellectual concern, A. N. Whitehead already warned us, "In the conditions o f modern life, the rule is absolute: the race which does not value trained intelligence is doomed." In reading these words today, one cannot help feeling chilly. At the same time, one also cannot help asking the ques tion: Where can intelligence be better trained than in the modem university? With all its imperfections, the Chinese tradition o f higher learning and education ranked next to none in the pre-modern societies. It has demonstrated its usefulness by providing the development o f the modem university w ith a solid foundation in the in itia l stage o f China's modernization. Hopefully, it w ill continue to do so in the decades to come. 13