L'Encyclopédie, published in France between 1751 and 1772, is a monumental 35-volume work that spans 21,000 pages. Compiled and edited by Denis Diderot (1713–1784) and Jean le Rond d'Alembert (1717–1783), two of the leading figures of the 18th-century French Enlightenment, the project aimed to accomplish several far-reaching goals: 1) to disseminate Enlightenment ideas, particularly the promotion of reason, science, and critical thinking, while challenging traditional authority; 2) to systematically compile and organize human knowledge from all spheres of life and from across the globe; 3) to advocate for secularism, skepticism, and occasionally, atheism; and 4) to advance intellectual freedom. In this context, Diderot’s extended entry on Chinese philosophy (Philosophie des Chinois) stands out as a unique contribution, offering insights into East Asian thought from an Enlightenment perspective.
The two authors of this paper, both scholars of Asian religions and cultures with a focus on transnational exchanges, have collaborated on translating this entry as part of a larger Digital Humanities project hosted by the University of Michigan. This project aims to create an open-access, collaborative translation and annotation of L'Encyclopédie, fostering a deeper understanding of its global intellectual impact.
Our talk will critically examine the challenges encountered in translating Diderot’s work, particularly the difficulties in interpreting the often distorted Chinese names, terms, and references within his entry. These distortions, whether due to the limitations of eighteenth-century European linguistic knowledge or the biases embedded in earlier missionary translations, complicate our ability to fully grasp Diderot’s engagement with Chinese thought. Furthermore, we will explore the complex tone of Diderot’s writing, which, while generally offering a fair and at times even admiring analysis of various forms of Chinese philosophy and religion, also reveals occasional lapses into Eurocentric assumptions. These biases are especially notable in the subtle yet persistent traces of Christocentric views—an unexpected dimension given Diderot’s staunch atheism. Despite his well-documented critiques of organized religion, his reflections on Chinese philosophy occasionally re-inscribe Christian epistemological frameworks, demonstrating the pervasive influence of European intellectual traditions even among Enlightenment thinkers.
Through this exploration, we will discuss the broader implications of Diderot’s treatment of Chinese philosophy and reflect on how his writings contribute to the legacy of Eurocentric and Enlightenment-era perspectives on non-Western intellectual traditions. In doing so, we engage with the question of freedom—both intellectual and ideological. The Enlightenment, while enshrining liberty, reason, and the expansion of knowledge, often remained constrained by its own cultural biases. Diderot’s engagement with Chinese philosophy exemplifies such a tension: while he sought to push the boundaries of European thought beyond its traditional religious and philosophical moorings, his interpretations were still shaped by the intellectual frameworks of his time. Thus, we consider the paradox of Enlightenment freedom—how it both expanded and restricted ways of knowing, particularly in its encounters with non-Western traditions.
Lastly, the paper will address the concept of “pivot language,” as argued by Nile Green (2024), and reexamine Enlightenment works on Asia in relation to the understanding and dissemination of East Asian thought and philosophy in the West, as well as their transmission to different parts of Asia as late as the twentieth century. Specifically, building on Green’s work on the translation of Confucian classics into South Asian languages such as Urdu via eighteenth-century English and French translations, this paper explores the connection between French Enlightenment and missionary translation and their role in the reverse translation of these texts into South Asia. Here, linguistic mediation becomes a site of both constraint and liberation, as translation not only facilitates intellectual exchange but also imposes interpretive limitations. By tracing these complex networks of linguistic and ideological transmission, we demonstrate how Enlightenment-era translations contributed to the multilayered transmission of Chinese philosophy beyond Europe. In this sense, the movement of ideas across languages and cultures can be seen as a pursuit of freedom—an attempt to transcend linguistic and cultural barriers—but one that is inevitably shaped by historical power dynamics.
In doing so, this paper highlights the transnational particularities involved in shaping the understanding of East Asian philosophy and underscores the significance of contemporary critical interpretations concerning the broad provenance of Diderot’s work on Chinese philosophy. Ultimately, by examining translation as both an instrument of control and a means of intellectual liberation, this paper reflects on the contested nature of freedom in cross-cultural philosophical engagement.
L'Encyclopédie, published in France between 1751 and 1772, is a monumental 35-volume work compiled by Denis Diderot and Jean le Rond d'Alembert, key figures of the French Enlightenment. Diderot’s entry on Philosophie des Chinois offers a rare Enlightenment perspective on East Asian thought, yet it presents challenges in translation, particularly in its distorted rendering of Chinese names, terms, and references. Our talk critically examines these difficulties and explores how Diderot’s work contributes to the legacy of Eurocentric Enlightenment perspectives on non-Western traditions. Central to our discussion is the paradox of freedom—while the Enlightenment championed liberty and knowledge, it remained constrained by its own cultural biases. Diderot’s engagement with Chinese philosophy reflects this tension, revealing both an expansion of intellectual horizons and the persistence of Western epistemological frameworks. We thus consider how Enlightenment freedom both enabled and restricted ways of knowing across cultural boundaries.