Zheng Jingbin: The Internal Structure, Construction Logic, and Promotion Path of the Independent Knowledge System of the Discipline of Ideological and Political Education
In May 2016, at the Seminar on Philosophy and Social Sciences, Xi Jinping proposed the "construction of a disciplinary system, academic system, and discourse system with Chinese characteristics" [1]. In April 2022, during an inspection of Renmin University of China, Xi Jinping emphasized once more: "Speeding up the construction of philosophy and social sciences with Chinese characteristics is, in the final analysis, a matter of constructing China's autonomous knowledge system" [2]. The reason the autonomous knowledge system has been elevated to a more prominent position is that the "Three Systems" are the rational expression of the knowledge system; the knowledge system constitutes the foundation and the "hard core" of these "Three Systems." Only by constructing an autonomous knowledge system can the philosophy and social sciences propel the holistic construction and systematic development of the disciplinary, academic, and discourse systems. As a foundational discipline within the philosophy and social sciences, Ideological and Political Education (思想政治教育) [1] is a vital force for promoting their prosperity and development. Consequently, the construction of an autonomous knowledge system has become an objective necessity for the advancement of the discipline of Ideological and Political Education. In the New Era, clarifying the connotation of this autonomous knowledge system, understanding its organic composition, and grasping the logical main thread of its construction are essential paths for enhancing the discipline's overall strength, increasing its international influence, and ensuring the prosperity of the philosophy and social sciences. This holds significant value for accelerating the building of a culturally powerful nation, strengthening cultural soft power, and enhancing China's international right to speak [2].
I. Problem Statement
In today's world, regarding the development of the social sciences, Chinese knowledge, Chinese wisdom, and Chinese solutions [3] must not only be present but should become foundational components supporting the human knowledge system. To ensure that Chinese culture plays a driving role in human civilization, it is necessary to construct a knowledge system rooted in our own problem domains—that is, an autonomous knowledge system. As one of the key disciplines supporting China’s autonomous knowledge system, the problem of constructing such a system for Ideological and Political Education is particularly prominent.
First, regarding its disciplinary attributes, Ideological and Political Education is the product of multi-disciplinary synthesis; it is a comprehensive discipline that has absorbed the fruits of various fields. Its knowledge genealogy is broad in origin, and its object of study is a changing whole characterized by complexity and comprehensiveness. This creates both vitality and tension between different knowledge contents.
Second, regarding its founding, the discipline has undergone 40 years of development from its establishment to its innovative expansion. It is a relatively late-developing discipline, and the richness of its knowledge system lags behind those with longer histories. As an emerging discipline, while its knowledge system has undergone a process of continuous extensional expansion, its "intensional growth has not been obvious" [3].
Third, regarding its development, the autonomy of the discipline needs further strengthening. Scholars are the primary subjects in the production of the autonomous knowledge system for Ideological and Political Education. Although a group of great academic masters has been cultivated and a significant amount of academic output produced, the performance of the vast number of scholars in knowledge creation and innovation still falls short of the needs of the times as disciplinary construction progresses.
Fourth, regarding disciplinary practice, as the era evolves, many new issues have emerged in the process of conducting domestic ideological and political education activities. These issues have already exceeded the explanatory boundaries of the original knowledge system; thus, new knowledge is required to respond to new challenges. Based on this understanding, it has become an inherent requirement for current disciplinary construction to analyze the internal structure of the autonomous knowledge system, grasp the logical main thread of its construction, and optimize the direction of its advancement.
II. Clarifying the Internal Structure of the Autonomous Knowledge System of Ideological and Political Education
Knowledge refers to the conceptual categories, principles, methods, laws, and institutional norms formed by people in the process of understanding and transforming the world. The systematic integration of numerous knowledge points constitutes a knowledge system. An autonomous knowledge system refers to a comprehensive system of knowledge characterized by Chinese features, Chinese style, and Chinese spirit [4], formed through Chinese discourse, rooted in the fine traditional Chinese culture, and based on China’s concrete realities.
Constructing an autonomous knowledge system for Ideological and Political Education first requires clarifying its internal components. Currently, regarding the elements of this system, there are three common views in academic circles:
- The "two-element theory," which divides the system into "core discipline and branch disciplines" [4].
- The "three-element theory," where some argue the system involves "philosophy, principles, and applied knowledge of ideological and political education" [5], while others divide it into "theoretical knowledge, institutional knowledge, and practical knowledge" [6].
- The "four-element theory," which some see as consisting of "concepts, categories, principles, and laws" [7]; others divide it into "common-sense knowledge, conceptual systems, theoretical systems, and methodological systems" [8]; and still others categorize it into "basic theory, historical research, applied research, and comparative research" [9]. Whether it is the macro-level division into core and branches or the micro-level distinction between theoretical and practical knowledge, none can be separated from the inherent attributes of knowledge. Scholars classify by attribute, based on the unity of scientificity and ideological nature, providing ideas for the innovative development of the autonomous knowledge system.
Clarifying the specific composition of the autonomous knowledge system is key to promoting the synergistic development of all elements. Mao Zedong once pointed out: "The distinction between sciences is based precisely on the particular contradictions inherent in their objects of study" [10]. Therefore, the autonomous knowledge system of Ideological and Political Education should arise from the revelation of the understandings and laws governing its object of study. From this perspective, the discipline in the New Era has formed "meta-knowledge"—autonomously authored conceptual categories, modes of thinking, discourse expressions, and interpretative methods—precisely through the investigation of "contradictions, phenomena, problems, and laws of ideological and political education" [11].
Based on the scope of the discipline’s unique object of study and the requirements for "innovation in practice, theory, institutions, and methods" [12], this article divides the autonomous knowledge system of Ideological and Political Education into four blocks: theoretical knowledge, practical knowledge, methodological knowledge, and institutional knowledge. Specifically, theoretical knowledge serves as the foundation, practical knowledge as the reflection, methodological knowledge as the central axis, and institutional knowledge as the guide. Together, they provide the wisdom, strategies, and practical guidance for the discipline.
In this system, theoretical knowledge focuses on the epistemological level, addressing "what it is" by researching origins and evolutions (essence, target, environment, etc.). Practical knowledge focuses on the praxiological level, addressing "what to do" by theorizing practical experience. Methodological knowledge focuses on the methodological level, addressing "how to do it" by exploring principles, efficacy, and evaluation systems. Institutional knowledge focuses on the planning level, addressing "what to achieve" by defining the makers, implementers, and participants of the system and outlining the direction for basic categories like moral and political education. These four "small systems" constitute the "large system" of the autonomous knowledge system. Under a systems-thinking perspective, these elements interact and coexist to serve the practice of ideological and political education. To ensure the smooth conduct of activities, we must ensure the quality and increment of each level of knowledge to manifest the "systematization" of the autonomous knowledge system and avoid an imbalance in its "four beams and eight pillars" [5].
Beyond the structural hierarchy, one must clarify the "autonomous" characteristics. Current academic discussion highlights keywords such as "originality," "systematicity," "connectivity (融通性)," and "indigeneity (本土性)." This article selects these four as the logical main thread of construction.
III. The Logical Main Thread of Constructing the Autonomous Knowledge System of Ideological and Political Education
"A very clear logical main thread for constructing China's autonomous knowledge system is to unify the entire process of knowledge production—from posing problems and explaining concepts to setting structures and developing ideas—and to standardize and systematize the involved deductive thinking, expression of thought, and methodological demonstration" [20]. Therefore, the construction must aim at the indigeneity of knowledge production, align with the connectivity of knowledge content, focus on the systematicity of the knowledge structure, and highlight the originality of knowledge application.
1. Aiming at the indigeneity of knowledge production: extracting the autonomous knowledge system from real life
The discipline of ideological and political education aims to serve the developmental needs of the Party and the state, the cause of reform and opening up and socialist modernization, and Socialism with Chinese Characteristics and the broad masses of the people. The discipline's practical functions and value claims dictate its developmental direction; thus, its knowledge production should be rooted in China's specific realities, deeply embedded in fine traditional Chinese culture, and focused on distilling knowledge schemas from historical experience that accord with China's national conditions, possess Chinese characteristics, and are capable of answering Chinese problems. In other words, the production of knowledge in the discipline of ideological and political education is directed toward the subject of knowledge production, oriented toward the content of knowledge production, and aimed at the goals of knowledge production. First is the indigeneity of the person. Subjects such as scholars of ideological and political education, the academic community of the discipline, and the consortia of knowledge production must continuously strengthen their disciplinary reflexivity and academic self-consciousness. They must have the courage to shoulder the heavy responsibility of disciplinary development and, by studying the outstanding ideological and political education activities of Chinese Communists, changes in the thoughts and behaviors of Chinese youth, and the current status of the values and moral norms of other groups, enhance the capacity to provide concepts regarding the laws of ideological and political education. Second is the indigeneity of content. Subjects of ideological and political education must base themselves on China's specific realities, take China as their frame of reference, distill the discipline's unique "identifying concepts" from the phenomena of ideological and political education, present unique research paradigms, and summarize the most effective knowledge categories for investigating disciplinary activities. They must remain deeply rooted in fine traditional Chinese culture, becoming adept at transforming the wisdom of state governance, ideological wisdom, and historical wisdom into forms of knowledge. They must condense the "way of learning" [6] and the "way of self-cultivation" found in Chinese civilization—along with the dialectical thinking, humanistic spirit, and "world-oriented perspective" [7] inherent within them—into a knowledge system. Finally, there is the indigeneity of goals. Producing and providing effective concepts capable of summarizing Chinese experience, explaining Chinese problems, and regulating Chinese practice is the proper meaning of constructing an autonomous knowledge system. The demand for new concepts and principles in the autonomous knowledge system of ideological and political education is not only to adapt to the needs of technological revolution and social transformation but, more importantly, to deconstruct the problems of insufficient command and lagging interpretation within disciplinary knowledge points. To this end, subjects of ideological and political education must face real life, focus on "what is currently happening," and use patriotism education, collectivism education, socialism education, ideal and belief education, and discipline and rule of law education as entry points. They must strive to clear the blockages in original conceptual research methods and form knowledge points that embody the New Era, providing an ideological guarantee for socialist modernization and the great cause of national rejuvenation.
Benchmarking the integration of knowledge content to perfect the autonomous knowledge system through dialogue and exchange. Xi Jinping has clearly pointed out: "The actual form of philosophy and social sciences is the result of the integration and generation of various kinds of knowledge, ideas, theories, and methods from ancient and modern times." [26] Therefore, scholars must neither view the knowledge of their own discipline as a "private domain" nor restrict exchanges between various disciplines within the philosophy and social sciences. Today, global scientific research has entered the era of "Big Science." The breadth and depth of Chinese culture’s participation in global multicultural dialogue are continuously expanding, and the influence of knowledge from many disciplines within Chinese philosophy and social sciences is also growing. Consequently, in the New Era, the fundamental prerequisite for placing the construction of an autonomous knowledge system for ideological and political education within an international perspective is to focus on cross-disciplinary integration with multi-disciplinary knowledge. On the one hand, this involves the integration of resources from Marxist theory. "The question of knowledge is a scientific one." [15] The fundamental hallmark distinguishing contemporary Chinese philosophy and social sciences from others lies in its adherence to the guidance of Marxism. Therefore, adhering to the guidance of Marxism is an inevitable choice for constructing the autonomous knowledge system of ideological and political education. To this end, scholars of ideological and political education must uphold the Marxist worldview and methodology, adhere to the innovative theories of the Sinicization and modernization of Marxism, and integrate principles and methods directly related to ideological and political education from the Marxist theoretical system—such as the theory of the dialectical relationship between social existence and social consciousness, the theory of socialist ideological construction, and the theory of socialist cultural construction. They must continuously explore the laws governing the development of ideological and political education practice. Through condensation and integration, they should reveal new knowledge content in new forms of knowledge, preventing Marxist theory from being "aphasic" [8] in the discipline, "missing" from textbooks, or "voiceless" at forums, thereby enhancing the political and academic nature of the autonomous knowledge system. On the other hand, it involves the integration of resources from other disciplines. Autonomy is not simplification, but rather an organic integration of knowledge. The autonomous knowledge system of ideological and political education must emphasize integration with technology—that is, forming basic knowledge at the theoretical level regarding technological operations. This includes actively exploring the application of blockchain technology in online ideological and political education, the challenges posed by the metaverse, and breakthroughs in the application of Big Data. It must also account for cross-integration with the natural sciences, absorbing and drawing on their research methods and paradigms, grasping the collaborative, collective, and cooperative characteristics of natural science research, and promoting increments in knowledge production through mutual learning and the standardization of knowledge production through methodological complementarity. It must perfect dialogue and exchange with other philosophy and social sciences, deepening interdisciplinary research on the basis of existing knowledge stocks in psychology, sociology, political science, education, and management, using knowledge fusion to promote knowledge innovation.
Focusing on the systematicity of the knowledge structure to enrich the autonomous knowledge system within the original framework. "China’s autonomous knowledge system is an integration of various types of knowledge, concepts, methods, propositions, and theories of philosophy and social sciences with Chinese characteristics." [27] Systematicity is the key to constructing an autonomous knowledge system. In other words, the reason the autonomous knowledge system of ideological and political education is called a "system" is not that it is a patchwork of meaningless, fragmented knowledge points, but rather that it is a self-contained sum of scientific and standardized knowledge points generated around the main trunk of researching the phenomena of ideological and political education. Although the theoretical system of the discipline is gradually improving, it is undeniable that there remains significant room for research on fundamental theoretical issues. Focusing on the systematicity of the knowledge structure, the construction of an autonomous knowledge system for the discipline must include the following three dimensions: First, the knowledge system itself. The autonomous knowledge system of ideological and political education consists of four levels: theoretical knowledge, practical knowledge, methodological knowledge, and institutional knowledge. These levels possess internal symbiosis and interdependence. Thus, scholars must maintain the unity of comprehensive grasping and focused breakthroughs, using forward-looking thinking and a holistic perspective to promote the iterative renewal of original knowledge content. Second, the constituent elements themselves. Based on the essential requirements of knowledge attributes, various types of knowledge build the "edifice of knowledge" in a certain order according to their functional positioning and value. However, each level contains several knowledge elements—that is, a more concrete "division of labor" exists within different types of knowledge. Taking practical knowledge as an example, it includes elements such as the theory of action principles, theory of action processes, and theory of action conditions of ideological and political education. It is evident that the constituent elements themselves also form a subsystem. For instance, the theory of action principles provides ideological guidance for activities; the theory of action processes provides normative guidance; and the theory of action conditions provides a powerful guarantee for smooth implementation. To enhance the persuasiveness and appeal of practical knowledge and improve its mobilization in dissemination, scholars must cultivate the fertile soil of knowledge growth, focus on complex and diverse problem contexts, and rely on "reflection-in-action" to promote the generation, perfection, renewal, and upgrading of practical knowledge. Third, meta-knowledge itself. Meta-knowledge is the smallest unit of a knowledge system. The generation of meta-knowledge is both the manifestation of mental activity from appearance to the concrete and from the abstract to the concrete, and a conscious presentation revealing the phenomena of ideological and political education. It involves the subject’s dismantling, deconstruction, and analysis of knowledge, involving factors such as emotion, cognition, and experience; therefore, the generation process of meta-knowledge itself is systematic. Just as truth is the dialectical unity of absolute and relative nature, meta-knowledge also possesses dual attributes. The construction process of any meta-knowledge is not uniform, construction methods are not hidebound, and construction results are not immutable. Therefore, scholars of ideological and political education must keep pace with the development and changes of their subjects, using the generation of new knowledge to fill meta-knowledge gaps and using the refinement of new knowledge to promote the renewal of meta-knowledge, achieving the unity of the "is" (shiran) and the "ought" (yingran).
Highlighting the originality of knowledge application to broaden the autonomous knowledge system through practical experience. Ideological and political education refers to "conscious educational practical activities carried out by a certain class or political party to transform its advocated ideology into an ideology widely accepted by the people, guiding them to form corresponding ideological and political qualities." [28] Furthermore, "the complete form of ideological and political education is rooted in class society." [29] It is clear that the practice of ideological and political education is not unique to the Communist Party of China but is an important component of human activity. The mission of constructing an autonomous knowledge system for the discipline in the New Era lies in basing itself on the great practice of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, transforming scattered, perceptual, isolated, and superficial viewpoints into systematic, rational, united, and profound cognitions. This inherently includes deep theoretical interpretations of domestic ideological and political education practice, as well as solutions for global issues facing humanity. To highlight the localization of the knowledge paradigm, the nationalization of the knowledge map, and the internationalization of theoretical influence, one must, on the one hand, solve China's practical problems with original propositions. The tremendous achievements made since the founding of the People's Republic are inseparable from the theoretical and methodological innovations of Chinese Communists—the same must be true for the autonomous knowledge system of ideological and political education. Constructing an autonomous knowledge system "requires a good grasp of the worldview and methodology of [Xi Jinping] Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era." [30] We must base ourselves on the reality of China's development, break free from a "mentality of apprenticeship," [9] uphold the fundamentals and break new ground, and keep pace with the times. We must strengthen research on the history of ideological and political education, its modernization in governance, and its cultivation systems. We must delve into research on the ideological and behavioral status of education subjects and objects, thereby transforming phenomena like lagging, missing, or crude knowledge points, and enhancing the expressive power of knowledge creation and innovation. On the other hand, we must solve the difficult problems of human development with original topics. We must find the intersection of domestic and international ideological and political education practices. Aiming at international contradictions in practice—such as "teacher-centeredness" vs. "student-centeredness," "supply capacity" vs. "acceptance capacity," and "physical space" vs. "virtual space"—and facing challenges like campus violence, cyber-attacks, and the craze for gaming, the subjects of ideological and political education must keep the whole world in mind. They should summarize the practical experience of hundreds of millions of people and transform the concepts, categories, and propositions of ideological and political education contained in fine traditional Chinese culture into a knowledge system that meets actual demands. They should strive to propose theoretical ideas, conceptual principles, and institutional norms from the perspective of ideological and political education that can solve world problems, continuously contributing Chinese wisdom and Chinese solutions to the resolution of human problems, providing a scientific worldview and methodology for the development and progress of human civilization, and realizing the transformation of the autonomous knowledge system from national significance to world significance.
IV. The Progressive Path for Constructing the Autonomous Knowledge System of the Discipline of Ideological and Political Education Constructing an autonomous knowledge system for ideological and political education in the New Era is a massive systemic project. Only through holistic grasping and coordinated advancement can we facilitate the formation and development of an autonomous, knowledge-based, and systematic knowledge landscape. Faced with multiple dilemmas such as weak theoretical foundations, lack of completeness, insufficient innovation, weak openness, and low practicality, the discipline must—based on the unique spiritual traits and developmental forms of an autonomous knowledge system—take Marxist theory as its guide, the construction of the textbook system as its handle, the transformation of research paradigms as its focus, international dialogue as its link, and the resolution of practical problems as its goal. Through clarifying its value orientation, consolidating its theoretical foundation, strengthening its practical relevance, and optimizing its developmental positioning, the "self-shaping" of the autonomous knowledge system will be achieved.
- Constructing the autonomous knowledge system with Marxist theory as its guide.
"Marx’s entire world outlook is not a doctrine, but a method. It provides not ready-made dogmas, but a starting point for further research and the method to be used for such research." 35 Constructing an independent knowledge system guided by Marxism stems from the scientificity and truth inherent in Marxist theory. At present, the scientificity of the independent knowledge system of the discipline of ideological and political education needs to be further strengthened. The laws of development of the objective world, the essence of cognition, and the general laws of the development of cognition revealed by Marxism provide a guide for action in constructing this system. Only by persisting in the guidance of Marxist theory can the independent knowledge system accurately identify its developmental positioning and clarify its value orientation. Breaking away from the "apprentice" state and the dependent status relative to Western philosophy and social sciences constitutes the second dimension of choosing Marxist theory. Under the circumstances where "the knowledge system of Western philosophy and social sciences uses liberalism as its theoretical pilot," [36] if our country’s discipline of ideological and political education is to realize the independence of its knowledge system, it must all the more take Marxist theory as the pilot and drive the innovation of knowledge structures through scientific truth.
The report to the 20th National Congress of the CPC clearly pointed out: "Why the Communist Party of China is capable, and why socialism with Chinese characteristics is good, is ultimately because Marxism works, and especially because the Sinicization and modernization of Marxism works." 34 To uphold the Chinese coloring of the independent knowledge system of the discipline of ideological and political education and to realize the logical self-consistency of knowledge system independence, the subjects of ideological and political education must promote the generation of new concepts, new propositions, and new terminology from the following three aspects. First, persist in the Marxist standpoint of the people. The people's standpoint is the distinctive marker that distinguishes Marxist political parties from other parties. "Taking the people as the center" is both the crystallographical thought of combining Marxism with contemporary Chinese concrete reality and a value concept that transcends Western capital-supremacy. Therefore, under the guidance of Marxist theory, the discipline of ideological and political education must strengthen research into the subject spirit, subject consciousness, subject character, and subject personality of the individual. It must persist in taking "for the people" as the starting point, "relying on the people" as the necessary path, and "benefiting the people" as the value goal [10] of the independent construction of the knowledge system. The concept of "people first" must run through the entire process of constructing the independent knowledge system to achieve the value aspiration of realizing the well-rounded development of the individual. Second, persist in the Marxist worldview and methodology. "Marxism is a powerful ideological weapon for us to understand the world, grasp laws, pursue truth, and transform the world." 37 Constructing an independent knowledge system for the discipline of ideological and political education must persist in dialectical materialism and historical materialism, emphasize the conceptual interpretation of Marxist original canons, and promote the generation and application of meta-knowledge regarding the models, functions, values, processes, methods, carriers, environments, and evaluations of ideological and political education through correct value concepts and scientific research methods. Third, persist in the latest achievements of the Sinicization and modernization of Marxism, especially Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era. Scholars of ideological and political education must be adept at refining concepts with contemporary character from the Party's innovative theoretical achievements and condensing original knowledge forms from the wisdom of state governance [11], thereby enriching the content and structure of the independent knowledge system of the discipline.
2. Constructing an independent knowledge system by taking the building of the textbook system as a grasp [12]
The textbook system is an important carrier of the discipline’s independent knowledge system. Whether textbooks can reflect theoretical, practical, methodological, and institutional knowledge with Chinese characteristics, and whether they possess accurate knowledge concepts and reasonable knowledge structures, is an important manifestation of the construction level of the independent knowledge system of the discipline of ideological and political education. This is reflected not only in the degree to which textbook content is updated, but also in the rationality of the design of the textbooks' chapter structures and knowledge blocks. Nowadays, the explanatory power of the independent knowledge system of the discipline needs to be further strengthened; a high-quality textbook system is nothing less than a powerful deconstruction of the insufficient explanatory power, lack of thoroughness, and low academic rigor of the discipline's knowledge system. To this end, ideological and political education in the New Era must persist in the principle of unifying political character with scientificity, and contemporary character with national character. Centered on the fundamental task of "fostering virtue through education" [13], it must conduct a systematic reorganization and holistic reconstruction of different knowledge blocks, such as education on the basic principles of Marxism, socialist core values education, education on fine traditional Chinese virtues, morality and rule of law education, and life safety education, thereby forming a textbook system that meets the developmental requirements of socialism with Chinese characteristics.
Xi Jinping pointed out: "The discipline system is inseparable from the textbook system." 30 The building of the textbook system is an eternal undertaking concerning the inheritance of human civilization. However, as the most distinct presentation of the discipline’s independent knowledge system, the textbook system still suffers from problems such as certain knowledge points being outdated, weak integration, insufficient ideological depth, and weak originality. To meet the developmental requirements of the New Era and form a textbook system with rich content and diverse forms, at the macro level, one must follow the unity of local sentiment and global vision, persisting in the combination of inheritance and development with reform and innovation. The revolutionary improvement of the textbook system should be driven by independent and digital educational content, and the holistic construction of the knowledge system should be driven by an intelligent and lifelong educational framework. For example, on the basis of the original framework of theoretical and practical knowledge of the discipline, one must continuously strengthen research into principles, methods, institutions, environments, and comparative studies across all blocks. Elements like digital value, digital governance, and digital application should be continuously added to stay in step with the trends of the times and foster the generation of new knowledge points. At the micro level, one must persist in the horizontal updating, improvement, enrichment, and development of textbook knowledge. This means adjusting conceptual referents based on different contexts, gaining insight into new problems birthed by social practice and explaining them with new knowledge points, and refining conceptual principles with strong generalization and high interpretative power from ever-changing phenomena, while timely updating categories and propositions that possess both value and truth. One must also emphasize the vertical connection of textbook content for ideological and political education across primary schools, secondary schools, and universities. Based on the characteristics of students' growth and development, textbooks for each stage should be holistically planned to avoid fractures and inversions, inefficient repetition, content misalignment, or detachment from reality. This ensures the rational allocation of textbook content at each level and promotes the "spiral ascent" of content. In short, the construction of the textbook system is an important carrier for the inheritance and development of the discipline's independent knowledge system. Textbooks for the discipline of ideological and political education must achieve the logical self-consistency of the independent knowledge system through scientifically standardized chapter structures, easy-to-understand knowledge blocks, and theoretical concepts that advance with the times.
3. Constructing an independent knowledge system with the focus on shifting research paradigms
Xi Jinping clearly pointed out: "Scientific research paradigms are undergoing profound changes." 37 Based on the progress of science itself, the general structure and function of original paradigms are constantly changing to adapt to the needs of social transformation. The discipline of ideological and political education must also follow the trends of the times and realize a shift in research paradigms. Against the background of the knowledge era, especially facing the new requirements for knowledge integration and convergent development proposed by the Declaration on the Construction of New Liberal Arts, the innovativeness of the independent knowledge system needs to be further manifested. To this end, the crux [14] of the construction of the discipline lies in facing the needs of socio-political culture, breaking down the "knowledge hegemony" brought about by stratification in the production of philosophical and social science knowledge, clarifying the direction for constructing the independent knowledge system, and taking innovative research as the main line. Through interdisciplinary integration and deep fusion with modern information technology, and by exercising academic self-awareness, an independent knowledge system that combines theoretical scientificity with practical influence can be fostered.
On the new journey in the New Era, the construction of the independent knowledge system must focus on the cross-disciplinary integration of ideological and political education, absorbing the wisdom of traditional paradigms while committing to exploring new interpretative frameworks starting from Chinese experience, thereby helping to give play to the value of the discipline in governing the Party and the state. In other words, to realize the transformation of knowledge system independence, we must not only promote the "internal fusion" of "homogeneous" knowledge but also achieve the "external connection" of "heterogeneous" knowledge, promoting the generation, integration, and improvement of knowledge points through empirical modes of thinking. Specifically, first, realize the transformation of research paradigms driven by data. Along with the accelerated pace of digital information infrastructure construction, the internet has become a booster for knowledge exchange and mutual learning. Facing new situations and problems arising from the informatization, digitalization, and intellectualization of ideological and political education, there is an urgent need to pursue a dynamic balance between knowledge supply and demand, responding to hot-button issues with new knowledge. To this end, in response to the major changes that technology has brought to ideological and political education activities, we must have the courage to cross the technological divide, explore the laws of technological development, draw on natural science research paradigms, and transition various methods—such as big data analysis—into the research of the discipline. From this, we should continuously refine theoretical knowledge to guide technological operation, condense practical knowledge to regulate technological application, summarize methodological knowledge to guide technological performance, and synthesize institutional knowledge to clarify technological development and management. Second, realize the shift in research paradigms under interdisciplinary intersection. Currently, the discipline includes paradigms of anthropology, culture, sociology, and intersectionality, as well as case-study and comparative paradigms. Although the knowledge field of the discipline already possesses a relatively distinct academic self-awareness, the knowledge production driven by original research paradigms has become insufficient to meet the needs of solving current complex problems. In response, the community of ideological and political education scholars must have the courage to step out of their "comfort zone," break through the limitations of original paradigms, persist in placing equal emphasis on inheritance and innovation, and continuously catalyze the birth of new paradigms, the formation of new fields of discourse, and the appearance of new methods.
4. Constructing an independent knowledge system with international dialogue and exchange as the link
Xi Jinping clearly pointed out: "The world's once-in-a-century longitudinal changes are accelerating, and the world has entered a new period of turbulence and transformation, urgently requiring answers to the questions of our times: 'What is happening to the world?' and 'Where is humanity headed?'" [11] Under the background of globalization, the connections between countries are growing closer, and the exchange and mutual learning between civilizations has become a theme of the times. Addressing the issue that the openness of the independent knowledge system needs to be further improved, the discipline of ideological and political education needs to adopt an open and inclusive attitude, constructing a logically rigorous independent knowledge system in the process of conducting international dialogue and exchange and drawing on the beneficial achievements of human civilization.
Constructing an independent knowledge system for the discipline of ideological and political education with Chinese characteristics is not about being closed, rigid, narcissistic, or working behind closed doors; rather, it involves absorbing the excellent achievements of global philosophy and social sciences through exchange with various civilizations and integrating them into the process of constructing China’s independent knowledge system for philosophy and social sciences. Based on this, first, we must persist in mutual learning between civilizations. Mutual learning is an important driving force for the rapid development of the discipline's independent knowledge system. As a practical activity, ideological and political education exists in all countries; thus, scholars must strengthen the interaction, exchange, and integration with the academic discourses of other countries, absorbing their excellent achievements through global dialogue. At the same time, when drawing on the academic models of Western knowledge systems, we should avoid mechanical copying, striving instead for rational analysis, dissection, and sublation [15] within Sino-Western cultural exchange. Second, we must focus on the "questions of the world." The world today still faces problems such as the peace deficit, development deficit, security deficit, and governance deficit, which require all countries to propose feasible solutions. As an important component of the philosophy and social sciences, the discipline of ideological and political education bears the disciplinary mission of answering the "questions of the world" with Chinese wisdom. This objectively requires that the construction of the independent knowledge system both gaze upon the world—observing global transformations—and actively explore world-class difficulties with an international perspective, refining "identifying concepts" [16] and creating new knowledge and systems with Chinese characteristics and global significance.
5. Constructing an independent knowledge system with the goal of solving practical problems
The independent knowledge system of the Ideological and Political Education discipline is a Chinese expression of national culture and the spirit of the times. It is characterized by the production of original results and the prosperity of Chinese scholarship, and aimed at grounding itself in Chinese reality to solve Chinese problems. Marx pointed out in the Theses on Feuerbach: "Philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it." [45] (P136) It can be seen that the generation and application of knowledge is intended to better guide practice. That is to say, the construction of an independent knowledge system for the discipline of Ideological and Political Education must not only reflect the reality of our country's ideological and political education activities but also resolve existing contradictions in its practice. It must not only emphasize originality but, more importantly, land upon practicality.
Facing the new phenomena and changes emerging in the field of ideological and political education—aimed at a series of issues such as data governance in ideological and political education, the discursive shift of ideological and political education, and its cross-border integration—the construction of an independent knowledge system should take the resolution of ideological and political education problems as its center, indigeneity as its foundation, and transcendence as its key. It must grasp value orientations, continuously respond to "true problems" and "major problems," and use knowledge innovation to clarify the underlying logic and philosophy in order to seek solutions.
Xi Jinping has repeatedly emphasized: "Problems are the voice of the times; answering and guiding the resolution of problems is the fundamental task of theory." [41] (P20) The key to theoretical innovation lies in the innovation of knowledge. Knowledge innovation in the discipline of ideological and political education is used to answer ideological and political education questions, explain the current state of its development, and promote the development of its practice. Therefore, maintaining the forward-looking and advanced nature of the independent knowledge system has become the responsibility and obligation of the ideological and political education community. Based on the consensus regarding the innovative development of liberal arts education, the developmental requirements for the autonomy of knowledge systems, and the spatial field of the globalization of knowledge dissemination, the construction of an independent knowledge system for the ideological and political education discipline in the New Era and on the New Journey [17] must strengthen its problem-orientation, increase its concern for problems, and focus on problem-care to respond to the call of the times.
The so-called "problem-orientation" [18] refers to "limiting abstract and grand research objects or fields to a specific scope for more in-depth and systematic research based on selected problems during the scientific research process." [46] As a science that studies the phenomena of ideological and political education, the discipline must be grounded in Chinese reality and focused on the needs of national strategic development. It must actively answer new problems faced by China’s development in the New Era, such as value fragmentation, the "pan-entertainment" of values, value individualism, and the alienation of value positions. It must profoundly analyze the deep-seated mechanisms behind the phenomena of "involution" [19] and "lying flat" [20] among some youth, and actively respond to students' ideological doubts, constructing an independent knowledge system in the process of analyzing and solving problems.
Furthermore, it must be grounded in human development. With a broader vision and under the guidance of Sinicized and modernized Marxism, it must follow the laws of ideological and political work, the laws of teaching and educating, and the laws of student growth. From the perspective of ideological and political education, it should strive to propose concepts, initiatives, and schemes that embody Chinese positions, Chinese wisdom, and Chinese values. It should actively respond to the "Questions of China," the "Questions of the World," the "Questions of the People," and the "Questions of the Times" [21], continuously demonstrating the charm of truth and the great power of practice inherent in the independent knowledge system. Simultaneously, it should provide original discursive resources and theoretical support for the building of a community with a shared future for humanity.
(Author information: Zheng Jingbin is the Dean of the Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences at Shandong University, and a Professor and Doctoral Supervisor at the School of Marxism.)