On June 20, 2025, the Second Youth Forum on the History of Political Thought, hosted by the Institute of Political Science and Public Management of the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, was held in the small auditorium of the Huaihai Road headquarters of the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences. The theme of this forum is \Political Modernity in the Perspective of Civilization Exchange,\ with four units set up: \Modern Chinese Political Thought,\ \Modern British Political Thought,\ \Modern French Political Thought,\ and \Research Methods in Political Thought.\ More than thirty young experts and scholars from universities, research institutions, and editorial departments of academic journals such as Peking University, Tsinghua University, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Nanjing University, Shandong University, China University of Political Science and Law, Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Tongji University, East China Normal University, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai University, Shanghai International Studies University, Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, Xiamen University, Sun Yat-sen University, Jinan University, and Zhejiang City College participated in this academic seminar.

The opening ceremony was presided over by Assistant Researcher Zeng Yixuan from the Institute of Political Science and Public Management of the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences. Researcher Zhang Shuping, Secretary of the Party Committee of the Institute of Political Science and Public Management of the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, delivered the opening speech. He focused on the relationship between political science research and the study of intellectual history, believing that political science research can be divided into three levels. The first level is policy discussion, the second level is theoretical discussion, and the third level is philosophical discussion, with the history of political thought and political philosophy belonging to the third level of research. He indicated that the Political Science Institute of the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences has always been committed to actively supporting the organization of various youth forums, with the original intention of hoping that political science research can achieve integration at the levels of policy discussion, theoretical discussion, and philosophical discussion. He emphasized that to understand the modern world, one must understand the classical world, and to understand modern China, one must understand classical China. Therefore, he believes that political science research should always maintain an open and receptive attitude towards history and philosophy, which is also the significant importance of the study of political thought history and political philosophy to the contemporary world.

The first unit was chaired by Mr. Chen Wenbin, Deputy Editor of the Editorial Department of \Fudan Journal (Social Sciences Edition)\. Assistant Professor Zhang Shiyu from the School of International and Public Affairs at Shanghai Jiao Tong University gave a report titled \Yan Fu and the Cross-Cultural Communication of Liberalism\. She examined the dissemination process of liberalism in a cross-cultural context by exploring Yan Fu's political thoughts. Yan Fu actively embraced universal liberal concepts such as individual freedom and political democracy, and his reconstruction of liberalism was also deeply influenced by traditional Chinese thought. In his three-element conceptual framework for freedom - that is, the actor, the restriction, and the purpose - Yan Fu emphasized the positive role of individuals as moral actors in pursuing moral goals. The examination of Yan Fu's Chinese liberalism reminds us that liberalism, as an intellectual doctrine, is always in a state of dynamic evolution, shaped by historical development and social changes. This also highlights the historical complexity and practical challenges faced by the implementation of liberal principles in reality.

The report by Assistant Researcher Song Xiaoyu from the Institute of World Sinology at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences is titled \The Connection between Yan Fu's Translation of 'Evolution and Ethics' and 'Spencer's Educational Articles': The Developmental Views of Two Stages and the Political Models of Each Stage.\ By comparing the English originals and Chinese translations of Yan Fu's two translated works, she found that both contain significant contradictions in Yan Fu's political thoughts. Yan Fu deliberately obscured the negative aspects of Britain in order to present to Chinese readers an ideal political model of Britain. However, he realized that the modernization in the British style took a long time, and China did not have ample time to slowly achieve modernization. In this dilemma, he believed that China should take Russia, led by Peter the Great, as an imitation object in the first stage, and Britain as an imitation object in the second stage. However, Yan Fu failed to clearly and systematically propose this two-stage claim, thus leaving many unresolved contradictions in the two translated works.

Jinan University's Institute of Philosophy, Lecturer Chen Huizhen, gave a report titled \The Political Philosophy of Difference in Zhang Taiyan's Interpretation of 'Qi Wu Lun'\. She advocated that as a key figure in the transformation of classical scholarship interpretation paradigms at the turn of the Qing Dynasty and the Republic of China, Zhang Taiyan, by re-examining the hermeneutic context of classical scholarship and the various schools of thought, achieved a paradigmatic reconstruction of classical scholarship and a creative transformation of tradition when drawing on the intellectual resources of the traditional academic genealogy to address contemporary political and cultural crises. Focusing on \Qi Wu Lun Shi,\ she analyzed how Zhang, as a revolutionary and thinker, activated the political philosophy of difference in \Zhuangzi·Qi Wu Lun\ through the integration of Zhuangzi and Buddhism, and constructed the imagination of national-historical subjectivity in a critical dialogue with \Qi Wu Lun\. Through linguistic criticism and the construction of the logic of essence and function, Zhang Taiyan reinterpreted the political and ethical thoughts of Taoism and its concept of the mean with a decentralized cognitive thinking pattern, completing the construction of a difference-based political thought based on political practice.

The report by Assistant Researcher Wang Hong from the Institute of History at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences is titled \From 'century' to 'Century' - The Translation Process of a Historical Concept at the End of the Qing Dynasty.\ He indicates that the practice of using \century\ as a unit of time for historical writing in modern China originated from the translation work of missionaries who came to China at the end of the Qing Dynasty. However, they mainly used \zhou\ to translate the word \century,\ which led to the formation of a historical narrative under the guise of \zhou history.\ The term \century,\ on the other hand, originated from the creation of modern Japan in translation practice and was introduced into China through the translation of various historical works related to the Western 19th and 20th centuries published in Japan by late Qing intellectuals. Influenced by these two distinct intellectual resources, late Qing intellectuals, with a perspective rooted in the 20th century, presented an unprecedented sense of time and historical consciousness. The modern concept of \century\ thus became one of the core concepts for Chinese people to understand history and reality.

Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, Institute of Political and Public Management, Assistant Researcher Wei Chaoli delivered a report titled \The Transformation and Expansion of the Central Concept in Modern Times.\ He believes that the modern concept of \central\ has multiple meanings, which are both distinct and interrelated, and these meanings were \layered\ in the historical process. Before modern times, \central\ could express a direction in geographical space and also refer to the \monarch\ in the power space. Since modern times, the meaning of \central\ has undergone two transformations. In the first transformation, it shifted from a spatial concept to an administrative concept; in the second transformation, it shifted from an administrative concept to a political party concept. The transformation and expansion of the central concept in modern times is the result of the social transformation and development in modern China. It not only enriched the administrative and political party elements in modern Chinese political practice but also perfected the conceptual system in modern Chinese political theory.

The report by Associate Researcher Guo Zhongjun from the Institute of Political and Public Management Studies at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences is titled \Populist Discourse of the People and Its Origins.\ He argues that in modern democratic societies, populists frequently employ the rhetoric of \the people,\ appealing to the supreme authority of the people, essentially constructing an extreme discourse of the people. \The people\ refers to the commoners in reality, especially those at the bottom, who possess virtue and wisdom; whereas the social elites and the powerful are seen as corrupt and decadent. Democratic politics should be an expression of the \will of the people,\ with the supreme \will of the people\ being the only legitimate source of all politics. The reason why the populist discourse of the people has formed and has such a strong and enduring influence in modern democratic politics lies in the fact that the ideas of popular sovereignty and political equality, which have developed at the intersection of the democratization process since modern times, have provided the key ideological fulcrum and social foundation.

Zhang Shuping, a researcher at the Institute of Political and Public Administration of the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, provided a concise review of the first unit's speeches. Regarding the reports by Zhang Shiyu and Song Xiaoyu, he believes that the translations of modern thinkers, including Yan Fu, often exhibit dual characteristics: one is profundity, and the other is complexity. These thinkers themselves have a strong foundation in traditional Chinese studies, and their understanding of Western learning is actually very profound. Therefore, the phenomenon of mistranslation in their works is actually a projection of their local cultural resources or their imaginations about the situation. Regarding Chen Hui Zhen's report, he believes that political thinkers themselves may have free-ranging thoughts, but scholars of the history of thought often need to control them through certain interpretative methods. For example, this article uses differential politics to explain Zhang Taiyan, which presents a rather novel interpretative perspective. Regarding Guo Zhongjun's report, he believes that the study of the historical evolution of concepts such as people or citizens has been continuously advancing, which helps us to grasp the contemporary evolution of ancient Chinese political thought through political knowledge. Teacher Wang Hong sorted out the concept of \century\ as a temporal concept, which is of great significance for understanding the concept of time in political life.

The second unit was presided over by Teacher Tian Run, editor of the Editorial Department of \Journal of East China Normal University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition)\. Associate Professor Kang Zixing from the School of Advanced Humanities and Social Sciences at Beihang University gave a report titled \Armed Commercial Nation: Adam Smith on War and Civilization\. He pointed out that in \The Wealth of Nations\, Smith spared no effort in meticulously combing through the history and institutions of the American colonies, as well as the causes and strategies of the American War of Independence. On the issue of America, Smith's attitude towards war has a subtle balance. On the one hand, although Britain has highly prosperous commercial trade and even dominates the world, defense remains the primary task of the nation, and war remains a danger that the nation must face. On the other hand, the nation should be rational and restrained, and should not misuse war, nor should it use war for unlimited conquest and commercial expansion to obtain imagined glory. In Smith's view, war and trade are phenomena that coexist in civilized society, both have their roots in human nature, and both should be subject to the laws of justice and civilization.

The lecture by Lecturer Sun Yuchen from the Department of Political Science at the School of Social Sciences, Tsinghua University, is titled \Human Nature, Opinion, and History: The Normative Issues of Smith's Theory of Natural Authority.\ He argues that although recent studies on Adam Smith attempt to interpret him as an important political thinker, Smith's status as a political theorist remains ambiguous. If political theory is an inquiry into normative issues in politics, then what is Smith's contribution to political theory? Therefore, he proposes a new interpretation of the normative characteristics of Adam Smith's political theory. By re-examining Smith's theory of natural authority based on history, he believes that Smith possesses a normative theory of authority and political obligation, and the normativity of this theory is rooted in opinion and moral sentiments, rather than directly derived from history itself. Once this principle is combined with Smith's insights into European history, it yields significant normative implications: it explicitly acknowledges the stability of modern European nations while remaining open to the possibility of change.

The title of the report by Zhu Huahui, a postdoctoral fellow of the Institute for Advanced Studies in Humanities and Social Sciences at Tsinghua University and a Shuimu Scholar, is \Metropolis, Provinces, and Colonies: The Issue of Colonial Empire in Enlightenment Thought and the Political Science of Great Powers.\ He pointed out that in the international wars of the 18th century, the struggle for colonies was always the focus of hegemonic competition. Therefore, how to maintain colonies, or even truly integrate colonies into imperial provinces, became the key issue in Western political thought of the 18th century. Faced with the huge problems brought by overseas colonies, Enlightenment thinkers launched a fierce criticism of the empire. He attempts to analyze the thinkers of the Enlightenment era, especially Montesquieu, Hume, Smith, Jefferson, and others' thoughts on the \metropolis-colony\ relationship, to reveal the difficulties and costs faced by modern colonial empires as ultra-long-distance empires in governance, and further discusses how the concept of a \free empire\ gradually took shape from the practical issues of 18th-century Roman imperial history and colonial rule.

Lecturer Fu Qian from Zhejiang University City College gave a report titled \The Bass of the Symphony: Pocock's Two Burkes and the Study of the History of Political Language.\ He believes that traditional intellectual history takes classics and their authors as the \main melody,\ and pays insufficient attention to the \bass\ outside of the classics. The Cambridge School emphasizes the study of the history of political language, which has the color of being against \canonization\ and \historical teleology,\ and thus pays more attention to composing the \bass.\ As one of the pioneers, Pocock has explained the methods of the history of political language. At the same time, because he delves into the history of republicanism, he is called a republican, but he is also very interested in Burke, the progenitor of conservatism, and has depicted two Burkes, namely the Burke of the ancient constitution and the Burke of political economy. Observing how this \republican\ composes the two Burkes as the \bass of the symphony\ helps to understand his methods and purposes, that is, to enhance the diversity of intellectual history narratives through historical research. From this perspective, the history of political language is broader in scope and more flexible in topics than traditional intellectual history.

The report by Assistant Researcher Zeng Yixuan from the Institute of Political and Public Management Studies at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences is titled \Breaking the Myth of British Laissez-Faire: A Reexamination of Richard Cobden's Concept of the State.\ She points out that as one of the representative figures of the Manchester School, Cobden is traditionally often summarized as a laissez-faire liberal. However, a careful reading of his original documents indicates that his ideological system, with free trade theory as the link, both connects international and domestic affairs and relates economic, social, and political reforms. Although his thoughts revolve around free trade and limited government, he does not absolutely reject all forms of state intervention. He advocates for the elimination of unreasonable government intervention while establishing reasonable government intervention, which is a process of reorganizing government intervention. Therefore, summarizing his ideological system with the term \laissez-faire liberalism\ is both contradictory and narrowing. Reexamining his concept of the state helps to break the myth of British laissez-faire and to retell the history of British liberal thought.

Shanghai Jiao Tong University's School of Marxism lecturer Zhong Chenning gave a report titled \T. H. Green's Ethical Theory of Self-Realization and the Breakthrough of Contemporary Paradigms.\ He indicated that self-realization, as one of the important theoretical concepts in contemporary ethical discussions, must trace its original philosophical expression back to Green, a representative figure of British idealism. Green unified desire, reason, and will in the two-way movement of self-consciousness, leading individuals towards a more perfect consciousness and the realization of higher possibilities in personality. Positive rights and social freedom became important political implications of Green's ethics based on self-realization, as he corrected the atomistic individual stance of classical liberalism from a social interaction perspective. Many researchers of Green have encountered difficulties in categorizing Green's theory within contemporary frameworks. However, Green's theory, centered on self-realization, contains a thought path that breaks through \dualism,\ thus transforming his unclassifiable nature into a thought-provoking theoretical advantage.

Associate Professor Kang Zixing from the Institute of Advanced Studies in Humanities and Social Sciences at Beihang University provided an in-depth review of the second unit's presentations. He pointed out that Teacher Sun Yuchen's article focuses on demonstrating that Adam Smith's authority has a normative basis, that is, people are willing to obey authority out of moral sentiments. This argument is based on the psychological mechanisms of humans, which are historical and descriptive in nature. This raises an unresolved question of how normative standards about authority can emerge from the description of human psychological mechanisms. Regarding Teacher Zhu Huahui's report, he noted that behind Adam Smith's criticism of empires lies the germination of a new form of empire, namely the so-called free empire. Moreover, Adam Smith's view of civilization has a normative moral implication, that is, civilization implies a trade relationship that is free and equal. Regarding Teacher Fu Qian's article, he believes that the portrayal of Pocock and Pocock's portrayal of Burke are intended to avoid understanding Burke through a single principle, but rather to pursue a more balanced understanding between Burke's dual images. Regarding Teacher Zeng Yixuan's report, he believes that when comparing Cobden and Smith, it is necessary to acknowledge the intellectual inheritance between the two, while also recognizing the significant differences in their views on empires and colonial issues. Regarding Teacher Zhong Chenning's paper, he agrees with Green's statement of \true freedom,\ which is the ability to let everyone do what they consider truly valuable. This is a more idealistic view, and how the pursuit of self-improvement and compromise with the social environment should be balanced is an important issue in real life.

The third unit was presided over by Professor Li Rongshan, a professor at the School of Sociology of Shanghai University and the deputy editor-in-chief of the \Society\ editorial department. Associate Professor Chongming from the Department of History at Peking University, who holds a tenured position, gave a report titled \The Modern Transformation of the Concept of Universal Monarchy (16th-18th Centuries)\. He indicated that the universal monarchy was the basic political imagination from the collapse of the Roman Empire to early modern Europe, reflecting the expectations of Europeans to achieve political and religious unity by re-establishing a Roman-style European empire. In early modern Europe, the concept of universal monarchy gradually became an important concept in international politics. In the secularization and criticism of the concept of universal monarchy, important ideas that dominate modern European international political thought, such as the balance of power, perpetual peace, and commercial peace theory, gradually emerged. In the transformation of the concept of universal monarchy in modern Europe, it can be seen that imperial imagination is an important driving force for the rise of modern European nation-states. At the same time, resistance to and criticism of the universal monarchy also become an important premise for modern liberal international order thought.

Nanjing University's School of Government and Management, Associate Professor Yu of JD, gave a report titled \Saints, Kings, and the Construction of Absolute Monarchy.\ He pointed out that before the French Wars of Religion (1562-1598), the \Christian King\ was essentially a sacralized monarchy, that is, the divine right of kings. However, during the French Wars of Religion, this traditional \Christian King\ began to be reinterpreted as the holder of absolute sovereignty. As a representative, Bodin advocated liberating the state from the control of the church and sectarian disputes, returning to the interests of the state itself. At the same time, \The Prince\ was translated into France, and Machiavelli's understanding of \princely virtue\ was also different from the traditional \Christian monarch.\ In practice, Cardinal Richelieu implemented a brand-new \absolutist\ governance strategy, clarifying the primary principle that religion serves politics.

The report by Assistant Professor Charles Fan from the School of International and Public Affairs at Shanghai Jiao Tong University is titled \Skepticism and Political Normativity: From Montaigne to Montesquieu.\ He pointed out that skepticism is a condition for the rise of modern thought and a certain background of modern thought. The impact of modern skepticism on modern political philosophy is not only in clearing away Aristotelianism and suspending religious disputes; perhaps more importantly, but often overlooked, is its combination with Epicureanism, which laid the normative foundation of \natural pleasure\ for modern politics. In other words, its influence is not only negatively clearing away pre-modern elements but also providing a positive normative foundation. The source of modern skepticism is Montaigne, and it is here that \natural pleasure\ in skepticism gives rise to political normativity. Montesquieu not only inherited Montaigne's line of thought but also discussed more deeply how it is possible to ensure politics that safeguard \natural pleasure.\

Shanghai International Studies University's Global Governance and Regional Studies Institute, Associate Researcher Guo Xiaoyu, gave a report titled \The Formation and Deformation of Rousseau's Social Contract: In the Movement of the General Will.\ She revealed the needs for contract, society, state, sovereignty, and power that successively emerged in the movement of people's will towards nation-building, and discussed the nature of these needs and the ways to acquire and maintain them, thereby presenting the internal and external order that requires continuous efforts from people to maintain and construct. This interpretation takes the \universalization\ movement after the emergence of will as the clue, interpreting the motivation and method of establishing the social contract and the human nature and political forms it can support in the sense of its ongoing significance. Understanding Rousseau from this perspective also means recognizing that the initial draft and final draft of \The Social Contract\ jointly determine the path of contracting, which is the key to grasping Rousseau's thought and method, and it can also support a contract theory understanding direction with significance in the history of thought.

The lecture by Assistant Professor Ren Shuhuai from the School of Public Affairs at Xiamen University is titled \Romantic Love, Political Virtue, and Republicanism: The Debate on Moral Psychology between Rousseau and Fenelon.\ He pointed out that during the Enlightenment, Rousseau is often considered to belong to the classical republican tradition that sought to revive the \freedom of the ancients.\ In contrast to modern republicanism's emphasis on social freedom and commercial virtue, classical republicanism holds that citizens should, on the one hand, minimize private emotions and partisan interactions as much as possible, and on the other hand, forge a public spirit and achieve collective freedom through political participation. This requires people to overcome self-centered private will at the ethical level in order to realize the absolutely selfless \general will.\ This ethical concept of \self-abandonment\ is often traced back to the 17th-century quietist Fran？ois de Salignac de La Mothe-Fénelon. He argues that Fenelon and Rousseau are not on a continuous spectrum of classical republican thought, but rather reflect the covert transition of republican ideas from humanism to romanticism at a key historical juncture between the 17th and 18th centuries.

Zhao Yutao, an assistant professor at the School of Government of Sun Yat-sen University, gave a report titled \From Civil Society and State Theory: Hegel's Synthesis of Smith and Rousseau.\ She believes that for Hegel, Scottish thought excels in the analysis of social mechanisms but fails to perceive the ethical nature of commercial civilization; Rousseau's theory of will has profound problem consciousness but does not understand the significant meaning of commercial civilization for universal human freedom. In fact, civil society is not only a social mechanism centered around the market but also shapes a unique modern ethical life. However, the entire logic of \social non-sociality\ still plunges the underclass into a \non-social sociality\ situation: their way of life is highly socialized, but they are in a state of ethical normlessness. It is necessary to transcend civil society, enabling individuals to ascend to the state, a more universal ethical community, through diverse means, to obtain a sociality that is both personal and truly social. Hegel's state theory achieves the combination of commercial society and ethical community, transcending the dualism between individual and society, nature and artificiality, providing the most profound solution to the debate on sociality since Hobbes.

Peking University's tenured associate professor from the Department of History, Professor Chongming, provided a detailed review of the third unit's speeches. He believes that Professor Yu's report actually contains two lines of thought: one is the sanctification of the king, enhancing the king's power through the sanctification of the king; the other is drawing resources from the contemporary doctrine of state rational sovereignty to construct the king's absolute control over sovereignty. There is actually a lot of tension between the two, and in the end, the image of the king as an absolute sovereign overwhelmed the image of the king as a saint. He agrees with Professor Xie's paper pointing out the relationship between skepticism and modernity, considering it a very important perspective for studying modern political thought. However, Montaigne's thought has many complex aspects, emphasizing natural law and natural pleasure, while also valuing reason, and in politics, focusing on maintaining customs and the existing order, so the dimension of conservatism or customism in Montaigne's thought should not be ignored. He believes that Professor Guo Xiaoyu's paper aims to illustrate a normative issue in Rousseau's thought, that is, whether nature and natural law in Rousseau's thought constitute the normative basis for his social contract. In addition, he agrees that the dual relationship in Rousseau's thought is very important for understanding Rousseau, and the social contract is actually to a certain extent to solve the split and conflict between the dual dimensions of individuals and citizens after entering the political society. He agrees with Professor Ren Shuhuai's basic interpretation of Fenelon's image in his paper, pointing out that there is a dimension in Fenelon's thought of rulers understanding interests, transcending interests, and then better realizing interests, so Fenelon does not completely deny interests and abandon commercial society. Moreover, Rousseau is committed to transforming the passion of romantic love through natural emotions and moral transformation, holding a certain conservative attitude in gender relations. Finally, he believes that Professor Zhao Yutao's paper on Hegel's synthesis of the Scottish Enlightenment and Rousseau fully presents the logical development of modern thought, but whether it is completely established still needs further discussion. Kant, on the basis of Hobbes and Rousseau, proposed the concept of \unsocial sociability,\ which reveals both the moral significance of society and the tension between society and morality, and Hegel's synthesis did not truly respond to Rousseau's questioning of the moral corruption of society.

The fourth unit was chaired by Senior Editor Wang Shengqiang, a researcher from the editorial department of \Academic Monthly\. Professor Wu Yan from the School of Law at Tongji University gave a report titled \Analytic Philosophy Research vs. History of Thought Research: Clarifying Some Misconceptions\. He pointed out that recently in academia, some scholars believe that the main task of philosophy lies in studying first-order issues, and neither research on philosophers nor research on the history of thought is strictly philosophical research. His article aims to review such a view of philosophy, arguing that philosophy, due to its nature which is different from science, cannot completely escape historical thinking like science, nor can it exclude old thinking from its discipline in the process of continuous progress like science. At the same time, by distinguishing different types of methods in the history of thought research and different types of disciplines within the field of philosophy, he pointed out that some historical thought research leans more towards the historical end, while some leans more towards the philosophical end, and within the philosophical disciplines, some lean more towards the scientific end and thus their dependence on history is relatively weak, while others lean more towards the philosophical end and thus their dependence on history is relatively strong.

Researcher Zhang Jiliang from the School of Political Science and Public Administration at Shandong University delivered a report titled \Exploration of Comparative Methods in the History of Chinese and Western Political Thought.\ He pointed out that the attention of scholars at home and abroad to the topic of the history of Chinese and Western political thought is gradually increasing, with scholars starting from various perspectives to compare figures such as Confucius and Rawls, Mencius and Aristotle, Xunzi and Augustine, Han Feizi and Machiavelli, and Zhuangzi and Nietzsche. However, the problem lies in: why compare? How is comparison possible? How to compare? He believes that the field of comparative history of Chinese and Western political thought is in its infancy, and the exploration of comparative methodology can, on the one hand, refer to the exploration experience of comparative philosophy, and on the other hand, requires scholars specializing in comparative political thought to consciously carry out methodological exploration. At the same time, based on this, actively engage in methodological dialogues with relevant scholars at home and abroad, thereby continuously promoting the formation of consensus on comparative methodology.

The lecture by Associate Professor He Tao from the School of Political Science and Public Management at China University of Political Science and Law is titled \A Brief Discussion on the Integration of Western Political Thought History Research and Political Theory Research.\ He pointed out that while Western political thought history research has achieved significant accomplishments, it also faces multiple challenges from both internal and external sources. As the \source of vitality\ for political theory research, Western political thought history should play a more important role in the development of political science. Achieving a deep integration between the two is not only an inevitable choice to meet challenges but also an important direction for future political research. Against the background of civilization exchange and interdisciplinary integration, this integration requires breaking through the limitations of traditional research paradigms, focusing on core theoretical issues in political science, and actively responding to real political challenges. By conducting theme-oriented non-continuous research and expanding the dimensions of comparative political thought research, it can not only provide historical depth for political theory innovation but also open up new perspectives for understanding contemporary political phenomena.

The report by Luo Yuwei, a researcher at the Institute of World History of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, is titled \Do We Need a Global History of Ideas? Observations and Reflections.\ She pointed out that at the beginning of this century, marked by David Armitage's study of the Declaration of Independence, there was a clear \global turn\ in the history of ideas in the Western world, with historians of ideas beginning to consider and explore the theoretical space and research methods of the history of ideas under a \global\ perspective. Against this backdrop, historians of ideas in the English-speaking world, represented by the \Cambridge School,\ have focused on the linguistic and historical connotations of \context,\ paying attention to the cross-regional flow and translation of \context.\ At the same time, the study of conceptual history, which was quickly adopted in East Asia and other regions shortly after the establishment of its research path, has shown vigorous development, and mature \global history of concepts\ research has begun to emerge. The development differences of the two research approaches in this field reflect the methodological disputes inherent in \global history of ideas,\ and are directly related to the fundamental question of whether a global history of ideas can be established. From a methodological perspective, the primary issues that global history of ideas must address are: how to define \global\? How to define \ideas\? Understanding these two basic categories fundamentally affects the possibility and feasibility of the implementation of related research.

Associate Professor Zhou Baowei from the School of Political Science and International Relations at East China Normal University gave a wonderful commentary on the fourth unit's speech. He pointed out that the reports of this unit mainly involve two parts. The first part is to elaborate on the study of the history of thought, which includes not only the history of political thought but also those newly developed and extended fields, new frontier directions, and new academic growth points. For example, Teacher Zhang Jiliang talked about comparative political theory, including the dimensions of comparison, the objects of comparison, and the problems and significance encountered in the comparison process. Another example is Teacher Luo Yuwei's discussion on global intellectual history and how to position global thought, which is derived from within the Cambridge School, and there are actually different views on global intellectual history within the Cambridge School itself. The second part, mentioned by Teacher Wu Yan and Teacher He Tao, is the dilemmas we encounter in the process of studying the history of thought. Especially Teacher Wu Yan talked about the identity recognition and anxiety of researchers in the history of thought, as well as how to deal with biases, challenges, and misunderstandings from other disciplines. There is a very misplaced situation in the history of thought in both Chinese and Western academic circles. In the Western academic circle, the historical approach is on the offensive, while the analytical philosophical approach is on the defensive. In the Chinese academic circle, it is exactly the opposite, with the historical approach facing many doubts, and the analytical philosophical approach is on the offensive. Whether in the field of philosophical research or the history of thought research, there is indeed a clear division between the analytical philosophical approach and the historical approach. However, different disciplines and research approaches are actually methods for us to understand the external world. These two approaches should not be an either-or, strictly opposed relationship, but should be a complementary relationship. As Herder believed, the world is large enough that we can regard historical and philosophical judgments as the two poles, two hubs, and two main axes of our understanding of human knowledge. The area between the two poles is actually the most fruitful, and it is impossible to travel around the world around any pole, whether it is history or philosophy. Therefore, he agrees with Teacher Wu Yan's view that any method has its value, and the most important thing is not whether it is a historical method or a philosophical method, but whether we are committed to valuable research.

At the closing ceremony, Professor Zhang Xingang from the School of History at Shandong University made a concluding speech for this symposium. He began with his own experience of transitioning from the field of political science to the field of history, discussing some fundamental issues in the study of the history of political thought, such as \what exactly is politics\ and \whose thoughts are being studied.\ He pointed out that the study of the history of political thought has both normative and empirical dimensions. These two dimensions are not mutually exclusive, nor is it a matter of using norms to criticize empirical research or using empirical evidence to ridicule norms. How to effectively combine the empirical aspects of politics with its normative aspects is crucial. He proposed exploring an empirical paradigm for the study of the history of political thought, which means paying attention not only to \Zixue\ and \Jingxue\ but also to the political expressions and thoughts of political participants in different eras and communities. This requires researchers to seek out a variety of materials, focus on the actual political process, extract the thoughts of political participants using concepts, and theorize them. The final and most critical point is that the study of the history of political thought must also maintain its original intention and focus on its research questions, which is closely related to our judgment of the times, the nation, and the world and politics. While it is important to pay attention to the research trends in the international academic community, it is also necessary to maintain independent judgment. Trendy topics may not be the most important. For Chinese scholars, the study and understanding of the construction of order in world history are far from mature, and there is still a lot of foundational work to be done.

The youth forum came to a successful conclusion amidst the collision of ideas and sincere dialogue. Young scholars from various academic backgrounds, with keen awareness of issues, solid textual skills, and diverse research perspectives, conducted in-depth discussions on key topics in the field of political thought history. From the reinterpretation of classics to the exploration of marginal ideas, from the sorting out of conceptual genealogies to the restoration of historical contexts, from the reflection on indigenous wisdom to attempts at cross-civilizational dialogue, the forum vividly demonstrated the vitality, depth, and broad vision of the younger generation in the study of political thought history.