Worldwide, humanities and social sciences (HSS) scholars produce and disseminate knowledge in an unequal global knowledge space, which can be caused by various structural, epistemological, and individual-level factors. Although global epistemic injustice receives much attention, the factors contributing to it, including the extraverted mindsets and practices of non-Euro-American scholars, remain less discussed. This article draws on semibiographical interviews with 30 high-achieving ethnic Chinese HSS scholars in mainland China, in Hong Kong, and overseas. It explores how these scholars display intellectual extraversion and why and how they are reflexive about and confronting it. The findings reveal three manifestations of intellectual extraversion, four sources of reflexivity regarding such extraversion, and three ways to confront it. The research uncovers the continuous reflexivity and efforts of ethnic Chinese HSS scholars in dealing with lingering epistemic discontinuities and exclusions and sheds light on new possible approaches to challenging global epistemic injustice in HSS research.

The global knowledge asymmetries are increasingly interrogated by non-Western humanities and social sciences (HSS) scholars whose research is anchored in local contexts yet must adhere to international (Western) standards. Under this circumstance, the study aims to examine how the cultural self-awareness of non-Western HSS scholars is manifested in research through a Chinese lens. Based on previous theoretical perspectives and Fei Xiaotong’s theory of cultural self-awareness, the study first constructs two analytical dimensions: academic self-reflexivity and cultural appreciation attitudes. It then performs a qualitative investigation including 28 Mainland Chinese HSS scholars through interviews and literature analyses. The findings highlight key principles for academic self-reflexivity, namely reflecting on intellectual extraversion, dichotomous thinking, and the reemphasis on Chinese culture and knowledge. The cultural appreciation attitudes are also elaborated, which are embodied in the recognition and revaluation of traditional Chinese knowledge, the continued appreciation of modern Western knowledge, and the synthesis of different cultures and knowledge in research. These findings develop Fei’s cultural self-awareness theory and add new discourses to address global knowledge imbalances, promoting a more diverse and inclusive global higher education landscape.

The asymmetrical global higher education and knowledge systems ordered by Euro–American hegemony have been increasingly interrogated, especially by scholars in the humanities and social sciences (HSS). With gathering awareness, growing HSS scholars from non-Western backgrounds have called for global intellectual pluriversality. Responding to such a trend, this article sheds new light on the status quo of East Asian and other non-Euro–American intellectual traditions by taking Chinese intellectual traditions as a case. Since the nineteenth century, generations of Chinese intellectuals have strived to transform their intellectual traditions into modern resources. This historical mission has been carried on by contemporary scholars and become even more complex in the current global era. By unpacking the real perceptions and recent experiences of Chinese HSS scholars, this study demonstrates that Chinese intellectual traditions deeply influence today’s knowledge production and have been transformed into three kinds of academic resources: approaches, methodologies/paradigms, and theories. However, the transformation process has never been smooth. Domestically, the great endeavours of Chinese HSS scholars are often impeded by the dominant intellectual extraversion and coercive audit culture; internationally, they feel constrained by epistemic injustice. This article proposes an empirical approach to examining and presenting intellectual traditions in the individual experiences of scholars. It reveals the high complexities of navigating through asymmetrical globalisation to achieve intellectual pluriversality.

The global knowledge asymmetries, dominated by academic centers in Western societies, have marginalized traditional non-Western knowledge. In line with the call for intellectual pluriversality, non-Western scholars in the humanities and social sciences (HSS) have witnessed a revitalization of traditional knowledge in research. Nonetheless, how they integrate their traditional knowledge into research lacks theoretical grounding and empirical substantiation. This study specifically examines the research agenda of contemporary Chinese HSS academics who are attempting to integrate traditional Chinese and modern Western knowledge. Through interviews, it seeks to understand their reasons, goals, principles, and strategies related to such knowledge integration. It first underscores the rationales stemming from global knowledge disparities and Chinese individuals’ limited exposure to their traditional knowledge. It then reveals guiding principles for understanding traditional Chinese knowledge. Last, it provides strategies for knowledge integration, including comparative analysis and the transformation of traditional Chinese knowledge into modern theories and methodologies. Such a research agenda transcends critical reflection on the hegemonic and inequitable global knowledge system, promoting tangible actions to facilitate HSS research in China and beyond.

Purpose: Ignorance has been seen as negative in the mainstream philosophical narrative and knowledge-based society. This study introduces Chinese epistemic traditions of Confucianism and Daoism as resources to reunderstand ignorance and current educational issues. Design/Approach/Methods: Guided by hermeneutic openness, this study fuses ancient epistemic and modern educational horizons by reinterpreting early Confucian and Daoist classics. Findings: The boundary between ignorance and knowledge is flexible and blurry in Confucianism and Daoism, and ignorance is distinctively understood as Confucian admissible propriety and Daoist transcendence of conventional knowledge. Rooted in these epistemologies, Confucianism and Daoism have developed unique educational ideas and forms—congyou (从游) and zuowang (坐忘)—which advocate moral socialization and self-reflexivity beyond knowing through language. These traditions inspire today's educators and learners to find more space for self-formation, appropriate forgetting, and illuminating intuition in education. Originality/Value: As an initial exploration, this study examines potential nonnegative ignorance and its educational implications in Confucian and Daoist wisdom. The findings are instructive for rethinking today's knowledge-based society and the text-oriented education of Chinese culture and can contribute to world epistemic diversity and cultural interactions.

作为当代高等教育研究“绘图师”，伯顿.克拉克沿着制度主义学术脉络，建立了高等教育安抚功能理论、高等教育组织传奇理论、学术寡头理论、高等教育三角协调模型、学术活动理论和创业型大学理论等系列高等教育理论，深刻揭示了高等教育系统和制度、高校组织运行与高校师生活动的规律。克拉克的研究以制度主义理论和方法为基础，吸收借鉴林德布洛姆的政治经济思想和改革观、本－大卫的学术职业理论观点和国际比较视角、梅茨格的知识实质增长理论，综合运用案例研究、多学科视角和跨国比较方法，极大地拓展了制度主义范式的适用范围和高等教育研究空间，对高等教育研究产生了广泛而深远的影响。