The issue of China's pragmatic philosophy, in regard to the country's cultural mission, emerged in the chapter ”Chinese People's Great Mission for World Civilization” in the Impressions of a Voyage to Europe by Liang Qichao (1873-1929). published in March of 1920. It reflects the fact that Liang started to emphasize the effect of culture on society following his European journey. It signified his understanding that the operation of Chinese society had changed. The previous culture studies on this change either regarded it as part of a debate on oriental and western cultures from the perspective of the May Fourth Movement and considered Liang a precursor of Neo-Confucianism, or interpreted its significance under the context of cultural self-reformation. Little explored in the past, the relationship between this changed viewpoint and Liang's pragmatic philosophy, as well as the significance of the latter, will be analyzed in this research. The three conclusive points of this study are: first, in terms of culture stud). Liang assumed a linear evolution of cultural history, i.e., that human society developed from folk culture to high culture, rather than evolving simultaneously in diverse ways. Then, he focused on how the cultural systems of signification in both the east and west should be integrated, rendering an interpretive explanation. Besides, he did not clarify what bias his own cultural perspective might cause; his analysis of the oriental and western cultures is an emic account. Also, his concept concerning oriental/western cultures centered on the analysis of traditional ideal cultures, not real cultures, and on the high culture formed by the intellectuals, rather than the subcultures in real social and cultural contexts. Therefore, Liang's ”cultural harmonization theory” aimed to find a general principle that combined oriental and western academic merits in order for the eastern and western societies to develop more in accordance with rationality. Second, the difference between Liang's theory of China's Cultural Mission and his other ideas of pragmatic philosophy involve not only the exchange of the east and west knowledge but also the cultural ideology formed by the long-inherited Chinese academic traditions. Such ideology, besides permeating into the life experience of traditional Chinese scholars, also led them to assume a responsibility to shoulder the mission of highest-order interest for the development of the whole world. However, while the new education system of the west introduced into China was a help in the administration of the country, Liang's ”China's Mission” could not be applied in this case, causing it to fail to achieve the requisite cultural reproduction mechanism in the new academic arena. Third, in light of Liang's motivation in writing the chapter, his ”China's Mission” aimed not only to bring about the best of traditional Chinese culture but to base his discourse on China's response to the world crisis at that historical period of time. Since his discourse pertained to the protection of benefits to China, it could turn the attention of academia from the May Fourth Movement to how modern western culture would impact postwar European society. In particular, Chinese academia lacked a definite orientation in the situation where Liang’s work realistically depicted the crisis the world was facing and at the same time proposed measures for dealing with it. He thereby became the ”initial and most powerful critic” of the times.