When Socrates meets Confucius文档格式.docx
- 文档编号:16552143
- 上传时间:2022-11-24
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:11
- 大小:28.32KB
When Socrates meets Confucius文档格式.docx
《When Socrates meets Confucius文档格式.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《When Socrates meets Confucius文档格式.docx(11页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
Throughaclosereadingofthe
Lunyu
(Analects)andthe
Memorabilia
ofXenophonaswellassomeofPlato’searlydialogues,[3]
thisarticletriestoarguethat,instrikingcontrasttothe‘rationales’stressedbySocrates’ethics,Confucius’ethicspresentsacharacteristicspiritof‘moralemotion’andtakes‘emotionales’asthegoverningprinciplesofmorallife.
1.AffectionversusKnowledge
Asiswellknown,Socrates’philosophyshowsaverymarkedandevenradicaltendencytoemphasizerationalknowledge.HeisusuallythoughttobethefirstGreekphilosopherwhonotonlydiscusseshumanaffairsthroughrationalinquirybutalsoestablishesthedominantpositionofmoralreasoninthetraditionofWesternethics.
OnSocrates’conception,therationalsoulisthemostdistinctcharacterofthehumanbeingfromotheranimals.Hearguesthatthegodshaveimplantedinhumanbeingsthenoblesttypeofsoulwiththefacultyofreasoning,wherebyhumanbeingsareabletoapprehendtheexistenceofgods,toacquireknowledgebytoil,andtoreasonabouttheobjectsoftheirperceptions,sothat,incomparisonwithotheranimals,theylivelikegods,bynaturepeerlessbothinbodyandinsoul
(seeXenophon,1959,p.61,p.303).Inthesearguments,Socratesdisplaysanimplicitintentionofdefiningthehumanbeingas‘animalrationale’,
akeydefinitionthathasbecomemoreandmoreexplicitandinfluentialinthelaterdevelopmentsofWesternrationalphilosophy.Asaman‘whomustbeguidedbyreason’
(Plato,
Crito
46B,
Jowett,
1937,p.430),
inaddition,heasaphilosopheralsopaysalotofattentiontothequestionofhowhumanbeingscanacquirerationalknowledgethroughtheirfacultyofreasoning.Aristotleremarks,‘TherearetwoinnovationswhichmayfairlybeascribedtoSocrates:
inductivereasoningandgeneraldefinition.Bothoftheseareassociatedwiththestarting-pointofscientificknowledge.’
(Metaphysics
1078b,
Tredennick
&
Armstrong,
1969,p.197.)
UnliketheGreeknaturalphilosopherswhoneglecthumanaffairsandthinkaboutonly‘UniversalNature’,
moreover,Socratesholdsthatoneshouldfirstknowoneselfbyusingone’sreasonaccordingtothefamousDelphicinscription.HisconversationswithhisfellowAtheniansarealwaysofhumanaffairs,especiallyofthemoralvirtuesseeminglyfamiliartothem.ItisinthesedialoguesthatSocratesarrivesatacelebrateddefinition:
‘virtueisknowledge.’Hesays,‘Forjustactionsandallformsofvirtuousactivityarebeautifulandgood.Hewhoknowsthebeautifulandgoodwillneverchooseanythingelse,hewhoisignorantofthemcannotdothem,andevenifhetries,willfail.’
(Xenophon,
1959,p.225)
Putdifferently,oneasamoralbeingmust,firstofall,haveknowledgeaboutvirtuesandthentakeactionaccordingtothisknowledge.IntheframeworkofSocrates’ethics,thus,allvirtuesandmoralactionsaregroundedonrationalknowledge,andreasonplaysadecisiverolenotonlyinthetheoreticallifebutalsointhepracticallife.GregoryVlastosmakesthispointmanifest:
‘SocratesistorationalizethemoraluniverseasrelentlesslyastheIonian
physiologoi
hadrationalizedthephysicaluniverse’,
and‘Hisgodscanbebothsupernaturalandrationalsolongastheyarerationallymoral’
(1991,pp.162-164).
WemaysafelyargueinthissensethatSocrates’ethicsisofacharacteristicspiritof‘moralreason’.
Bycontrast,Confuciuspreferstoregardemotions,[4]
especiallysuchmoralaffectionsas
ren
(humanelove)and
xiao
(filialpiety),asthefundamentalcharacterofhumanbeingsaswellastheirmorallife.Hesays,‘Ifonebewithout
ren,whathasonetodowithritualpropriety?
’(Lunyu
3:
3)[5]
Thisstatementhighlightsthevitalsignificanceof
ren,asortofuniversalloveforfellowhumans,notonlyforobservingritualproprietyinanexplicitwaybutalsoforthehumanasamoralbeinginanimplicitway.Tobesure,todaywecoulddistinguishinConfucius’teachingsbetween
asaspecificvirtueofhumaneloveand
asageneralvirtuethatembracesallspecificvirtuesandcanmakeapersontrulyhuman
(see
Chan,
1955,pp.297-298).However,wemaynotoverlookasimplefactthatConfuciushimselfdoesnotisolatethemfromeachother,butjustemploysthissingletermtorefertobothofthem.[6]
Thisfactsuggeststhat,forhim,tolovefellowhumansinahumanewayisessentialforonetobeatruehumanintheethicalsense.ThefamousConfucianmaximthat‘ren
meansthehuman’canbeunderstoodalsointermsofthisstanceofConfucius.[7]
Meanwhile,YouRuo,oneofhisdistinguisheddiscipleswhosewordshaveoftenbeenregardedtoresemblethoseofConfuciushimself,claims,‘Filialpietyandbrotherlyrespectaretherootof
ren.’(Lunyu
1:
2)Nomatterwhetherheretheword‘ren’meanshumaneloveortheall-embracingvirtueoreventhehuman
perse,thisclaimevidentlyaffirmsthecrucialimportanceoffilialpiety,akindofkinshiploveforparents,forthehumanasamoralbeing.IntheframeworkofConfucius’ethics,thus,itisnotrationalknowledgebutmoralsentimentsthatcanmakeapersontrulyhuman.WemaysayinthissensethatConfuciuswouldhavedefinedthehumanas‘animalemotionale’ifhehadtriedtogiveadefinitionofthehuman.Hisfollowershaveembracedtheseideasfaithfully.Forinstance,Mencius,whoisthefirstConfucianthinkertodevelopasystematictheoryofhumannature,declaresinthedimensionofhumanelove:
‘Whoeverisdevoidoftheheartofcompassionisnotatruehuman.’(Mencius
2A6)Inthemeanwhile,healsoremarksinthedimensionoffilialpiety:
‘Ifonecannotgettheheartsofone’sparents,onecannotbeconsideredatruehuman.’(Mencius
4A28)
Therefore,Confuciusalwayshighlypraisesthemoralactionsmotivatedbysinceremoralsentimentsand
yet
belittlestheonesmerelyoutofasenseofduty.Inhisview,asstatedabove,itisevenmeaninglessforpeopletotakesuchmoralactionsasobservingritualproprietywithouthumaneloveintheirhearts.Onanotheroccasion,Confuciusremarksinasimilartone,‘Thefilialpietyofnowadaysmeanssupportingparents.Butevendogsandhorsescanbesupportedinasimilarway.Ifonedoesnotrevereone’sparents,whatisthedifference?
2:
7)Putdifferently,whileonecertainlyoughttofulfillone’sfilialdutytoone’sparents,thisfulfillmentmustnotbedoneasacompulsoryobligation,butitshouldstemfromone’sgenuinekinshiploveforthem;
otherwise,onewouldnotgettheheartsofone’sparents.Itistruethat,likehumanenesstofellowhumans,filialpietytoparentsasavirtueismorethananaffectionintheConfucianframework.AccordingtothisstatementofConfucius,yet,itsemotionaldimensionisplainlyfarmorefundamentalanddecisivethanitspracticalone.Inadialogueaboutthethree-yearmourningforlateparentswithhisdiscipleZaiWo,Confuciusevensetsanethicalstandardof‘feelingateaseinyourheart’(xinan)bywhichonecouldjudgewhetheroneoughttotakeanactornot.WhenZaiWoclaimsthatthethree-yearmourningwillleadtoalossoftheobservancesofritualpropriety,Confuciusdoesnotrefutehimbyrationalarguments,butjustaskshimaquestiontoappealhismoralsentimentsinhisheart:
‘Ifyouweretoeatgoodriceandwearembroideredclothesaftertheone-yearmourning,wouldyoufeelatease?
’AfterZaiWoanswersintheaffirmative,hecontinueshisargumentsandsaystwice,‘Ifyoufeelatease,doit’,
thoughhereallythinksthatafilialsonwouldnotfeelateaseinsuchcircumstancesandthusshouldnotdoitatall(see
17:
21).Asaresult,Confuciusestablishesan‘emotionale’of‘justificationbyfeelingatease’(xinanlide)thathasbeenstillprevalentamongtheChinesepeopleuptonow:
solongasanactcanmakeyoufeelateaseinthemoraldimensionofyourheart,youwillhavesufficientreasontodoit.[8]
Inhisinterpretationofthe
Lunyu,Fingaretteremarks,‘jen
[ren]anditsassociated
“virtues”,and
li
[ritualpropriety]
too,arenotconnectedintheoriginaltextwiththelanguageof
“will”,
“emotion”
and
“innerstates”.’
(1972,p.43)
Unfortunately,thisremarkismisleadingforpurposesofaphilosophicalunderstandingofConfucius.Indeed,Confuciushasnotthe‘rational’ideasoftheWesternkindaboutthesubject/objectdistinctions.However,thislackisunlikelytopreventhimfromconnecting
orothervirtueswith‘emotion’or‘innerstates’accordingtothe‘emotionales’oftheChinesekind.Onthecontrary,
itis
inlightofthisveryconnection
that
Confuciusholdsthat‘jen
istheaspectofconductthatdirectsourattentiontotheparticularpersonandhisorientationastheactor’
(Fingarette,
1972,p.47),
because,forhim,theconductof
issignificantinmoralsense
ifand
onlyifitisintrinsicallymotivatedby
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- When Socrates meets Confucius