a)• Freedom & Propriety: Kant sees freedom as acting by self-given moral laws, free from external forces. Confucius's propriety aids civilized social expression, like Kant's imperative duty, stressing self-restraint and moral responsibility for harmonious co-existence.
b)• Rational Capacity: Kant defines it as knowing and acting on moral laws by reason. Confucianism impacts Chinese humanity with self-cultivation and desire restraint. It has similarities and differences with Western rationality in focus and emphasis.
• Conclusion: Confucius's thought is valuable for moral cultivation and social stability, not to be wrongly criticized.
收起
-
A Comparative Discussion of Li and Kant's "Freedom"
In Confucianism, Li, a set of norms and moral principles, governs social and individual behavior. It intertwines with inner virtue, guiding people to act with propriety and righteousness for a harmonious social order.
Kant's freedom centers on the autonomy of the will. True freedom, for him, is acting according to the moral law self-imposed by reason, a transcendental concept underlying moral agency.
Both involve self-regulation. With Li, individuals follow norms for moral and social cultivation. In Kant's view, free agents act per the self-imposed moral law. However, their sources differ. Li stems from Confucian cultural heritage, while Kant's is based on a priori reasoning.
Regarding the individual-society relationship, Li focuses on social order and individual roles within it. Kant's freedom, though having implications for the moral community, emphasizes the individual as an end, with freedom exercised in personal moral decision-making, not necessarily aligning with immediate social order.
In sum, despite different backgrounds, comparing Li and Kant's "freedom" shows parallels and differences in understanding individual conduct, moral agency, and the individual-society relationship, aiding a deeper exploration of philosophical traditions and fundamental ethical-metaphysical questions.
-
Comparing Confucian "Li" with Kant's "freedom" is intriguing as it bridges Eastern and Western ethical thought. "Li" represents social order and ritual propriety in Confucianism, emphasizing collective harmony and one's role within it. In contrast, Kantian "freedom" is about individual autonomy and moral law, stressing rational self-governance. While "Li" is more about conforming to social norms for the common good, Kant's freedom is about acting out of duty, not coercion. This comparison highlights the balance between social cohesion and individual liberty across different philosophies.
-
a)What indeed is freedom?Use Kant’s interpretation of freedom as a way to comprehend your understanding of Confucius’s requisites on propriety.In what way are Confucius’s idea of propriety comparable with Kant’s idea of imperative duty? Freedom in Kant's Philosophy: Kant defines freedom as the ability to act according to the moral law,which is reason's own law.This is encapsulated in his Categorical Imperative,which states that one should act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.This implies that freedom is not arbitrary but is bound by the moral law that reason prescribes. Confucius's Requisites on Propriety: Confucius's concept of"propriety"(Li)is central to understanding his ethical and social philosophy.Propriety,in Confucianism,refers to the traditional rituals,customs,and institutions that regulate social behavior and maintain harmony.It is not just about external behavior but also about the internalization of moral values that guide actions. Comparability with Kant’s Imperative Duty: Confucius's idea of propriety can be seen as comparable to Kant's idea of imperative duty in that both emphasize the importance of acting in accordance with a set of moral principles or norms.For Confucius,propriety is not just a social convention but a moral code that reflects the deeper order of the universe.Similarly,Kant's imperative duty is not arbitrary but is derived from the rational moral law that every individual must follow to act autonomously and with respect for universality.Both systems see a form of freedom that is not merely the absence of constraint but the ability to act in accordance with a higher moral or rational principle. b)How does the German philosopher Kant define human’s“rational capacity”?From this perspective,how should we look at Confucian's influence on Chinese humanity?How is western rationality similar and different from Confucian rationality? Kant's Definition of Rational Capacity: Kant defines human rational capacity as the ability to reason and make moral judgments independently.It is the capacity to use one's own understanding without the guidance of another,which he sees as the essence of enlightenment.Rational capacity,for Kant,is the foundation for moral autonomy and the ability to act according to the Categorical Imperative. Confucian Influence on Chinese Humanity: The Confucian influence on Chinese humanity can be seen as an emphasis on relational harmony and social order,which is achieved through the practice of propriety(Li)and benevolence(Ren).Confucianism emphasizes the cultivation of virtue and the maintenance of social harmony,which can be seen as a form of rational capacity in action,albeit different from Kant's emphasis on individual autonomy and moral law. Similarities and Differences between Western and Confucian Rationality: Western rationality,as seen in Kant's philosophy,emphasizes individual autonomy,critical thinking,and the moral law that is derived from reason itself.It is more focused on the individual's capacity to reason and act independently of external influences. Confucian rationality,on the other hand,is more relational and context-dependent.It emphasizes the individual's role within a network of social relationships and the importance of harmony within those relationships.Confucian rationality is about the proper conduct that maintains social order and is derived from a different cultural and philosophical context. In conclusion,while both Western and Confucian rationality value the capacity for reason and moral judgment,they differ in their emphasis and application.Western rationality is more individualistic and autonomous,while Confucian rationality is more relational and harmonious.Both systems,however,recognize the importance of acting in accordance with a higher rational principle,whether it be a moral law or a social order.
-
This image seems to be discussing a topic related to a comparative view of Kant's interpretation of "freedom," possibly in the context of Chinese philosophy or thought, as indicated by the mention of "Li" (which can refer to礼仪, meaning "ritual" or "propriety"). Immanuel Kant was a prominent German philosopher in the Enlightenment era, known for his contributions to metaphysics, ethics, and aesthetics. His interpretation of "freedom" is central to his moral philosophy, where he argues that freedom is a fundamental aspect of the human will and is essential for moral responsibility. If this discussion is comparing Kant's views on freedom with those from a Chinese philosophical perspective, it would be interesting to see how concepts such as Li, which emphasize social order and harmony, interact with Kant's individualistic and rationalistic concept of freedom. This comparison could provide a richer, more diverse understanding of the complexities and nuances involved in the concept of freedom across different philosophical traditions.
-
a) Freedom according to Kant and its relation to Confucius's propriety 1.Kant's view of freedom: For Kant, freedom is the ability to act in accordance with reason and moral law independently of external coercion. It is not the freedom to do whatever one desires in a completely unconstrained way. True freedom lies in self - governance by the moral law within us. 2.Confucius's requisites on propriety: Confucius emphasized propriety (Li) as a set of norms and behaviors that were designed to create harmonious social relations. These norms were not meant to suppress human nature but rather to guide it in a way that would lead to a well - ordered society. In a sense, just as Kant's moral law provides a framework for freedom, Confucius's propriety provides a framework within which individuals can express their nature in a harmonious and socially beneficial way. 3.Comparison with Kant's imperative duty: Kant's categorical imperative is a moral principle that commands us to act in a way that we could will to be a universal law. Confucius's propriety can be seen as somewhat analogous in that it provides a set of rules that, if followed by all members of society, would lead to a harmonious and just social order. For example, just as Kant would argue that lying is not in line with the moral law because it cannot be willed as a universal principle, Confucius would see certain behaviors as against propriety because they disrupt social harmony. b) Kant's definition of human's "rational capacity" and its relation to Confucian influence on Chinese humanity 1.Kant's definition of rational capacity: Kant believed that human beings have the ability to use reason to understand moral laws and make autonomous moral decisions. This rational capacity is what distinguishes humans from animals and allows us to act in a morally responsible way. 2.Confucian influence on Chinese humanity: Confucianism has had a profound influence on Chinese humanity. It has emphasized values such as benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and faithfulness. These values have guided Chinese people's behavior and social relations for thousands of years. From a Kantian perspective, Confucian teachings can be seen as a way of guiding people to use their rational capacity to make moral decisions in the context of society. For example, the concept of benevolence encourages people to consider the well - being of others, which is a rational and moral choice. 3.Similarities and differences between western rationality and Confucian rationality: 1.Similarities: Both Western rationality (as represented by Kant) and Confucian rationality recognize the importance of using reason to make moral and ethical decisions. They both strive for a certain kind of order and harmony in society, whether it is through following moral laws or Confucian values. 2.Differences: Western rationality often emphasizes individual autonomy and the universality of moral laws in a more abstract sense. Confucian rationality is more deeply embedded in the context of social relations and family values. For example, in the West, the moral law may be seen as applying to all individuals equally regardless of their social position, while in Confucianism, different social roles (such as father - son, ruler - subject) have different sets of propriety rules. Regarding the initial statement about Confucius being inhumane as suggested by Bertrand Russell, this is a misinterpretation. Confucius's teachings were aimed at promoting harmonious human relations and the development of a moral society, which is very much in line with the well - being and humanity of people.
您确定给 “
4008987008