Some people believe Li or rituals are about organizing and structuring social and personal behaviors, and thus seem to conflict with human emotional instinct and free spirit. Then, can we draw the conclusion that Confucius is in line with inhumanity (as suggested by Bertrand Russel on page 54)? Bear this question in your mind and answer the following questions:
–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?
–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?
"Individual volitional behavior is not interfered by others" is the subjective dimension of this freedom view, that is, individual subject has natural free will; The "social norm of justice" (Li) is the normative dimension of this freedom view, that is, it is based on the justice theory of Confucius. That is to say, the normative conditions of freedom come from two principles of justice, namely, the principle of justice derived from the spirit of universal love (benevolence) and the principle of suitability adapted to the basic life style of a particular era (righteousness). Therefore, Confucius' concept of freedom has two levels, that is, the conservative freedom to abide by norms, and the constructive freedom to reconstruct norms.
In Kantian philosophy, however, the basic determinacy of the concept of freedom is its own cause, and the corresponding negation is obedience to external necessity. Taking Kantian concept of freedom as the main line, we can reveal the internal relationship between Kantian epistemology, ethics and social and political philosophy.
Kant defines "rational capacity" as the ability to act according to universal laws. Confucianism's influence on Chinese humanity is about moral cultivation and social harmony, which aligns with the rational pursuit of moral law in Kant. Western rationality focuses more on individual autonomy, while Confucian rationality emphasizes social roles and responsibilities. B oth recognize the importance of rationality but differ in their application and emphasis on the individual versus society.
(a)Freedom is autonomy according to universal laws,as Kant described.Confucius's emphasis on propriety aligns with this,highlighting internal moral self-discipline through adherence to social norms.
(b)Kant defines"rational capacity"as the ability to act based on rational principles.Confucianism's influence on Chinese humanity is evident in its moral emphasis,similar to Western rationality in pursuing action based on rational principles,but differing in the relationship between the individual and society.
a) The essence of freedom, as understood by Kant, is the ability of human beings to be able to choose their actions autonomously, rather than the actions themselves being determined by external factors. Applying this interpretation to Confucius' moral demands, we can understand that people should have the autonomy to act in accordance with their inner moral code rather than being bound by external rituals or norms in their moral choices. Although Confucius' emphasis on "Li" (礼) may appear to be an organisation and structuring of social and individual behaviour, its core lies in the cultivation of inner virtue, so that people can act out of their inner self-consciousness and voluntariness, which is somewhat similar to Kant's view of freedom. There is a similarity between Confucius' "rites" and Kant's "imperative duty" in emphasising the autonomy and universality of moral behaviour.
b) Kant defines the "rational faculty" of human beings as the basis of their ability to choose their actions autonomously, which transcends sensual experience and is the guiding principle of moral judgement and action. From this perspective, Confucius' thought had a profound influence on Chinese humanism. Confucius emphasised moral norms and the spirit of benevolence, concepts that are deeply rooted in Chinese culture and have shaped the moral concepts and codes of conduct of the Chinese people. Compared with Western rationality, Confucian rationality focuses more on morality and humanism, emphasising human relationships and moral responsibility. Western rationality, on the other hand, focuses more on logic and science, pursuing objectivity and universality of knowledge. Although they differ in specific content and methodology, both emphasise the important role of reason and morality in human society.
Analysis:
- In discussing freedom, we need to recognise that although Kant and Confucius lived in different times and cultures, their ideas both emphasise the importance of moral behaviour and autonomy. Kant's view of freedom provides us with a new perspective for understanding Confucius' moral imperatives.
- In exploring the capacity for reason, we can see that Confucian and Western rationality share common ground in their emphasis on morality and rationality, but differ in the specific ways of realisation and focus. This difference makes the two philosophically and culturally distinctive and provides us with rich intellectual resources.
a)Freedom, as understood by Immanuel Kant, is not merely the ability to do as one pleases, but rather the capacity for self-mastery and the adherence to moral law. Kant's notion of freedom is closely tied to his concept of the categorical imperative, which holds that actions are morally right if they can be universalized without contradiction. In other words, one should act only in ways that one would will all rational beings to act. This idea of freedom as self-legislation, or自律 in Chinese, is at the heart of Kant's moral philosophy。
When we turn to Confucius's concept of propriety, or礼 in Chinese, we find a similar emphasis on self-discipline and the adherence to social and moral norms. Confucius taught that礼 is not merely a set of external rituals, but a fundamental principle that guides one's thoughts and actions. 礼 is about maintaining social harmony and order through the proper performance of one's role in society, and it is through this performance that one's inner character is revealed and cultivated.
Moral Autonomy: Both Confucius and Kant emphasize the importance of moral autonomy, the idea that individuals should govern their own behavior based on internal principles rather than external forces. Confucius's 礼 and Kant's categorical imperative both require individuals to act in accordance with a set of universal moral principles。
Social Harmony: Confucius's 礼 is aimed at promoting social harmony and order, while Kant's imperative duty is similarly concerned with the well-being of society as a whole. In both cases, the individual's actions are evaluated not just in terms of their personal benefit, but also in terms of their impact on the wider community。
Universalizability: Kant's categorical imperative requires that one's actions be universalizable, meaning that they could be applied to all rational beings without contradiction. Confucius's 礼 also contains a similar notion of universality, in that it provides a set of guidelines that all members of society should follow in order to maintain a harmonious and just social order。
Respect for Others: Both Confucius and Kant stress the importance of respecting others and treating them with dignity. Confucius's 礼 includes principles such as 仁 , or benevolence, which emphasizes kindness and compassion towards others. Kant's imperative duty similarly requires that individuals be treated as ends in themselves, never merely as means to an end.
b)Kant believed that human rationality is a cognitive capacity that includes innate forms, a priori categories, and innate concepts as knowledge elements. Rationality is not just the ability to logically reason, but also includes moral and practical rationality. Kant's view of rationality emphasizes the importance of human autonomy and the moral law, and argues that rationality is the foundation upon which will is decided, rather than a tool for it.
From Kant's perspective of rationality, we can see that Confucianism has similarities and significant differences in its understanding of human nature to Kant's rational view. Confucianism emphasizes "benevolence", "ritualism", and "the middle path", which reflect a pursuit of harmony and order, resonating with Kant's moral rationality. The "benevolence" in Confucianism can be seen as a moral rationality that requires individuals to follow certain moral norms and behavioral guidelines in society to achieve harmony between the individual and society.
However, there are differences between Confucian rationality and Western rationality in some aspects. Western rationalism often emphasizes individual autonomy and logical reasoning ability, while Confucian rationality places more emphasis on social relationships and personal cultivation, emphasizing the role and responsibility of the individual in society. The "rites" in Confucian thought are not only an external code of conduct, but also an embodiment of inner cultivation, which is different from Kant's view of internalizing moral laws into individual rationality.
a) Freedom and Propriety:*Kant views freedom as acting freely and act according to a law I give to myself moral, independent of external influences. Similarly, Confucius’s concept of propriety facilitates the orderly expression of social behavior, emphasizing self-discipline and moral duty to achieve harmonious coexistence, much like Kant's notion of imperative duty.
b) Rational Capacity: Kant defines rational capacity as the ability to understand and act according to moral principles through reason. Confucianism shapes Chinese humanity by promoting self-cultivation and controlling desires. While it shares commonalities with Western rationality, such as ethical reasoning, they differ in their focus and priorities.
1.While Kant's notion of freedom emphasizes individual autonomy and moral reasoning, Li situates freedom within the context of social roles and communal harmony. For Kant, being free means acting rationally and consistently with moral principles, whereas for Confucianism, freedom is realized through fulfilling societal and familial obligations.
Nature of Constraints: Kant views constraints as potentially undermining freedom, particularly when they hinder rational agency. In contrast, Confucianism posits that constraints established by Li are essential for achieving true freedom and moral development.
Role of Community: In Kant’s framework, the community is important but primarily serves as the context in which individual autonomy is exercised. In contrast, Confucian emphasis on Li highlights that community and social relationships are central in defining and understanding individual freedom.
Conclusion:Kant champions individual autonomy rooted in rational choice, while Confucianism emphasizes the interconnectedness of individuals within their social contexts, suggesting that freedom is intimately tied to communal values and responsibilities.
Kant views freedom as autonomy under moral law, which aligns with Confucius's emphasis on propriety as a moral guide, akin to Kant's duty-based ethics.b) Kant's "rational capacity" highlights the universal law-following ability. Confucianism's influence in China parallels this by stressing social harmony and roles, differing from Western individualism. While both value rationality, Western thought prioritizes individual rights, whereas Confucianism focuses on social order and moral conduct.
a) True freedom, in Kant's understanding, is the ability of individuals to act according to the moral laws to which they subscribe without interference from external desires or compulsions. Confucius demands that people conform to social norms and individual roles, which is comparable to Kant's concept of "responsibility", which emphasizes self-discipline and adherence to moral laws.
b) Kant defined man's "rational capacity" as the ability to recognize and follow moral laws. Both Western reason and Confucian reason emphasize moral self-discipline and rational judgment, but Confucianism focuses more on realizing moral practice through social roles and relationships, while Kant focuses more on moral laws and self-discipline within individuals. Confucius emphasized moral self-discipline and social harmony in order to cultivate human virtue and promote social stability and progress. Therefore, it is too one-sided and simplistic to classify it as inhumane.
Freedom is not to do as one pleases, but to master oneself.
Kant asks us to respect each human being as an end in itself rather than as a means, as a rational being, because man is rational, and this is the essence of man's distinction from animals.
But Confucius' Golden Rule relies on a contingent condition: how each different person expects to be treated will be different under this condition, because each person has different requirements for the treatment of others.
Kant believes that people start from sensory experience and synthesize knowledge through the categories of understanding. However, human beings are not satisfied with this, they also want to make knowledge into a system and achieve a thing in itself. This cognitive ability is reason.
a)In Confucius' philosophy, freedom is not the modern sense of individual liberty, but rather the freedom to act within the bounds of propriety and moral norms. He emphasized "self-restraint and the restoration of rites," suggesting that individual freedom should be subordinate to social order and ethical standards.
b)Confucianism emphasizes benevolence, propriety, and moderation, influencing Chinese values that prioritize harmony, respect for elders, and social order. Western rationality emphasizes logic and science, while Confucian rationality focuses on morality and human relationships, valuing one's role and responsibilities within society.
Kant's concept of freedom is a crucial part of his philosophical system. He divides freedom into three levels: transcendental freedom, practical freedom, and moral freedom. In Confucian philosophy, "Li" is a central concept, often translated as "principle" or "reason." We can see that "Li" and Kant's concept of freedom share similarities in terms of autonomy and internal regularity. However, "Li" places more emphasis on the order of the universe and society, while Kant's freedom concept focuses more on the individual's rational and willed freedom.
Confucius’s concept of Li (rituals or propriety) emphasizes structured behavior and social harmony. While it may seem to conflict with emotional instincts, from Kant’s perspective, Li aligns with autonomy because it encourages individuals to internalize moral principles and act out of self-discipline. This resembles Kant’s concept of imperative duty, where actions are guided by moral obligation rather than external forces or desires.
Kant defines human rational capacity as the ability to formulate and follow universal moral laws autonomously. Rationality, in Kant’s view, enables individuals to transcend personal desires and act according to moral duty.
In Confucian philosophy, rationality is also essential, as it guides individuals to adhere to moral virtues such as ren (benevolence), yi (righteousness), and li (propriety). Through rational reflection and moral cultivation, individuals achieve personal harmony and contribute to social order.
Emphasizing the Role of Rationality Confucius regarded rationality as the key to moral development, advocating for a balance between emotions and reason. By cultivating wisdom and understanding, one can make the correct moral choices in various situations. Kant, on the other hand, clearly stated that moral principles should originate from rational reflection, independent of empirical and other contingent factors. He established ethics on a rational foundation to construct a universal moral framework.
Pursuing Harmony and Order Confucius believed that "li" (ritual propriety) is an essential safeguard for achieving social harmony and order. It clarifies the positioning and responsibilities of various classes and roles in society, allowing people to know their place, thus ensuring that families, social order, and national stability are maintained, as in the phrase "a ruler should act like a ruler, a subject like a subject, a father like a father, and a son like a son." Kant's view of freedom also implies the pursuit of social order. He believed that free individuals act on the basis of moral laws, which can promote social justice and harmony. When everyone acts freely in accordance with reason and morality, society as a whole becomes more orderly and stable.
Reflecting Human Value Confucius's "li" culture reflects the role of nurturing the heart and governing fundamentally. By guiding people to understand courtesy and filial piety, it strengthens emotional connections and identification, enhances the motivation for inner transformation, and promotes the positive development of interpersonal relationships and social customs, thereby realizing human value. Kant considered the pursuit of freedom as one of the highest values of human existence. The ultimate goal of human rationality is to achieve freedom. Through free choices and actions guided by reason, human dignity and value are displayed, driving social progress and development.
According to Kant, freedom is the ability to act according to the moral laws that people give themselves out of reason. Freedom is not unbridled indulgence, but self-discipline guided by the principles of reason.
Confucius' ritual is not a constraint that suppresses human nature. Etiquette is a set of norms and values designed to guide people in building harmonious and orderly social and interpersonal relationships. For example, the rules of etiquette for various rituals such as funerals and sacrifices are ways of expressing respect for life and ancestors. These rituals help people put their emotions and actions in a proper context and give them a proper way to express and communicate, which is a kind of orderly freedom.
Kant's categorical imperative emphasizes that moral action should be based on generalizable rules. That is, an action is moral only if we are able to will, and the principles behind it should become universal laws. The rites of Confucius also have a certain universality. For example, the principle implied in the liturgical concept of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is a principle that can be applied to different social situations and interpersonal relationships, similar to the universality required by Kant's deterministic imperative.
Confucius' ritual is a way of regulating behavior and cultivating moral character. It requires people to abide by certain moral and ethical norms out of internal self-cultivation and social responsibility. Kant's categorical imperative also emphasizes that moral behavior comes from an individual's autonomous will, rather than being driven by external coercion or utilitarian ends. In this regard, both value individual initiative and self-restraint in ethical behavior
To sum up, Confucius' ritual thought is a people-oriented ethical and social concept aimed at achieving social harmony and personal moral growth.
a) Freedom, according to Immanuel Kant, is the capacity to act according to a universal law that one gives to oneself. It is not the liberty to do whatever one wishes but the autonomy to follow moral laws that can be universally applied. In this sense, freedom is closely tied to self-legislation and moral duty.
Confucius's requisites on propriety (li) can be understood through the lens of Kantian freedom by recognizing that propriety in Confucian thought involves a set of norms and rituals that guide behavior in a way that is harmonious with societal expectations and moral values. Confucius believed that by adhering to these proprieties, individuals could cultivate themselves and live virtuously.
Both Confucius and Kant emphasize the importance of duty and moral law over personal desires, suggesting that true freedom comes from living in accordance with these principles.
b) Kant defines human "rational capacity" as the ability to understand and follow moral laws through reason. For Kant, rationality is the faculty that allows humans to discern the moral law and to act autonomously according to it.
Looking at Confucianism's influence on Chinese humanity through this lens, we can see that Confucian rationality emphasizes the importance of moral reasoning and ethical conduct in social relationships. Confucianism teaches that through the cultivation of virtues and adherence to propriety, individuals can live a life that is in accordance with reason and moral principles.
Western rationality, as exemplified by Kant, tends to focus on abstract principles and universal laws that are applicable to all rational beings. It is often more individualistic and places a strong emphasis on autonomy and the capacity for moral legislation through reason.
Regarding the question of whether Confucius is in line with inhumanity as suggested by Bertrand Russell, it is important to note that the structured and ritualistic aspects of Confucianism are not meant to suppress human emotions or the free spirit but to channel them in ways that are socially beneficial and morally upright. Confucian propriety is not about robbing individuals of their freedom but about guiding them to exercise their freedom in a way that is harmonious with the social order and the cultivation of virtue. Therefore, it would be a misinterpretation to equate Confucianism with inhumanity based solely on its emphasis on social structure and personal discipline.
Similarities: Kant's freedom is to act according to moral law, while Confucianism's "rites" are also a moral code. Both emphasize that the individual has a moral code that should be followed. For example, Kant's "categorical imperative" and Confucianism's "benevolence and propriety" provide guidance for people's behavior. Both have a positive impact on social order. Kant's concept of freedom helps to establish a social order based on rational morality, while Confucianism's "rites" directly construct the structure of social order from the family to the State.
Differences: Kant's freedom derives from human reason, a moral law based on purely rational thought. Individuals decide whether or not their actions meet the requirements of freedom through rational judgment.
Confucianism, on the other hand, derives its "rites" from traditional customs and social relations. It was gradually formed in the course of long-term social development and evolved with the changes of the times. "It emphasizes compliance with established social norms.
a.Confucius' concept of "li" is comparable to Kant's categorical imperative to some extent. Confucius believed that "etiquette" is not only a set of norms of behavior, but also an important embodiment of moral and ethical values. In Confucianism, "propriety" and "benevolence" are interdependent, in which "benevolence" is subjective cultivation and self-consciousness, and "propriety" is objective norms and external constraints. Confucius emphasized that if a person's heart is not benevolent, then it is useless for him to follow "li." This shows that following "li" is an important way to achieve "benevolence". This is similar to Kant's view that we must respect all rational beings as "ends-in-themselves" and that reason is the source of this unconditional demand. Thus, Confucius's "li" can be seen as a moral code that requires individuals to act according to certain moral standards in society, which is consistent with Kant's freedom.
b.Kant defined human "rational capacity" as the ability to legislate for oneself, which is the basis of moral behavior. Reason is not merely a tool for pursuing specific ends, but the ability to recognize and follow universal moral laws. According to Kant, rational beings must respect all rational beings as their own purposes, which is an unconditional requirement of reason.
From this perspective, the influence of Confucianism on Chinese human nature lies in its emphasis on moral cultivation and social responsibility. The "li" in Confucianism is not only the norm of social order. This kind of thinking is similar to Kant's moral philosophy, which emphasizes the self-discipline and freedom of individuals in following universal moral laws.
Western reason and Confucian reason are similar in some respects, for example, both emphasize the importance of reason in moral behavior. However, they differ in some ways. Western rationality tends to emphasize individual autonomy and individual rights, while Confucian rationality focuses more on individual roles and responsibilities in society and the family.
a) Kant's ethical principle advocates for people to resist their natural impulses and impose rules on themselves. Compared to Confucius, Kant places more emphasis on autonomy in all situations and does not emphasize the role of moderation, while Confucius places more emphasis on different degrees of moderation in different situations and achieving a state of moderation.
b) Kant defines it as the ability of human beings to reason rationally. Confucius believed that people should maintain a respectful attitude, from Kant's perspective, Confucius' view also affirms the inherent logical ability of human beings, while at the same time setting limits on people's behavior, preserving their abilities without allowing them to go too far. The Western definition of rationality places more emphasis on human beings' inherent abilities, while Confucianism places more emphasis on the influence of the later years.
Kant's formulation of liberalism:
(1) The first formulation is the most superficial, establishing the law of freedom of the will by analogy with the law of nature: "You shall act in such a way that the code of your actions shall become a universal law of nature by your will." ”。
(2) The second form of expression: "You are to act in such a way that you will always use the humanity in your personality and the humanity in the personality of every other person as an end in itself, and never just as a means." ”。
(3) The third form of expression: "the idea that the will of every rational being is the will of universal legislation." ”
In Kant's view, Confucius's benevolence and goodness do not have moral values - Kant has high requirements for morality, and cannot do a moral thing based on compassion, and balance Kant's moral motivation theory with Confucian morality, just as he takes into account procedural justice and consequential justice in law.
I think Kant's freedom is something that is not subject to choice, but emphasizes autonomy. Confucius's etiquette is somewhat different from Kant's freedom, and Confucius's etiquette requires that under certain constraints, keep one's own etiquette.
a.).The freedom is t act freely and to act according to a law I give myself.
Confucius's concept of "propriety" and Kant's "categorical imperative" both emphasize moral duty and behavioral norms. Confucius focuses on appropriate behavior within social roles and relationships, stressing self-cultivation, benevolence, and respect to maintain social harmony. Kant advocates for universal moral laws, requiring actions to conform to principles that can be universally applied. Both emphasize moral self-discipline and social harmony, but Confucius emphasizes the cultivation of emotions and virtues, while Kant stresses rational adherence to duty, with a stronger focus on universality and abstraction.
b).Kant defines rationality as the capacity for critical thinking, moral judgment, and autonomous decision-making. Confucianism promotes rationality through moral virtues and social harmony. Western rationality focuses on individual autonomy, truth-seeking, and science, while Confucian rationality emphasizes moral character, introspection, and social well-being. Both traditions use reason to pursue the good life, but differ in their focus, methods, and goals.
Freedom, as interpreted by Immanuel Kant, is not merely the absence of external constraints but the autonomy of the will.For Kant, rational capacity is the ability to reason, to form judgments based on principles, and to act in accordance with these judgments. Rationality, in this sense, is the foundation of morality and freedom.Confucianism has had a profound impact on Chinese culture and society, shaping values, ethics, and social structures for centuries.
Firstly , Kant’s concept of freedom is closely related to his moral philosophy. For Kant, freedom is a kind of autonomy , which is the ability of a rational being to act according to self - given moral laws.
Secondly, “Li” in Chinese philosophy represents the fundamental principles and patterns of the universe and human society. It is more about an objective order and the way things should be. It is not the same as the individual - centered freedom described by Kant.
They have different focus. Kant focuses on the individual's freedom as a basis for moral responsibility. The concept of “Li” focuses on the overall order of the universe and society, and individuals play a role in this order.
a)Freedom, as interpreted by Kant, is to act freely，to act according to a law I give myself，also freedom is autonomous rational actions. In this sense, freedom is not merely the absence of external constraints but the internal disposition to act morally.
Now, turning to Confucius’s requisites on propriety, we find a similar emphasis on moral and social order. Confucius emphasized the importance of propriety (li) in maintaining social harmony and respecting one's social role. In this way, Confucius’s idea of propriety can be seen as an imperative duty, akin to Kant’s categorical imperative, that guides individuals in their moral and social conduct.
Both Kant and Confucius saw the importance of moral and social order in the pursuit of freedom. both they recognized that true freedom required a commitment to moral principles and the willingness to act in accordance with those
Confucius’s idea of propriety and Kant’s idea of imperative duty are comparable in that both emphasize the importance of moral conduct in achieving freedom. Both philosophers recognized that freedom is not merely the absence of external constraints but requires an internal commitment to moral principles. Property, for Confucius, was the external expression of morality, while Kant’s imperative duty was the internal moral law that guided individuals in their actions. Both concepts aimed at promoting social harmony and respecting the humanity in others.
b)Kant defined human’s “rational capacity” as the ability to reason and to understand the moral law. He believed that rationality was the distinguishing feature of human beings and that it enabled them to act in accordance with the categorical imperative. Rationality, for Kant, was the foundation of morality and freedom.
While Kant’s interpretation of freedom and Confucius’s requisites on propriety may differ in some respects, both emphasize the importance of moral conduct in achieving true freedom. Similarly, while western rationality and Confucian rationality have different emphases, both recognize the role of reason in guiding human behavior. Understanding these similarities and differences can help us appreciate the diverse ways in which different cultures and philosophical traditions have sought to understand and promote freedom and rationality.
Confucius's Li is the correspondence of the form to the feeling, the harmony between emotion and reason and the proper appropriateness. But Kant thinks interpretation of freedom is to act freely,to act according to a law a person gives to himself. Kant's freedom has a restriction for a person to make a decision,but Confucious's Li has no requirement.Kant's concept of freedom aims to enable individuals to have moral autonomy and to be able to make decisions that are line with objective and universal moral principles. Confucius's concept of Li is to cultivate an individual's moral character through external behavioral norms and to achieve social stability and harmony.It emphasized that people can restrain their own inappropriate desires and behaviors and establish a hierarchical and orderly social structure.
Kant's moral philosophy emphasizes "good will" and "categorical imperative", believing that moral actions should be based on pure good will, without any self - interest and utilitarian purposes. In Kant's view, such pure moral actions are unconditionally good and do not depend on any external results or others' reactions. This view can be applied to explain the morality of Li, that is, the actions of Li should stem from pure moral motives, without any selfishness and utilitarian purposes.
a Freedom means that the individual is able to transcend his or her desires and impulses and act in accordance with the laws of reason and morality. Individuals are allowed to choose their actions autonomously, rather than being driven by natural impulses or external conditions.
They all require the individual to transcend his or her personal desires and emotions and act according to higher moral principles. Both Confucius's etiquette and Kant's imperative duties emphasized the moral responsibility and self-discipline of individual behavior, as well as the importance of these principles in maintaining social order and promoting the moral development of the individual.
b Kant's definition of "rational faculty":
The rational faculties are self-disciplined in Kant's philosophy, meaning that individuals should self-discipline according to universal laws and not rely on external authority or subjective desires.
The influence of Confucianism on Chinese nature:
Confucianism, especially the teachings of Confucius, had a profound impact on China's concept of human nature. Confucianism emphasizes the moral cultivation and social responsibility of the individual, and emphasizes the self-discipline and moral responsibility of the individual. Confucian etiquette (Li) and benevolence (Ren) embody the importance of social order and the moral development of the individual.
Similarities between Western rationality and Confucian rationality:
Both Western and Confucian rationality emphasize individual self-discipline and moral responsibility. Kant's rationality requires the individual to transcend individual desires and act according to universal laws, while Confucian etiquette and benevolence also require the individual to play an appropriate role in society and maintain moral order.
The difference between Western rationality and Confucian rationality:
Western reason, especially in Kant's philosophy, places more emphasis on universal laws and individual autonomy. Kant's rationality is abstract and formal, and it requires that the actions of the individual be the law of all. Confucian rationality, on the other hand, is more specific and focuses on social relations and moral practice. Confucian etiquette is not just an abstract principle, but a concrete social norm of behavior, which is closely related to the moral cultivation and social responsibility of the individual. Confucian rationality is more embodied in the pursuit of a harmonious social order and the role of the individual in it, while Western rationality emphasizes the autonomy of the individual and the observance of universal laws.
- Differences: Kant's freedom is more centered on the individual's rational capacity to create and follow universal moral laws independently, emphasizing the separation from the deterministic natural world. In contrast, Li in Confucianism is more about integrating individuals into the social fabric through following established norms and achieving freedom within that social context, with a focus on the cultivation of inner virtues in relation to social harmony.
- Similarities: Both concepts ultimately aim at the moral betterment of individuals. Whether it's Kant's idea of acting according to the categorical imperative or the Confucian practice of adhering to Li to cultivate virtues, they both see freedom as related to the ability to make moral choices and live a life that is worthy and in line with certain ethical ideals. They also both recognize that true freedom is not just doing whatever one wants but is about having a higher guiding principle for one's actions, be it rational moral laws in Kant's case or the moral and social norms in the case of Confucian Li.
In conclusion, while Kant and the Confucian understanding of concepts related to freedom have different starting points and emphases, they do share some common ground in their pursuit of a moral and fulfilling life as the manifestation of freedom.
The German philosopher Kant defined human's "rational capacity" as the ability to think, judge, and act in accordance with principles that are independent of one's senses and desires. He believed that reason is the true source of morality.
From a Kantian perspective, Confucianism's influence on Chinese humanity has been significant. Confucianism emphasizes self-cultivation, respect for elders, harmony in society, and the importance of education, all of which have shaped the way Chinese people think and behave. These values promote rationality in a sense by encouraging people to act with wisdom and consideration for others.
Now, let's compare western rationality and Confucian rationality!
Western rationality, as represented by Kant's philosophy, focuses on the use of reason to understand the world and derive moral principles. It emphasizes logical thinking, scientific inquiry, and the pursuit of universal truths.
On the other hand, Confucian rationality is rooted in the Chinese cultural context and emphasizes practical wisdom, social harmony, and moral self-cultivation. It values human relationships, respect for authority, and the pursuit of virtue. While it also uses reason, it does so in a way that is integrated with social norms and values.
In summary, while both western rationality and Confucian rationality value reason, they approach it from different cultural and philosophical perspectives. Western rationality focuses on logical thinking and scientific inquiry, while Confucian rationality emphasizes practical wisdom and social harmony.
Russell's view is inaccurate. Confucius' advocacy of "Li" does not conflict with human emotional instinct and free spirit but is a positive construction of social order and personal cultivation.
Kant believes that the animal-like behavior in response to desires is not true freedom. Freedom is the opposite of natural necessity. Self-discipline is true freedom. Confucius' "Li" is similar to Kant's concept of self-legislation. "Li" is a social and personal behavioral norm, and people following "Li" are following a socially recognized moral and behavioral standard.
Kant's "imperative duty" is based on moral laws, and people have the duty to act in accordance with moral laws. Confucius' "Li" is also a moral constraint, and people have the responsibility to follow "Li".
Kant believes that human's rational capacity is the ability to transcend sensory experience and be able to recognize and follow moral laws. Reason can enable people to break away from the bondage of desires and act in accordance with universal moral principles.
您确定给 “
4008987008