341 回复

• 
  JqsP4tkh • 11-25

  a) Freedom and Confucius' Requisites on Propriety

  Understanding Freedom:

  Freedom, according to Immanuel Kant, is not merely the absence of external constraints but the autonomy of the will. It means acting in accordance with principles that you yourself agree with as universally binding, i.e., acting out of a sense of duty rather than out of inclination or external pressure.

  Confucius' Requisites on Propriety:

  Confucius emphasizes propriety (li) as a means of organizing and structuring social interactions in a harmonious way. He believes that by following the prescribed rituals and norms, individuals can cultivate their virtue and maintain social order.

  Comparison with Kant's Imperative Duty:

    • Universalizability: Both Confucius and Kant emphasize the importance of universal principles. Confucius' propriety aims at creating a harmonious society through universally accepted rituals. Kant's categorical imperative, on the other hand, requires that one's actions be such that you could will them to become a universal law.

    • Duty and Virtue: Confucius sees following propriety as a duty that leads to virtue. Kant sees following the moral law (duty) as the path to autonomy and freedom.

    • Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Motivation: While Confucian propriety might sometimes be seen as externally imposed, Kant emphasizes the intrinsic motivation derived from acting in accordance with one's own rational nature.

  b) Kant's Definition of Rational Capacity and Confucian Influence

  Kant's Definition of Rational Capacity:

  For Kant, the rational capacity of humans is their ability to reason and to act in accordance with the moral law, which is grounded in reason itself. Rationality, for Kant, is the capacity to formulate and follow universal principles of morality independently of sensible desires or inclinations.

  Confucian Influence on Chinese Humanity:

  Confucianism has deeply influenced Chinese culture and humanity by emphasizing:

    • Social Harmony: Through rituals and norms, Confucianism fosters social cohesion and stability.

    • Moral Cultivation: It emphasizes self-cultivation and the development of virtues such as benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and fidelity.

    • Hierarchy and Respect: It upholds a hierarchical social structure with respect for authority and traditional roles.

  Similarity and Difference between Western Rationality and Confucian Rationality:

    • Similarity: Both systems aim at moral and ethical conduct. Both recognize the importance of reason in guiding human actions.

    • Difference:

        • Source of Morality: Western rationality, especially Kantian ethics, sees morality as grounded in reason itself, independent of external authorities or traditions. Confucian rationality, on the other hand, sees morality as rooted in tradition, social harmony, and the cultivation of virtue.

        • Autonomy vs. Collectivism: Western rationality emphasizes individual autonomy and the universalizability of moral principles. Confucian rationality tends to emphasize the collective good and the role of individuals within a social hierarchy.

        • Focus on Duty: While both systems emphasize duty, the duties emphasized differ. Kantian duty is universal and intrinsic, whereas Confucian duty is often tied to specific social roles and obligations.

  Conclusion:

  Drawing the conclusion that Confucius is inhumane based solely on the perception of rituals conflicting with emotional instinct and free spirit is overly simplistic. Confucius' emphasis on propriety aims at fostering a harmonious society through universally accepted norms, which can be seen as analogous to Kant's categorical imperative in its emphasis on universalizability and duty. However, the rational capacity and the ethical systems of Confucianism and Kantian ethics differ significantly in their sources of morality, their views on autonomy and collectivism, and their focus on duty. Thus, while both systems contribute to our understanding of morality and humanity, they do so in distinct ways.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  8班王洪琳 • 11-25

  a) Freedom, in Kant's view, is autonomy based on moral law. Confucius's propriety aims to regulate behavior for social harmony, aligning with Kant's imperative duty by emphasizing a moral obligation.

   

  b) Kant defines rational capacity as the ability to reason and act autonomously based on principles. From this perspective, Confucianism influenced Chinese humanity by emphasizing moral virtue and social order. Western rationality focuses on logic and autonomy, while Confucian rationality emphasizes harmony and social roles, showing both similarities in moral emphasis and differences in approach.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  17班罗艳红 • 11-25

  Kant believed that freedom is the foundation of moral laws, emphasizing that "freedom is not about doing what you want, but about not doing what you don't want to do. Kant's concept of freedom emphasizes self-discipline and rational autonomy, believing that humans are free and this freedom is guaranteed through moral laws. Confucius emphasized the principle of 'Do not do to others what you do not want done to yourself' and achieved social harmony and order through 'self-restraint and restoration of propriety'.
  The relationship between freedom and morality
  Kant's moral philosophy revolves around the concept of "good will" and emphasizes that moral behavior should be driven by good will rather than practical interests. He believes that human behavior should follow the principle of universality, that is, "the guidelines you follow when acting should be the natural laws that you intend to make universal. Confucius' moral philosophy is reflected in the idea of "benevolence", emphasizing the importance of "establishing oneself and others, and achieving oneself and others", and influencing society through personal moral cultivation.
  The ways to achieve freedom and self-discipline
  Kant emphasized the absolute moral law, believing that people should follow universal moral principles and not resort to any means, even for a noble purpose. Confucius achieved self-discipline through "self-restraint and restoration of propriety", emphasizing that individuals should restrain their desires and abide by social norms

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  16班杨婕 • 11-25

  "Li" is a system of norms. It stipulates the behavioral guidelines for different social roles. Following "Li" is an important part of personal moral cultivation. However, "Li" doesn't mean complete freedom, but rather freedom within norms.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  沈婧桐 • 11-25

  Freedom, as per Kant, is autonomy aligned with moral law. Confucius' emphasis on propriety aligns with Kant's imperative duty, both emphasizing self-constraint and moral obligation. Propriety organizes behavior, not stifling emotion, but guiding it towards virtue.Kant defines human "rational capacity" as the ability to reason and act in accordance with principles. Confucianism shaped Chinese humanity through moral cultivation. Western rationality focuses on logic, while Confucian rationality emphasizes moral reasoning. Both seek truth, but through different lenses.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  张雨9班 • 11-25

  Freedom in Kant's philosophy refers to the autonomy of individual behavior, that is, the ability of individuals to act according to their own rational principles, rather than being driven by desires or external conditions. Kant believes that true freedom is the freedom to follow the moral law, and this freedom is realized through practical reason. The rites of Confucius can be understood as a code of social and personal behavior, which aims to maintain social order and harmony. The requirement of propriety is not a suppression of individual freedom, but a guide to how individuals should act in society.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  11班吴亚媛 • 11-25

  Kant regards freedom as central to his moral philosophy, seeing it as the foundation of rational action. He differentiates between the inevitability under natural laws and the freedom under moral laws. For Kant, freedom is not arbitrary action without constraints, but rather self-disciplined action in accordance with universal moral laws. Kantian freedom implies that humans can transcend natural impulses and act based on reason and moral principles. He emphasizes that the exercise of freedom must be consistent with universal principles to ensure that individual freedom does not infringe upon the freedom of others. Kant's concept of freedom provides a philosophical foundation for modern democracy and the rule of law, highlighting the dignity and autonomy of individuals. In short, Kant's freedom is freedom through rational self-discipline, which is the cornerstone of moral action and individual autonomy.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  9班郭梵 • 11-25

  Kant believed that freedom is essentially an unrestrictable right and an essential attribute of human beings. He defined freedom as "autonomy", that is, the capacity of free will. Autonomy is the foundation of human beings' capacity for action and an internal force that is not affected by external factors. Kant held that human free will, which is free from the interference of any external factors, exists in the innermost depths of human hearts as an untouchable core. The essence of freedom lies in the capabilities of human beings themselves rather than in the rights bestowed by others or the government.

  Confucius advocated "self-denial and restoration of ritual", emphasizing that one's behavior should conform to the norms of ritual by restraining one's behavior, speech, listening and hearing, etc., which reflected a kind of self-restraint and self-discipline.
  Kant believes that freedom is self-discipline, and human free will should be guided by reason, follow moral laws, be self-dominant, and not be influenced by external factors and desires. Both of them emphasize that individuals need to restrain and restrict their own behavior to achieve an ideal state.

  There is a difference between them.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  11班彭雨萱 • 11-25

  For Kant, freedom is the ability to act in accordance with reason, independent of external coercion or determination by natural desires. It's not about doing whatever one wants but following self-imposed moral laws out of a sense of duty. This moral law is based on the categorical imperative, which requires actions to be universalizable and to treat others as ends in themselves, not means to an end.

  Kant believes that reason is the ability of human beings to think and understand the world, and in the broadest sense, it refers to the human mind's "ability to judge according to apriori principles", including the source of all apriori elements of apriori principles such as cognitive ability, emotional ability and desire ability.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  18班吴洁渝 • 11-25

  In Confucianism, the importance of family relationships is undeniable. Confucianism emphasizes filial piety, respect for elders, and harmony within the family. These values reflect a deep sense of love and responsibility towards family members. However, this does not necessarily mean that Confucianism advocates a hierarchical or differentiated love, where love for one's family is stronger while love for others diminishes.

  In fact, Confucianism also emphasizes the extension of love beyond the family. The concept of "benevolence" (ren) in Confucianism emphasizes universal love and kindness towards all people. Confucius believed that people should extend their love and care to others, regardless of their relationship or status. This idea is reflected in the saying, "Do not do to others what you do not want done to yourself," which advocates for empathy and consideration towards others.

  Furthermore, the extension of love in Confucianism is not limited to interpersonal relationships. It also encompasses a broader sense of social responsibility and care for the community and society at large. Confucianism encourages individuals to contribute to the well-being of society through their actions and to promote harmony and progress.

  Therefore, while Confucianism emphasizes the importance of family relationships, it does not advocate a differentiated love that diminishes towards others. Rather, it promotes a sense of universal love and care that extends beyond the family to include all people and the society as a whole.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  10班周由珍 • 11-25

  Both Li and Kant's concept of freedom are related to moral behavior. Li provides a set of norms for moral behavior in Chinese philosophy, while Kant's freedom is based on the ability to make moral decisions through reason.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  8班张力琳 • 11-25

  a) Freedom according to Kant:

  For Immanuel Kant, freedom is not about mere absence of external constraints but rather the ability to act in accordance with rational will—which is bound by moral law. Kant distinguishes between two types of freedom:

  1.Freedom of choice (empirical freedom), which refers to the ability to act according to personal desires or inclinations.

  2.Practical freedom (moral freedom), which is the capacity to act according to moral laws that are self-imposed through reason.

  Kant argues that true freedom is found not in doing whatever we want, but in adhering to the moral duties that we recognize through reason. These duties are universally binding and are the expression of our autonomy (the capacity to legislate moral laws for oneself). Hence, moral freedom is about aligning one's actions with duty, even in the face of contrary inclinations.

  Confucian Propriety (Li):

  Confucius’s concept of Li (礼), often translated as propriety or ritual, is central to the idea of cultivating a harmonious and moral society. Li refers not just to external rituals or manners, but to the moral principles that guide behavior in a way that promotes social harmony, respect, and order. The goal of Li is to regulate personal and social behavior so that individuals fulfill their roles in family and society, contributing to the greater good.

  While Confucius emphasizes that propriety is deeply tied to social roles (e.g., between rulers and subjects, parents and children), he also argues that internalizing these principles leads to self-cultivation and the moral development of the individual.

  Freedom and Propriety (Li):

  At first glance, one might think that Confucian propriety, with its emphasis on roles, rituals, and external duties, conflicts with the idea of freedom, as Kant defines it. However, when we compare Kant’s idea of freedom with Confucius’s view of propriety, we see a potential alignment.

  b) Kant’s Concept of Rational Capacity:

  Kant defines rational capacity as the ability of humans to apply reason to determine moral laws and act in accordance with them. It is through reason that humans gain the ability to transcend mere natural instincts and desires, aligning themselves with universal moral laws (the categorical imperative). The rational capacity enables individuals to be autonomous, meaning they can legislate moral rules for themselves and are not bound merely by external causes or inclinations.

  Kant’s view of rationality involves the ability to legislate universal moral laws (the categorical imperative) and to recognize oneself as subject to moral duties, irrespective of particular desires or consequences. This rationality is also the basis for human dignity and moral worth, as it allows individuals to act freely and responsibly in the moral realm.

  Confucian Humanity (Ren) and Rationality:

  Confucianism, especially in its emphasis on Ren (仁), or humanity/benevolence, also involves a form of rationality but is rooted in moral cultivation through social interactions, virtues, and the fulfillment of one’s role in society. While Confucian rationality is not explicitly framed in terms of the categorical imperative, it emphasizes the rational capacity to understand and practice virtues like benevolence (Ren), righteousness (Yi), and ritual propriety (Li) in a social context.

  Confucian rationality is not merely about abstract moral laws but involves practical wisdom in managing one’s behavior and relationships in the context of family, society, and governance. The Confucian sage is a model of moral wisdom, understanding both the inner cultivation of virtue and the external responsibilities one has within the social order.

  Comparing Western Rationality and Confucian Rationality:

  Similarity: Both Western rationality (as conceived by Kant) and Confucian rationality emphasize the moral responsibility of individuals. Kant’s moral rationality and Confucian thought both stress the development of virtuous traits (for Kant, this is through adherence to moral duties; for Confucius, through the cultivation of benevolence and propriety). Both systems advocate for transcending mere self-interest in favor of moral law or the good of others.

  Difference: Western rationality, as defined by Kant, tends to focus more on individual autonomy, where moral laws are universally applicable and self-imposed by reason. For Kant, the individual's rational capacity is paramount in determining one’s moral duties, independent of social roles or external relations.

  In contrast, Confucian rationality places a significant emphasis on interpersonal relationships and the social context. The rationality in Confucianism is closely tied to proper behavior in these relationships (e.g., filial piety, respect for authority, compassion towards others). It’s not about abstract universal laws but about harmonizing one’s actions within the social order.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  17班彭爱心 • 11-25

  Confucius' view of freedom focuses more on social ethics and personal moral cultivation, emphasizing internal harmony and self-improvement; Kant's view of freedom is based on the independence of individual rationality and moral self-discipline, emphasizing free will under the guidance of reason. Although the paths of the two are different, they are both committed to exploring how to achieve spiritual independence and moral nobility, reflecting the different understandings and pursuits of human nature and social order in Eastern and Western philosophy.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  19班张珣 • 11-25

  Confucius and Kant approached the concept of morality from different perspectives, there are notable similarities in their ideas. Both saw morality as based on universal principles that apply to all individuals, and both emphasized the importance of acting in accordance with these principles for the well-being of society. In this way, Confucius's idea of propriety can be seen as comparable to Kant's idea of imperative duty, reflecting a shared commitment to moral conduct and social harmony.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  16班程佳丽 • 11-25

  A discussion on Li, a key concept in Chinese Confucianism, with a comparative view of Kant's interpretation of "freedom" reveals significant differences. Li emphasizes social harmony and order through prescribed norms and rituals, seeing individual conduct as instrumental in achieving societal well-being. In contrast, Kant's concept of freedom focuses on the autonomy of the individual and the moral imperative to act independently of external influences, in accordance with the moral law. While Li emphasizes social norms, Kant prioritizes individual autonomy and rationality in moral decision-making.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  17班陈香凝 • 11-25

  Confucius emphasizes self-discipline. For Confucius, moral behavior was a voluntary and conscious self-constraint. This idea inherently contains the notion of freedom. By adhering to propriety for a long time, it would gradually become internalized as one's essence. For Kant, freedom is the opposition of necessity. Kant advocated a combination of autonomy and heteronomy in moral education. He believed that humans possess free will, and rationality is one of their special attributes. People should follow universally understandable laws, not be driven by sensory desires or personal wills.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  10班封占清 • 11-25

  To act freely is to act autonomously, to act according to the laws of one's own making, and not according to fortuitousness, such as nature or social tradition, which one cannot control by one's own will. Kant's morality, only talking about the starting point, not the interest, the requirements are very high, difficult to achieve. Confucius paid attention to reason (Li) while taking into account sensibility , which met the perceptual needs of human beings.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  8班向朋 • 11-25

  Kant thinks that freedom is not peoples' ibstincts，such as eating，sleeping，and so on.He thinkes freedom  is  that we can act freely. Whithin the limits 

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  8王艺霖 • 11-25

  a)- Kant's freedom: Acting per self-given moral laws by pure reason, not whim.

  - Confucius's propriety & freedom: Li isn't restrictive. It's norms for harmonious behavior, like Kant's moral law-guided action.

  - Comparison: Kant's imperative duty is abstract moral command. Confucius's Li is similar in setting behavior standards but is rooted in Chinese context.

   

  b)- Kant's rational capacity: Humans use it to understand & apply moral laws, beyond instincts.

  - Confucian influence: Emphasizes moral cultivation via virtues, shaping Chinese humanity.

  - Similarities & differences:

  - Similar: Both use reason for behavior & moral harmony.

  - Different: Kant's is abstract, culture-independent. Confucian is tied to Chinese culture, with more focus on family & society in moral dev.

   

  Confucius isn't inhumane. Both aim for moral & harmonious human existence despite differences.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  17班冉家吉 • 11-25

  1.  Confucius’s “Li”  shares similarities with Kant’s Imperative Duty, both emphasizing that individuals should adhere to certain moral norms. Kant’s Imperative Duty is the result of reason legislating for itself, while Confucius’s “Li” is a norm formed within social and cultural traditions. Both require individuals to follow certain moral and social norms in their actions, but Kant’s concept of freedom places more emphasis on the individual’s internal moral autonomy, while Confucius’s “Li” focuses more on external social norms and order.
  2.  Confucian rationality is more reflected in the adherence to social responsibility and moral norms, while Kantian rationality places greater emphasis on individual moral autonomy and adherence to universal laws. The similarity between Confucian and Kantian rationality lies in the belief that reason is an important ability to guide behavior, and both highlight the central role of morality and reason in human life. The difference is that Confucian rationality focuses more on norms within social and cultural traditions, while Kantian rationality focuses more on individual internal moral laws and self-discipline.

   

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  17班王冰心 • 11-25

  a) Freedom, according to Kant, involves acting autonomously based on one's internal principles. Confucius emphasizes propriety as a way to cultivate character and achieve harmony in social relationships, which can be seen as akin to Kant's idea of imperative duty. However, their underlying philosophical foundations differ, with Confucius focusing on virtue and harmonious relationships, while Kant's ethics are grounded in the categorical imperative.

   

  b) Kant defines human's rational capacity as the ability to reason and make judgments based on universal principles. Confucianism emphasizes cultivating this rational capacity through education and personal development. While western rationality tends to focus on logical analysis, Confucian rationality emphasizes moral and ethical principles and the cultivation of character. Despite these differences, both traditions recognize the importance of using reason to guide actions and make moral judgments.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  10班徐雪函 • 11-25

  a）Kant sees freedom not as acting on impulse but as acting according to self-imposed moral laws. Freedom means autonomy, expressed by following “moral duty” rather than mere desires. Similarly, Confucius’s li is not just about restriction; it guides individuals to develop virtue and harmony within society. Like Kantian duty, Confucian li promotes self-discipline, encouraging people to choose morally sound actions, achieving balance between individual and society.

  b）Kant defines rationality as the ability to go beyond instincts and follow universal moral laws. Confucianism values rationality as well, but it is relational, using ren and li to maintain social harmony. Western rationality emphasizes individual autonomy and universal principles, while Confucian rationality focuses on the interaction between individuals and social roles.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  9班赵梦妮 • 11-25

  Kant believes that freedom means acting in accordance with laws and morality. In Confucianism, the concept of "Li"  holds that freedom lies in making one's behaviors conform to moral and social norms. Kant's idea of freedom emphasizes the autonomy of individual will and abstract universal laws. While the freedom within "Li" is achieved in specific social scenarios and internalized into a state of natural and unrestrained behavior.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  斑马还没睡 • 11-25

  Both Kant’s moral philosophy and Confucian propriety provide frameworks for ethical behavior. However, Kant’s framework is grounded in universalizable maxims where actions must be justifiable for all rational beings (categorical imperative), while Confucius emphasizes context-specific roles and social relationships (propriety).Kant’s idea of freedom is linked to the notion of autonomy where individuals are self-governing agents who derive their moral laws. In contrast, Confucius views freedom more relationally, where understanding and practicing propriety lead to a harmonious society. Here, one's freedom is often interpreted through fulfilling one's duties, suggesting that true freedom is found in the collective good rather than individual autonomy. For Kant, moral duties stem from the rational capacity of individuals; one must act not only in accordance with duty but also out of respect for the moral law. Conversely, Confucian propriety includes duties that arise from one's roles within families and society. Both emphasize the importance of duty, but Kant's duties are derived from rationality, while Confucius's are contingent upon social relations and expectations.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  10班臧颜 • 11-25

  Confucius' requisites on propriety and Kant's freedom are two different ideas, but they have something in common in terms of social discipline and moral norms. Although Confucius' "Li" and Kant's "freedom" have different theoretical foundations, they both emphasize the moral responsibility of individuals in society and the importance of achieving social harmony through individual efforts. To some extent, they reflect the different understanding and pursuit of the relationship between individuals and society between the East and the West.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  18班付子怡 • 11-25

  A: Freedom, according to Kant, is acting according to self-imposed laws out of respect for reason, aligning with moral imperatives. Confucius’s concept of propriety (Li) similarly emphasizes adherence to societal norms and rituals, which guide behavior in a morally upright manner. Both philosophers advocate for actions guided by internal principles rather than external coercion, promoting a form of self-regulation that harmonizes individual conduct with communal values.

  B: Kant defines human’s “rational capacity” as the ability to think and act according to universal principles derived from reason. From this view, Confucianism’s emphasis on ethical conduct and social harmony can be seen as an expression of rationality, fostering a society where individuals act in ways that benefit the collective. Western rationality often prioritizes individual autonomy and universal principles, whereas Confucian rationality emphasizes relational duties and social order, reflecting a more communitarian approach.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  11班李谋成 • 11-25

  For question A: Freedom is a complex concept that has been interpreted differently by different philosophers. Immanuel Kant understood freedom as the autonomy of moral action, that is, the ability of individuals to act in accordance with universal moral laws, rather than being driven by desires or external conditions. Kant's moral philosophy emphasized the "practical reason" and the "categorical imperative" that people should act according to those norms that can become universal laws. Confucius' propriety requires people to follow certain social norms and moral codes, which on the surface seem to restrict individual freedom. However, from the perspective of Kant's view of freedom, Confucius' ritual can be understood as a way to cultivate an individual's inner moral self-discipline, and to realize an individual's moral freedom by following the ritual. Confucius' rites are similar to Kant's moral law in that they both emphasize the standardization and universality of behavior, and both believe that individuals should transcend their personal desires and follow a higher moral code.

  For question B: Kant's definition of human "rational capacity" refers to the ability of humans to understand and follow universal moral laws. He believes that reason is the guiding principle of human behavior and the key characteristic that distinguishes humans from animals. From this perspective, the influence of Confucianism on Chinese human nature is that it emphasizes the importance of moral cultivation and personal virtue, which echoes Kant's concept of reason as an important force guiding human behavior. Western rationality tends to emphasize individual autonomy and critical thinking, while Confucian rationality focuses on social harmony and moral order, emphasizing individual role and responsibility in society.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  9班杨佳仪 • 11-25

  a) Kant argues that freedom is not subjective and personal, but is innately and universally valid for rational beings and is the basis of the moral law. He further divides freedom into three levels: a priori freedom, practical freedom and moral freedom. Simply put, Kant sees freedom as the ability of a rational being to choose and follow moral laws autonomously and independently.
   What about Confucius' view of rites, which is actually comparable to Kant's view of imperative duties to some extent. Confucius' rites emphasize social order and moral norms, which require people to act in accordance with established ceremonial norms, which is somewhat like what Kant said about moral laws, both of which are a kind of constraint and guidance for behavior. However, Confucius' rites are based more on tradition and custom, while Kant's moral laws are based on rational principles. Confucius' view of rites focuses on external norms of behavior, while Kant's view of imperative duties focuses more on inner moral self-awareness.
   b) According to the German philosopher Kant, the "rational faculty" of human beings starts from sensory experience, synthesizes knowledge through intellectual categories, and further makes knowledge into a system. Reason has the function of adjusting knowledge and further perfecting it into a unity, but this unity is only an "ideal unity" rather than a "realistic unity".
   From this perspective, the influence of Confucianism on Chinese human nature is far-reaching and complex. Confucianism emphasizes moral ethics such as "benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom and trust" and focuses on personal moral cultivation and social responsibility. Under the long-term cultivation and influence of Confucian thinking and culture, Chinese people have developed their unique qualities of thought and distinctive character, such as being subtle and introverted, being prudent and keeping to one's self, etc. These characteristics reflect, to a certain extent, the spirit of Confucianism. To a certain extent, these characteristics reflect the Confucian emphasis on the rational component of human nature, but they may also inhibit individual creativity and the spirit of adventure.
   Western rationality and Confucian rationality are similar and different in several ways. Western rationalism emphasizes that rationality is the essence of human nature and believes that the best life is to follow the guidance of reason to live. It prizes reason, honors science, and values logical thinking. Confucian rationality, on the other hand, pays more attention to moral practice and social responsibility, emphasizing the perfection of human nature through moral cultivation. In terms of values, Western rationalism emphasizes individualism, freedom, equality and rights, while Confucian rationality pays more attention to family and social harmony. In addition, there are also significant differences between the two in terms of their views on education and politics.
   In general, both Western rationality and Confucian rationality are products of profound insight into human nature. They have formed their own unique theoretical systems and practices under different cultural backgrounds, and together they constitute a valuable treasure of human civilization.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  16班谭俊杰 • 11-25

  Kant's categorical imperative emphasizes that moral actions should be based on universalizable maxims. That is, an action is moral only if we can will that the principle underlying it should become a universal law. Confucius' propriety also has a certain universality. For example, the principle of "Do not do to others what you do not want others to do to you" implied in the concept of propriety is a principle that can be applied across different social situations and interpersonal relationships, similar to the universality required by Kant's categorical imperative. Confucius' propriety is a way to regulate behavior and cultivate moral character. It requires people to abide by certain moral and ethical norms out of inner self - cultivation and a sense of social responsibility. Kant's categorical imperative also emphasizes that moral actions come from the autonomous will of individuals and are not driven by external coercion or utilitarian purposes. In this regard, both of them attach importance to the initiative and self - constraint of individuals in moral behavior.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  8班张露熙 • 11-25

  This view is completely wrong. Confucius's thought is not inhumane at all.

   

  a)

   

  - For Kant, freedom is the ability to act according to self - given moral laws. Confucius' propriety (Li) is not a constraint that suppresses human nature. Propriety is more like a set of ethical norms that guide people to express their emotions and behaviors in a more appropriate and harmonious way. It is similar to Kant's concept of the categorical imperative in that they both emphasize a certain moral obligation and self - restraint. Confucius' propriety aims to achieve social harmony and personal moral cultivation through civilized behavior patterns. For example, in various ceremonies and daily interactions, propriety guides people to respect others and maintain order, which is in line with the pursuit of a kind of moral order under freedom.

   

  b)

   

  - Kant defines human "rational capacity" as the ability to think and judge independently according to principles and laws. Confucianism has had a far - reaching impact on Chinese human nature. It emphasizes moral self - cultivation, benevolence, loyalty, and filial piety. Western rationality often focuses on logical deduction and objective knowledge pursuit, while Confucian rationality is more focused on moral and ethical concepts and human relations. But they also have similarities. For example, they both attach importance to the use of human wisdom to regulate behavior and values. Confucian rationality makes the Chinese people more concerned about family, society and ethics in the process of thinking and behavior, and plays an important role in shaping values and social stability.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表

添加回复

×

图形验证码

换一个

确定