Kant's idea of freedom is closely tied to his concept of autonomy, which he defines as the ability to govern oneself according to self-given laws. For Kant, true freedom is achieved when individuals act not out of external compulsion but rather out of a sense of moral duty or obligation. This concept of autonomy is similar to Confucius's idea of propriety (礼), which emphasizes the importance of acting in accordance with social norms and conventions.Confucius believed that individuals should act in a way that is proper and appropriate in any given situation, which requires them to understand and follow the unwritten rules of society. This idea of propriety is comparable to Kant's idea of imperative duty, which refers to actions that are morally obligatory and should be performed out of a sense. Kant defines human rational capacity as the ability to think, reason, and make judgments about the world around us. For Kant, rationality is essential for moral action, as it allows individuals to understand and apply moral principles to their own behavior. From this perspective, we can see how Confucianism has influenced Chinese humanity by promoting values such as filial piety, respect for elders, and social harmony, which are all based on the idea of propriety.
教学团队
课程特色
视频(28)
考试(25)
文档(3)
讨论(3)
最新学员
A discussion on Li with a comparitive view of Kant's interpretation of "freedom"
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?
341 回复
-
-
-
For Kant, freedom is fundamentally a moral concept. It is the ability to act in accordance with the moral law, which he refers to as the Categorical Imperative. This imperative is not based on external constraints or desires but rather on the rational nature of human beings. Freedom, in this sense, is the autonomy to act out of a sense of duty and respect for the moral law, rather than being driven by inclination, passion, or external coercion.Confucius emphasizes propriety (Li) as a fundamental aspect of social harmony and moral behavior. Propriety, for Confucius, is not just a set of external rules or rituals but rather a way of embodying virtue and fostering harmonious relationships. It involves acting with respect, humility, and consideration for others, and it is intertwined with the concept of Ren.
-
Immanuel Kant, a prominent figure in Western philosophy, defines freedom in his moral philosophy as autonomy, which means acting according to one's own rational will rather than being driven by external forces or desires. For Kant, true freedom is not the absence of constraints but the ability to act according to the moral law that one has rationally recognized as binding upon oneself. This moral law is expressed through the categorical imperative, which commands actions unconditionally, regardless of one's inclinations or circumstances.
-
a) Freedom is a free action that you can act according to a law you give yourself. Confucius focus on the property, Kant emphasize the moral action.
b) Kant regard it as knowing and acting on law. For chinese people, inter characteristics is of great important. So Confucian rationality focus on moral and ethnic norms. Western rationality emphasize the individual action.
-
a) Freedom and Propriety
Kant views freedom as self-discipline and autonomy, while Confucius emphasizes propriety (li) as social norms based on universal principles. Both stress the importance of universal principles in guiding behavior, with Confucius focusing on social harmony and Kant on moral obligation.
b) Rational Capacity and Confucian Rationality
Kant defines human rational capacity as the ability to form knowledge through reason and experience. Confucian rationality emphasizes cultivating virtue in harmony with traditional values, focusing on practical application and social harmony. Western rationality tends to be more analytical and individualistic, while Confucian rationality is more holistic and intuitive. Both have contributed to human thought and culture.
-
Li refers to propriety, rituals, and a set of social norms and moral principles that govern human behavior and interactions. It is seen as a way to maintain social order and harmony. It's not just about external formalities but also reflects inner moral cultivation. For instance, in daily life, the way people greet each other with appropriate bows or words following Li is meant to show respect and courtesy within the social fabric.
Freedom for Kant is also about autonomy, which means that individuals are self-governing and not simply following external commands or inclinations blindly. It's the ability to set one's own laws based on rationality and act accordingly.
-
a）According to Kant, freedom is to act autonomously which means we can act in accordance with our own choice instead of merely satifying our instinct desire and natural appetites. Confucius’s idea of propriety also demands that a person should act to certain rules. The difference is just that these rules are used to maitain social order.
b）Rational Capacity: Kant defines it as knowing and acting on moral laws by reason. We should look at it in a more rational persepctive. Confucius's idea did great benefit to social order. Both Western rationality and Confucius's one emphasize on the restriction on our instinct impulse.
-
Kant defines freedom as the ability to act according to self-imposed laws derived from reason, rather than being driven by external forces or inclinations. True freedom, for Kant, involves adherence to moral laws that individuals recognize as binding upon themselves through rational deliberation. This idea forms the basis of his categorical imperative, which dictates that one should act only according to maxims that could be universal laws.Confucius’s Li, on the other hand, is a system of rituals and norms aimed at harmonizing social relationships and cultivating virtue. While Li might appear restrictive, it is not meant to suppress individuality but to channel human actions toward moral and social harmony. Confucius viewed Li as a means to nurture one's character and align personal desires with communal well-being.Both Kant and Confucius emphasize moral self-discipline. For Kant, freedom is realized through rational adherence to duty; for Confucius, true freedom emerges when one's behavior, shaped by Li, resonates with moral and societal harmony. While Kant’s duties are universal and deontological, Confucius’s Li is more contextual and relational, focusing on the practical cultivation of virtues like filial piety and respect.Thus, Confucius’s Li does not conflict with humanity or emotional instinct but seeks to refine and guide these instincts to achieve a higher moral state, much like Kant’s rational autonomy. Kant defines humans’ “rational capacity” as their ability to reason and legislate moral laws for themselves. This capacity distinguishes humans as autonomous beings capable of ethical deliberation, and it underscores his belief in the intrinsic dignity of human beings.From this perspective, Confucian influence on Chinese humanity can be seen as fostering rationality within a communal and relational framework. Confucian rationality prioritizes harmony, social roles, and the cultivation of virtues through lived practice and interaction.
-
A Discussion on Li and Kant's "Freedom"
This article explores the traditional Chinese concept of "Li" and compares it with Kant's "freedom." "Li," originating from ancient rituals and evolving into a comprehensive social norm system, embodies external behavioral norms and internal moral sentiments in Confucianism. It regulates various aspects of life and reflects Confucian views on humanity and relationships.
Kant's "freedom" is crucial in his moral philosophy, stressing the autonomy of the will and the ability to act according to self-prescribed moral laws.
In comparison, regarding the source of authority, "Li" comes from traditional wisdom and social customs, while Kant's "freedom" is based on individual rationality. Concerning the individual-society relationship, "Li" focuses on maintaining social harmony through role prescriptions, and Kant's "freedom" implies individual responsibility to the moral community.
This comparative study helps us understand different philosophical perspectives on moral and social guidance and their impacts on individual and social conceptions.
-
For Kant, freedom is the ability to act according to universal moral laws that are derived from reason. This is consistent with Confucius' emphasis on ritual, which is not about suppression but about making behavior conform to moral and social expectations. Both see a freedom of action based on responsibility, in which responsibility is understood as a rational and moral requirement.
-
Confucius is not equivalent to inhumanity. Firstly, it is essential to define the concept of freedom. Freedom indeed refers to act according to a law I give myself. In other words, the essence of freedom lies in following one's inclinations, desires, and even appetites rather than being continuously bound by natural necessities. For example, you have the right to decide what you are going to eat, whether it be Chinese food with its rich flavors and diverse styles or the delicate and refined Japanese food. In that way, it is line with what Confucius has emphasized about freedom. Confucius advocates that we shouldn't be confined to express, to eat, and to think. He recognizes that the significance of personal agency and the freedom to make choices within the framework of moral and ehical principles.
-
Kant defines “rational capacity” as the ability to understand and follow moral principles. Confucianism influenced Chinese humanity by emphasizing moral self - cultivation. Western rationality focuses on objective knowledge and problem - solving, while Confucian rationality centers on moral and social relations. They both value reason, but have different focuses. And Confucius isn't inhumane; his ideas promote social harmony and personal growth.
-
Kant's categorical imperative is a moral command that is unconditional and applies to all rational beings. It requires us to act in such a way that the maxim of our action can be willed as a universal law. Confucius's propriety also has a universal aspect in that it provides a set of norms that are considered beneficial for the whole society and are expected to be followed by everyone.
However, Kant's categorical imperative is derived from pure reason, while Confucius's propriety is more deeply rooted in traditional social and cultural values and the accumulated wisdom of human relationships. Propriety is more about how to maintain social harmony and personal moral cultivation through daily behaviors and interactions.
-
In general, the concept of "freedom" is rarely explicitly mentioned in traditional Chinese thought, but in fact, the word "freedom" is not rare, such as the historical records mentioned that "if the rich and poor are free, no one will take away." In ancient China, in different times and on different occasions, the meaning of the word "freedom" has some differences. For example, in Buddhism, it can refer to the unimpeded practice. Daoism can be the realm of lacking desire to return to the true; Poetry may refer to the unrestrained pursuit of emotion. In spite of these subtle differences, in general, people regard 'freedom' as something that is sufficient for them, and that enables them to achieve liberation in life.
-
First, Kant's definition of freedom emphasizes the autonomy of the will and the autonomy of morality. According to Kant, true freedom is not to do anything at will, but to be able to act according to one's own free will without being bound by the laws of nature in one's moral practice. This freedom is internal freedom from external forces, that is, "self-discipline is freedom" Kant's definition of rational power :
Kant emphasized the importance of rational ability in philosophy. He believed that reason is not only the ability of logical reasoning, but also the ability to organize, explain and predict experience. Kant distinguishes between two types of reason: transcendental reason and empirical reason. Transcendental reason refers to the reason that does not depend on concrete experience, and pays attention to the universality and necessity of things. Empirical reason, on the other hand, is reason based on sensory experience, dealing with concrete facts and phenomena 1. Kant believed that reason is the basis of human understanding of the world. Through reason, human beings can transform the information received by the senses into ordered knowledge and summarize the universal laws of nature The combination of Kant's concept of freedom and Confucius' requirement of etiquette can be understood as follows: true freedom is inner autonomy and behavioral self-discipline under the premise of abiding by morality and law. This kind of freedom is not only the norm of behavior in real life, but also the self-restraint and self-realization in the spiritual level. The "rites" and "benevolence" emphasized by Confucius are the embodiment of this freedom, that is, to realize one's moral perfection and self-worth while abiding by social norms. moral cultivation : Confucianism emphasizes the importance of moral cultivation, advocating "honesty to establish oneself, benevolence to others, public behavior". This moral concept has shaped the character of Chinese people who attach importance to honesty, benevolence and justice. collective consciousness : Confucian culture emphasizes collective interests over individual interests, which has shaped Chinese people's collective consciousness and team spirit to a certain extent.
-
The concept of "freedom" is a central theme in both the works of Li and Immanuel Kant, though they approach it from different philosophical backgrounds and contexts.
▎Li's Perspective on Freedom
Li, often associated with Chinese philosophy, particularly Confucianism, emphasizes a relational and communal understanding of freedom. In this context, freedom is not merely the absence of constraints but is deeply intertwined with social harmony, moral responsibility, and the cultivation of virtue.
1. Relational Freedom: For Li, freedom is understood in relation to others. It involves recognizing one's duties and responsibilities within a community. True freedom is achieved when individuals align their personal desires with the greater good of society.
2. Moral Autonomy: While Li acknowledges individual agency, he posits that genuine freedom comes from moral self-cultivation. By adhering to ethical principles and societal norms, individuals can achieve a higher form of freedom that transcends mere individualism.
3. Cultural Context: Li's interpretation is also shaped by the historical and cultural context of China, where collective values often take precedence over individual rights. This perspective contrasts sharply with Western notions of freedom as predominantly individualistic.
▎Kant's Interpretation of Freedom
Immanuel Kant, a central figure in Western philosophy, offers a distinct view of freedom that is rooted in rationality and autonomy:
1. Autonomy and Rational Will: Kant defines freedom as the ability to act according to one's rational will. For him, true freedom is found in the capacity to legislate moral laws for oneself, independent of external influences or desires.
2. Moral Law and Categorical Imperative: Kant's concept of freedom is closely linked to his notion of the categorical imperative, which dictates that one should act only according to maxims that can be universalized. This moral framework establishes a foundation for ethical behavior that respects the autonomy of all rational beings.
3. Individualism: Unlike Li's communal focus, Kant emphasizes individual rights and personal autonomy. Freedom, in Kantian terms, is often viewed as the ability to make choices based on reason rather than being subjected to external authority or societal norms.
▎Comparative Analysis
1. Nature of Freedom:
• Li: Freedom is relational and contextual, emphasizing duties to others and the community.
• Kant: Freedom is individualistic and rational, focusing on personal autonomy and moral self-legislation.
2. Role of Morality:
• Li: Morality is derived from social roles and relationships; ethical living enhances communal harmony.
• Kant: Morality is universal and based on rational principles; ethical behavior stems from the capacity for autonomous reasoning.
3. Cultural Influence:
• Li: His understanding is influenced by Confucian values that prioritize social harmony over individual rights.
• Kant: His views are shaped by Enlightenment ideals that emphasize individualism and rationality.
4. Implications for Society:
• Li: A society that fosters freedom must cultivate virtues and prioritize collective well-being.
• Kant: A just society must protect individual rights and ensure that all members can exercise their rational autonomy.
▎Conclusion
While both Li and Kant address the concept of freedom, their interpretations reflect fundamentally different philosophical traditions. Li's relational approach underscores the importance of community and moral responsibility, while Kant's emphasis on individual autonomy highlights the role of rationality in ethical decision-making. Understanding these differences can enrich contemporary discussions on freedom, ethics, and social responsibility across cultural contexts.
-
In contrast, Immanuel Kant's interpretation of "freedom" is rooted in his moral philosophy, particularly his notion of autonomy and the categorical imperative. Kant posits that true freedom is not merely the absence of constraints but the ability to act according to rational moral laws that one gives to oneself. For Kant, moral actions are those performed out of duty and respect for the moral law, which is universal and applies to all rational beings.礼: Freedom within the context of 礼 is often understood as the freedom to act in accordance with societal norms and duties. This form of freedom is communal and relational, emphasizing harmony and the well-being of the group. For Kant, freedom is an individualistic concept. It is about the capacity to legislate moral laws for oneself, independent of external influences. True freedom arises when one acts from a sense of duty, guided by reason.Role of Community:礼: The practice of 礼 is inherently social; it requires individuals to consider their roles within a community. It promotes a sense of belonging and responsibility towards otherKant: While Kant acknowledges the importance of community, his focus remains on the individual. He believes that moral agents must act on principles that can be universally accepted, which may sometimes conflict with societal norms.Li: The moral framework of 礼 is deeply rooted in Confucian thought, where virtues such as respect, filial piety, and loyalty are paramount. Actions are evaluated based on their alignment with these virtues and their impact on social harmony.Kant: Kant's moral framework is deontological, emphasizing duty and the rationality behind moral choices. The categorical imperative serves as a guide for determining the morality of actions based on their potential to be universalized.Autonomy in the context of Li is often limited by social expectations and the need to maintain relationships. Personal desires may need to be subordinated to the greater good of the community.Kant: Kantian autonomy is about self-governance in moral decision-making. The individual is seen as a rational agent capable of discerning right from wrong, irrespective of societal pressures.While both 礼 and Kant's concept of freedom deal with the balance between individual actions and social expectations, they emerge from different philosophical traditions and prioritize different aspects of human experience. 礼 emphasizes the importance of societal roles and harmony, while Kant champions individual autonomy and rational morality. Understanding these perspectives can enrich our comprehension of freedom, ethics, and the human condition in diverse cultural contexts.
-
This view is completely wrong. Confucius's thought is far from being "inhuman."
a) Kant's view of freedom: For Kant, freedom is the ability to act in accordance with moral law that one gives to oneself out of reason. It is not the freedom of unrestrained impulse.Confucius's propriety and Kant's comparison: Confucius's concept of propriety is not a restraint of human nature but a kind of reasonable guidance. Propriety is used to regulate people's behavior in different social contexts. Just as Kant's categorical imperative provides a rational and moral framework for behavior, Confucius's propriety also aims to help people achieve harmonious co - existence and moral self - cultivation. For example, the practice of propriety in Confucianism such as filial piety and respect for elders is a moral demand based on human relations and values, guiding people to have correct behaviors and attitudes, which is similar to Kant's moral law that requires people to act rationally and morally.
b)Kant's definition of human "rational capacity": Kant believes that human rationality is the ability to understand and follow moral laws through self - reflection and self - legislation.Confucian influence on Chinese humanity: Confucianism emphasizes self - cultivation, benevolence, righteousness and other concepts. It shapes Chinese people's values and moral concepts through education and cultural inheritance. It promotes people's moral growth and social harmony.
Similarities: Both emphasize the importance of reason in moral judgment and behavior guidance. They both seek to establish a set of moral principles and values to promote the well - being of individuals and society.
Differences: Western rationality, as represented by Kant, often emphasizes individual autonomy and the abstract universality of moral laws. Confucian rationality is more closely related to human relations and specific social ethics, and is more focused on the realization of values such as "harmony" in the context of family and society.
-
while both Li and Kant’s concept of freedom ultimately lead to moral development, their approaches diverge: Li is a more structured, social approach to moral formation that emphasizes harmony, duty, and ritual; Kant’s freedom is an individualistic, rationalistic conception that focuses on moral law and self-legislation.
-
a) Kant’s interpretation of freedom is primarily linked to autonomy, which he defines as the ability of a rational agent to act according to moral laws that they give to themselves. For Kant, freedom is not the ability to act on impulse or desires but the capacity to act in accordance with rational, moral principles, regardless of external influences or natural inclinations. Now, if we compare this with Confucius’s ideas of Li (propriety or ritual), we can see both similarities and differences. For Confucius, Li is a set of moral norms and rituals that govern behavior in society, encouraging individuals to act in accordance with social harmony and the natural order.
b) Kant defines human rational capacity as the ability to reason and recognize universal moral laws. For Kant, this is what distinguishes humans from other beings: the capacity for autonomy—the ability to legislate moral laws for oneself. Rationality, in this sense, is not just intellectual reasoning but also the ability to act according to principles that one recognizes as binding, independent of personal inclinations or external consequences. Now, when we apply this understanding to Confucianism, the concept of rationality is somewhat different. Confucius’s approach to rationality is closely tied to the idea of proper conduct (Li) and moral cultivation (Ren). Rationality, in the Confucian sense, involves understanding and fulfilling one's duties in relation to others (e.g., family, society, rulers, and subordinates). It’s not merely intellectual reasoning but a deeply practical application of moral values that contributes to personal and social harmony.
-
- 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.
-
a)1. What indeed is freedom?
Freedom, according to Kant's interpretation, involves acting according to moral laws that we give ourselves rather than being determined by external factors or desires. It is the ability to act autonomously based on reason and duty, rather than being driven by emotions or instincts.
2. Use Kant’s interpretation of freedom as a way to comprehend your understanding of Confucius’ idea of propriety.
Confucius' idea of propriety (Li) emphasizes proper conduct and behavior within societal roles and relationships. While it may seem structured and rule-based, it also allows for individual expression within those roles. In this sense, there is a form of freedom in adhering to Li because it provides a framework for meaningful action and interaction.
3. Is Confucius’ requisites on propriety comparable with Kant’s idea of imperative duty?
Both Confucian propriety and Kantian imperative duty involve rules and guidelines for ethical behavior. However, while Kant focuses on universal moral laws derived from pure reason, Confucius emphasizes the cultivation of virtue and the fulfillment of social roles. Thus, while similar in promoting ethical behavior, they differ in their philosophical foundations and methods of achieving ethical conduct.
b）1. How does the German philosopher Kant define human “rational capacity”?
Kant defines human rational capacity as the ability to think critically, make judgments independently, and act according to principles of morality. Rationality, for Kant, is central to human dignity and the foundation of moral law.
2.From this perspective, how should we look at Confucian rationality?
Confucian rationality is rooted in practical wisdom and the cultivation of virtue. It emphasizes the importance of social harmony and the fulfillment of one's role in society. Unlike Western rationality, which often prioritizes abstract reasoning and individual autonomy, Confucian rationality focuses on relational ethics and the collective good.
3.How is western rationality similar and different from Confucian rationality?
Western rationality, influenced by philosophers like Kant, tends to emphasize individual autonomy, critical thinking, and the application of universal moral principles. Confucian rationality, on the other hand, stresses communal harmony, hierarchical order, and the cultivation of virtues through adherence to social roles and rituals. Both value rational thought, but they differ in their focus on individual versus collective well-being and the means of achieving ethical conduct.
-
a) Freedom in Kant vs. Confucius
Kant: Freedom is moral autonomy—aligning one’s will with universal laws through reason (categorical imperative).
Confucius: Freedom is cultivated through Li (rituals), which harmonize personal desires with social ethics.
Similarity: Both see freedom as linked to moral discipline, not unrestricted action.
Difference: Kant focuses on universal rationality; Confucius emphasizes relational ethics and context.
b) Kant’s Rationality vs. Confucian Influence
Kant: Rationality is the ability to legislate universal moral laws, emphasizing individual autonomy and dignity.
Confucius: Rationality is situational wisdom (zhi) and ethical discernment (yi) within social roles.
Similarities: Both value reason for moral growth and order.
Differences:
Kant: Universal, individualistic.
Confucius: Contextual, communal.
Conclusion: Russell’s critique oversimplifies Confucius’s philosophy. Both Kant and Confucius seek freedom through moral cultivation, but with differing cultural frameworks.
-
1
KANT'S CONCEPTION OF FREEDOM
Autonomy
To act freely To act according to a law I give myself
Heteronomy
To act according to desiresI haven't chosen myself
Confucius emphasized the importance of etiquette in maintaining social order and harmony, as well as respect and compassion for others. From this point of view, Confucius's rites are similar to Kant's imperative obligations, in that both emphasize the moral norms that individuals should follow in society
2
.Kant believes that reason is the premise of freedom, because only the existence of reason can individuals transcend natural causality and act according to universal moral laws.
Confucianism believes that through education and the practice of etiquette, individuals can cultivate rationality and morality, so as to achieve personal perfection and social stability.
western reason and Confucian reason are similar in some respects, however, they differ in their emphasis and methods. Western rationality often emphasizes individual autonomy and critical thinking, encouraging individuals to question and reflect on tradition and authority. However, Confucian rationality focuses more on the role and responsibility of individuals in society and family, emphasizing that individuals should follow etiquette and moral norms to achieve harmony.
-
Kant believes that autonomy refers to the individual's ability to act freely according to their own moral laws. This is similar to Confucius's concept of "Li" (礼), which in Confucian philosophy is a social norm that guides people on how to act in a moral and proper manner. Confucius believed that adhering to "Li" is key to achieving personal morality and social harmony. Heteronomy, as described by Kant, refers to the state where an individual acts according to desires or external rules that they have not chosen for themselves. This contrasts with Confucius's "Li," as Confucius emphasizes internal moral cultivation and voluntary adherence to "Li," rather than passively following externally imposed rules.
-
a) Regarding the comparability between Confucius' concept of ritual (li) and Kant's concept of the categorical imperative, we can observe that both emphasize the importance of behavioral norms. Confucius' ritual is a norm for social order and individual behavior, aimed at maintaining social harmony through rituals and etiquette. Kant's categorical imperative, on the other hand, is a moral command that requires people to act according to universal moral laws, regardless of personal emotions or desires.
b) Kant defines human "rational capacity" as the ability to autonomously follow moral laws, that is, the capacity to transcend sensual impulses and decide actions based on reason. From this perspective, the influence of Confucianism on Chinese humanism lies in the emphasis on cultivating personal moral character and social responsibility through virtues such as ritual, benevolence, righteousness, and wisdom.
-
Immanuel Kant defines freedom as the ability to act according to rational principles,rather than out of instinct or desire.He believes that true freedom is autonomy,which means following moral laws that one has set for oneself,rather than being driven by external rules or desires.Confucius's concept of'Li'(ritual or propriety)can be understood as a norm for social behavior,emphasizing the role and responsibilities of an individual within society.Confucius believed that by adhering to'Li',one could achieve self-cultivation and social harmony.This shares similarities with Kant's concept of freedom,as both emphasize the individual's responsibility and self-discipline within society.Confucius's'Li'and Kant's moral law are comparable to some extent,as they both serve as internal principles guiding individual conduct.However,Confucius's'Li'focuses more on social harmony and interpersonal relationships,while Kant's moral law focuses more on individual moral responsibility and universality.
-
Li emphasizes the importance of moral integrity and social harmony, advocating for self-discipline within community life. In contrast, Kant’s interpretation of "freedom" focuses on autonomy, positing that true freedom involves acting according to rational moral laws. While Li underscores relational responsibilities, Kant prioritizes individual moral agency in ethical decision-making.
-
Kant viewed"freedom"as central to moral agency and responsibility.He distinguished between empirical freedom,based on desires,and transcendental freedom rooted in rationality and autonomy.For Kant,true freedom lies in the ability to act according to reason and moral law,independent of external or internal determinants.
Kant defines"rational capacity"as the ability to reason and make moral judgments independently.Confucianism's influence on Chinese humanity is seen in its emphasis on moral development and social harmony,which can be rationally pursued.Western rationality often focuses on individual rights and critical thinking,while Confucian rationality emphasizes collective well-being and moral rectitude,showing both overlap in the value of reason and divergence in its application.
添加回复
您确定给 “0” 位老师发送协议吗？
UMOOCS用户服务协议
问题分类：
--
4008987008