341 回复

• 
  周沁媛 • 11-28

  a) Freedom, according to Immanuel Kant, is the capacity to act according to a universal law that one gives to oneself. This is known as the "categorical imperative." For Kant, freedom is not about acting according to one's whims or emotions but is about acting in accordance with rational principles that can be universally applied.
  Confucius's requisites on propriety (li) involve a set of social norms and rituals that organize behavior and relationships. While on the surface, this may seem to impose constraints on individual freedom, from a Kantian perspective, propriety could be seen as a series of practices that reflect a universal moral law within the context of a community. Confucius's propriety is not arbitrary but is based on the idea of harmony and respect, which can be seen as analogous to Kant's idea of acting according to a universal moral law.
  Confucius's idea of propriety is comparable to Kant's idea of imperative duty in that both involve a sense of obligation to act in a certain way, not out of desire or emotion, but out of a sense of what is morally right. Both are about submitting one's behavior to a higher principle: for Kant, it is the moral law; for Confucius, it is the propriety that maintains social harmony.
  b) Kant defines human "rational capacity" as the ability to understand and act according to moral laws through reason. Rationality, for Kant, is the faculty that allows humans to discern the moral law and to act autonomously, free from the constraints of empirical desires and inclinations.
  From this perspective, Confucianism can be seen as a form of rationality that emphasizes the importance of social order and harmony. Confucian rationality is about understanding one's place in society and acting in ways that fulfill social roles and responsibilities. It is a rationality that is deeply embedded in the social and relational context.
  Western rationality, as exemplified by Kant, tends to focus on abstract principles and universalizable moral laws. It is more individualistic and emphasizes the autonomy of the individual's reason. Western rationality seeks to uncover objective truths that are independent of cultural or social contexts.
  Confucian rationality, on the other hand, is more contextually based and relational. It is concerned with the practical application of moral principles within the specific context of social relationships. While Western rationality may seek to universalize moral principles, Confucian rationality acknowledges the importance of particular relationships and the social context in determining what is morally right.
  In terms of similarity, both Western and Confucian rationalities aim at guiding human behavior towards moral ends. However, they differ in their approach: Western rationality is more abstract and universal, while Confucian rationality is more particular and relational.
  Regarding the suggestion that Confucius is in line with inhumanity as proposed by Bertrand Russell, it is important to note that Confucianism places a strong emphasis on humaneness (ren) and the cultivation of moral character. The rituals and propriety in Confucianism are not intended to suppress human emotion but to channel them in ways that are beneficial to both the individual and society. Therefore, it would be more accurate to say that Confucius's teachings are a form of social and moral philosophy that seeks to harmonize human behavior with a deeper understanding of what it means to be a virtuous person within a community.

   

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  22级5班陈正琴 • 11-28

  –a) Freedom, as interpreted by Kant, is the capacity to act according to moral law through rationality, free from the determination of inclinations or external forces. Confucius's requisites on propriety (Li) can be understood through this lens as the freedom to act in accordance with the moral principles inherent in one's social roles. Both Confucius's propriety and Kant's imperative duty involve a sense of obligation to follow a set of rules for moral behavior. They are comparable in that they require individuals to act out of a sense of duty rather than desire, though Confucius emphasizes social harmony and role fulfillment, while Kant focuses on adherence to universal moral laws.

   

  –b) Kant defines human's "rational capacity" as the ability to understand and act upon moral laws through reason. Viewing Confucian influence on Chinese humanity through this perspective, we see a focus on moral education and the cultivation of virtues that align with social roles, which can be seen as a form of rational moral conduct. Western rationality, like Confucian, values reason, but it tends to be more individualistic and abstract, seeking universal principles. Confucian rationality is more relational and context-bound, emphasizing the application of moral principles within specific social relationships.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  6班王筱骞 • 11-28

  Freedom, according to Kant, is the ability to act in accordance with moral law, guided by reason rather than mere impulse, which aligns with Confucius’s notion of propriety (li). Confucius's propriety, while appearing to constrain emotional instincts, is a structured way of channeling behavior to cultivate virtue and maintain social harmony, akin to Kant’s idea of imperative duty—acting according to universal moral principles. Kant's rational capacity is the ability to recognize and act on moral duties through reason, which contrasts with Confucian rationality, focused on moral cultivation in the context of social relationships. Both perspectives prioritize reason in human flourishing, but Kant emphasizes individual autonomy and abstract morality, while Confucianism values relational virtue and communal harmony, where moral duties are shaped by social roles. Thus, Confucius is not in line with inhumanity, as his framework of propriety ultimately serves to refine human nature and social cohesion.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  三班晁可欣 • 11-28

    First of all, Kant views freedom as acting according to self-imposed laws, guided by reason, not merely by inclination. But Confucius emphasizes Li, a set of moral guidelines for harmonious social conduct. From my point of view, both of them are out of philosophical and moral perspective. As for rationality, both of Western and Confucian recognize using reason for moral judgments.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  4班周美林 • 11-28

  1. Moral basis: Both propriety and Kant's view of freedom emphasize the importance of morality. However, propriety is more concerned with guiding individual behavior through external social norms. To promote social harmony, while Kant focuses on the individual through rational understanding of moral law, so as to achieve self-restraint and social justice.

  2. The relationship between the individual and society: In Chinese traditional concept, " propriety " emphasizes how the individual should adapt to the social structure. In order to maintain the overall harmony and stability; Kant's concept of freedom is more emphasis on the individual as a moral subject, The belief that individuals should judge and choose ethical behavior based on reason, even if it means confronting irrational social structures.

  3. Realization path: The process of following propriety is a process of continuous learning, practice and self-improvement. Kant's view of freedom holds that through rational thinking and moral judgment, The individual can achieve a state of spiritual freedom that transcends instinctive desires.

  To sum up, although there are some differences in the concrete expression and emphasis between " propriety " and Kant's view of freedom, But they all reflect the profound thinking of the relationship between individual and society, and the exploration of how to build a more harmonious and orderly society.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  彭莘洋 • 11-28

  According to Kant, the difference between man and animal lies in the fact that man possesses transcendental rationality in addition to his instinctive desires. The important premise of realizing freedom is the independent will, with which one can reconcile one's reason and emotion and become the master of one's life.
  When you can exert your own will to establish a principle of your own and act in accordance with it, make your own decisions. You are truly free from all heteronomy and a truly free man

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  3班管奕晗 • 11-28

  Confucianism has a profound influence on Chinese humanities, and its emphasis on moral reason is similar to Kant's practical reason. However, Confucian rationality pays more attention to moral practice and the harmony of interpersonal relations, which is different from Western rationalism which emphasizes logical reasoning and scientific method. Through the comparison between Confucianism and western rationality, we can better understand the differences and commonalities between Chinese and Western cultures in the application of rational ability

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  3班刘科宏 • 11-28

  The exploration of "Li" and Kant's "freedom" reveals the richness and diversity of philosophical thought on human conduct and morality. While they approach the question from different angles, with different cultural roots and methodological frameworks, they both offer valuable perspectives on how individuals can lead moral lives, contribute to social harmony, and realize their full potential as human beings. Understanding these concepts in a comparative light not only enriches our knowledge of different philosophical traditions but also provides inspiration for contemporary ethical discussions and the pursuit of a more just and harmonious global society. It prompts us to reflect on how we can combine the wisdom of cultural traditions with rational moral principles to navigate the complex moral landscapes of the modern world.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  4班程欣 • 11-28

   

  1、Kant defines freedom as the ability to act according to one's own will without being constrained by external forces. He argues that true freedom lies in acting out of moral duty rather than inclination. This aligns with his concept of the categorical imperative, which states that one should only act according to maxims that could be universalized.

  Confucius' idea of propriety (Li) emphasizes the importance of proper behavior and etiquette in social interactions. While it may appear restrictive, it serves to maintain harmony and order within society. Propriety is not merely about following rules but also about cultivating virtue and self-discipline.

  In comparing Confucius' idea of propriety with Kant's notion of imperative duty, both emphasize the importance of acting according to certain principles. However, while Kant focuses on individual autonomy and moral law, Confucius stresses communal harmony and hierarchical relationships. Both philosophies aim to guide individuals towards virtuous actions, albeit through different means.

   

  2、Kant defines human rational capacity as the ability to reason and make judgments based on logical principles. He believes that rationality is essential for moral decision-making and the pursuit of knowledge.

  From this perspective, Confucianism's emphasis on education and the cultivation of wisdom highlights its recognition of the importance of rationality. The Confucian ideal of the sage (Junzi) embodies qualities such as wisdom, benevolence, and righteousness, all of which require rational thought and judgment.

  Western rationality often prioritizes individual reasoning and empirical evidence, whereas Confucian rationality places greater emphasis on tradition, collective wisdom, and the role of elders and scholars. Despite these differences, both traditions recognize the value of rational thinking in guiding ethical behavior and societal norms.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  4班彭珍 • 11-28

  For Kant, freedom was not simply the absence of external constraints. He posited that true freedom was autonomy in the moral realm. According to his moral philosophy, the categorical imperative served as the guiding principle. The categorical imperative demands that we act only according to maxims that we could will to be universal laws. In other words, when we make a moral decision, we should consider whether the rule underlying our action could be applied to everyone in all similar situations without leading to contradictions or moral absurdities. For example, lying would be considered immoral under Kant's framework because if everyone were to lie whenever it suited them, the very concept of truth-telling and communication would break down, undermining the fabric of society. Kantian freedom, then, is the ability to use reason to determine and act upon moral duties independent of external coercion or the lure of personal desires. It is about self-governance in line with an a priori moral law that reason reveals to us, allowing us to rise above the dictates of mere instinct and immediate self-interest.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  2班柯珺洢 • 11-28

  Kant defines human rational capacity as the ability to recognize and follow universal laws,a capacity that enables humans to transcend sensory experience and achieve universality in morality and knowledge.In Kant's view,reason is the guiding principle of human action,requiring our behavior to conform to moral laws.

   

  The influence of Confucian thought on Chinese human nature is mainly reflected in the emphasis on the role and responsibility of the individual in society,as well as the achievement of personal cultivation and social harmony through education and the internalization of propriety.Confucian rationality emphasizes the harmony of social order and interpersonal relationships,which has similarities with Kant's concept of rationality,both highlighting the role of reason in guiding behavior and achieving moral goals.

   

  The difference between Western rationality and Confucian rationality lies in the fact that Western rationality places more emphasis on individual autonomy and universality,while Confucian rationality focuses more on social harmony and the role of the individual within society.Western rationality tends to achieve progress in knowledge through logic and critical thinking,whereas Confucian rationality aims to achieve personal perfection and social harmony through moral cultivation and social practice.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  3班彭坞洁 • 11-28

  Kant's view of freedom holds that freedom is the ability to act rationally autonomously without being controlled by external factors. Kant regarded freedom as a fundamental characteristic of human reason and the basis of moral law. For Kant, freedom is a necessary condition for moral responsibility, as only free actions can be considered truly moral actions. He closely linked freedom with responsibility, believing that only under the condition of freedom can individuals take responsibility for their actions.

  In contrast to Kant, Confucius' emphasis on "li" represents another interpretation of freedom. Confucius believed that "li" is the foundation of social order and personal behavior norms, and it stipulates the roles and responsibilities of people in society. By following "li", individuals can achieve self-cultivation and social harmony. In Confucius' eyes, freedom is not unrestricted individualism, but the harmonious coexistence of individuals and society within the framework of "li". Therefore, Confucius' "li" and Kant's "absolute command" have similarities to some extent, as they both emphasize that actions should conform to certain universal principles or norms.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  3班赵原 • 11-28

  Li emphasizes moral rectitude and social harmony. Kant’s view of “freedom” is rooted in autonomy and rational choice, which means it is to act according to law that I give myself. While Li focuses on duty and social order, Kant’s freedom is about individual actions in accordance with universal moral laws.

   

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  邓力3班 • 11-28

  Li in Confucianism refers to rituals and norms that emphasize maintaining social harmony and moral self-cultivation. Individual freedom aligns with adhering to Li, reflecting moral responsibility within society. 

  Kant's concept of freedom focuses on rational autonomy, where freedom is the ability to act according to moral law derived from one's reason, independent of external influences. 

  Li emphasizes social relationships, where freedom is expressed through conforming to external norms. Kant centers on individual rationality, where freedom arises from internal moral autonomy.  

  Both link freedom to morality but differ in focusing on external norms (Li) versus internal reason (Kant).

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  胡灿悦7班 • 11-28

  a)Understanding Freedom through Kant and Confucius:

  Kant's Interpretation of Freedom:

  Immanuel Kant distinguishes between two types of freedom:negative freedom,which is the absence of external constraints,and positive freedom,which is the ability to act according to one's own rational will.For Kant,true freedom is not about doing whatever one desires without constraints;it is about acting in accordance with the moral law,which is derived from reason.This is encapsulated in his concept of the categorical imperative,which states that one should act only according to maxims that can be universally legislated.

  Confucius's Requisites on Propriety:

  Confucius's teachings emphasize the importance of propriety(Li),which is a set of social norms and rituals that govern behavior.Propriety,in Confucian thought,is not just about external conformity;it is about internalizing these norms to the point where they become second nature.This aligns with the idea that true freedom comes from acting in accordance with one's rational will,as per Kant.

  Comparability with Kant's Imperative Duty:

  Confucius's idea of propriety can be seen as comparable to Kant's idea of imperative duty in that both emphasize the importance of acting in accordance with certain moral or rational principles.For Confucius,propriety is not just about following rules;it is about aligning one's actions with the greater good and with the moral order of the universe.Similarly,Kant's categorical imperative is about acting in a way that one's actions could be a universal law.Both philosophies suggest that true freedom is found in living up to these higher moral standards.

  b)Kant's Definition of Rational Capacity and its Application to Confucianism:

  Kant's Definition:

  Kant defines human's"rational capacity"as the ability to reason and to act according to reason,which is the foundation of his moral philosophy.Rationality,for Kant,is the capacity to set and pursue ends based on principles that can be universally applied.

  Confucian Influence on Chinese Humanity:

  From Kant's perspective on rational capacity,we can view Confucianism's influence on Chinese humanity as an emphasis on the development of moral character and the cultivation of virtues.Confucianism encourages individuals to act rationally by adhering to moral principles that are in harmony with the social order.This is similar to Kant's view that rationality involves acting according to universal moral laws.

  Similarities and Differences Between Western and Confucian Rationality:

  • Similarities:Both Western rationality,as seen in Kant's philosophy,and Confucian rationality emphasize the importance of reason in moral decision-making.They both value the ability to act in accordance with principles that can be universally applied.

  • Differences:Western rationality,particularly in the Kantian tradition,tends to focus on individual autonomy and the moral law as a product of individual reason.Confucian rationality,on the other hand,places more emphasis on the individual's role within a social and familial context,with moral principles often derived from social harmony and the maintenance of relationships.

  In conclusion,while there are differences in the emphasis and application of rationality between Western and Confucian philosophies,both recognize the importance of acting rationally in accordance with moral principles.Confucius's teachings on propriety are not inhumane but rather offer a framework for individuals to achieve a higher form of freedom through the cultivation of moral character and the internalization of social norms.The suggestion that Confucius is in line with inhumanity is a misunderstanding of his teachings,which are fundamentally about harmonizing individual behavior with the greater good,much like Kant's emphasis on acting according to the categorical imperative.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  2班侯晓璐 • 11-28

   In Kant's view, to do what one wants is to act in accordance with natural instincts, which cannot be called freedom; it is not free.

  Nature acts according to the nature and instincts which nature has given you, and freedom acts according to the principles of reason. Freedom is a power peculiar to man, while nature is a power shared by all animals. Therefore, in Kant's view, self-discipline is the symbol of rationality, is the ability to use reason to restrain desires and instincts, which is the expression of people's free will, so self-discipline is freedom, or self-discipline is a manifestation of freedom.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  2022级5班吴琪 • 11-28

  A: What is freedom?

  Freedom, according to Kant's understanding, is the ability of a rational being to act according to the laws he has set for himself (i.e., the moral law). It is not just an outward, unfettered state, but an internal, ethical choice of action.

  How to use Kant's understanding of freedom to understand Confucius's requirements for propriety?\nConfucius emphasized that "li" is a norm of social and personal behavior, aimed at maintaining social order and personal morality. From Kant's point of view, Confucius's requirements for propriety can be seen as the embodiment of a moral law, which requires people to follow certain norms in their behavior in order to achieve social harmony and personal perfection. This observance of propriety is not an external compulsion, but is based on an internal moral self-discipline, which is in line with Kant's understanding of freedom.

  How is Confucius's concept of propriety similar to Kant's categorical imperative?

  Both Confucius's rites and Kant's categorical imperatives emphasize the prescribing of behavior by a universal, intrinsic moral law. Confucius's rites focus more on the combination of social norms and personal cultivation, while Kant's categorical imperatives focus more on the universality and absoluteness of moral laws. But both embody the intrinsic requirements for norms of conduct and the spirit of ethical self-discipline.

  b:

  How did Kant define the "rational faculties" of human beings?

  According to Kant, the "rational faculty" of human beings is the ability to know, understand, and judge the nature of things, which enables human beings to transcend the limits of their sensibility and reach the knowledge of truth and morality. Rational capacity is the foundation of moral self-discipline and moral judgment.

  From Kant's definition of rational ability, how should we view the influence of Confucianism on Chinese nature?

  Confucianism emphasizes moral education, the inherent goodness of human nature, and the improvement of one's moral character through learning and cultivation. This is in line with Kant's emphasis on and application of rational faculties, that is, to recognize and practice moral norms through reason, and to achieve personal perfection and social harmony. Confucianism has a profound influence on Chinese nature, shaping Chinese moral concepts and codes of conduct, making Chinese pay attention to etiquette, respect others, and pursue harmony in daily life.

  What are the similarities and differences between Western rationality and Confucian rationality?

  Both Western and Confucian rationality emphasize rational thinking, the pursuit of truth, and moral self-discipline. However, there are also differences between the two. Western rationality focuses more on logical analysis, scientific empirical evidence, and the pursuit of individual freedom, while Confucian rationality focuses more on morality, social harmony, and the improvement of personal cultivation. These differences reflect different understandings and applications of rational competence in different cultural contexts.

  Based on the above analysis, although there are some differences between Confucianism and Western rationality, this does not mean that Confucius is inhumane. On the contrary, Confucius's ideas have played an important role in shaping Chinese's moral concepts and codes of conduct, and have had a profound impact on Chinese society. Therefore, we should evaluate Confucius's thought comprehensively and objectively, rather than one-sidedly evaluating it as inhumane.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  6班胡洋 • 11-28

  a) Freedom, in Kant’s view, is the ability to act according to one’s rational will, independent of external influences or mere impulses. This aligns with his idea of "autonomy," where true freedom lies in the adherence to the moral law, or the categorical imperative. Confucius's concept of propriety (Li) might seem to constrain personal freedom, but it can be seen as a framework that enables moral development by guiding behavior toward societal harmony. Rather than conflicting with freedom, Li helps cultivate the rational self, aligning personal behavior with moral and social duties, akin to Kant’s notion of duty. In both, true freedom is found not in the absence of restrictions but in acting in accordance with universal principles.

  b) Kant defines human rational capacity as the ability to reason morally, to distinguish between right and wrong, and to act in accordance with universal moral laws. This rational autonomy is central to his philosophy. Confucian rationality, while also emphasizing moral cultivation, is more relational, focusing on the harmony between the individual and society. It is grounded in concrete social roles rather than abstract moral laws. While Western rationality, especially Kantian, stresses individual autonomy and universal principles, Confucian rationality emphasizes relational duties and the importance of tradition and social harmony. Thus, Confucian rationality is more communal, focusing on societal cohesion, while Kantian rationality emphasizes individual moral law.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  5班刘春燕 • 11-28

  1.Kant's Interpretation of Freedom and its Relation to Confucius's Propriety. For Kant, freedom is closely tied to the concept of autonomy. He distinguishes between the phenomenal world where we are subject to causal laws and the noumenal world where we can exercise our free will. Freedom, in Kant's view, is the ability to act in accordance with the moral law that we give to ourselves out of our rational nature. It is not being determined by external forces or mere inclinations but by our own internal rational imperative. Confucius's idea of propriety (Li) is about having appropriate behaviors in different social situations. While it might seem on the surface that Li restricts freedom as it sets norms for social and personal conduct, in fact, it can be seen as a way to enable a harmonious social order within which true freedom can be realized. Just like Kant's moral law which guides people to act in a way that respects the dignity of others and themselves, Confucius's propriety guides individuals to behave in a manner that respects social hierarchies and the feelings of others. For example, in a society governed by Li, people know how to interact with elders, peers, and juniors in a respectful and appropriate way, which creates a stable and harmonious environment where people can freely pursue self-cultivation and other aspects of life. Kant's imperative duty is categorical, meaning it is an unconditional moral obligation that applies universally. Confucius's propriety also has a certain universality in the context of the social community it pertains to. It is expected of everyone within that social framework to follow these norms to maintain social harmony, similar to how Kant's moral law demands adherence from rational beings to achieve moral goodness.

   2. Kant's Definition of Human's “Rational Capacity”Kant defines human's rational capacity as the ability to think beyond the immediate sensory experiences and to formulate universal laws and principles. It is what enables humans to distinguish right from wrong from a moral perspective and to act in accordance with self-imposed moral imperatives rather than just being driven by instincts or desires. Confucian Influence on Chinese Humanity and Comparison with Western Rationality. Confucianism has had a profound impact on Chinese humanity. It emphasizes moral cultivation, respect for elders and authority, and the importance of harmonious social relations. From the perspective of rationality, Confucian rationality focuses a lot on the practical aspects of how to live a good life within the social fabric. It is about using reason to understand and follow social norms and moral teachings to build a virtuous self and a harmonious society. In comparison, Western rationality, as exemplified by Kant, is more focused on abstract reasoning to derive universal moral laws that are applicable regardless of specific social contexts in an idealized sense. Similarities between them lie in that both use reason as a tool to guide human behavior and moral judgment. However, the differences are that Western rationality often starts from abstract principles and tries to apply them to real life, while Confucian rationality grows out of the observation and organization of social life experiences and then formulates norms and moral guidance for people to follow within that specific cultural and social context.

  It is completely wrong to say that Confucius is in line with inhumanity. Confucius's teachings on propriety are aimed at creating a better social environment where people can thrive and develop their humanity, rather than suppressing it.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  2022级2班黄旭 • 11-28

  Understanding of Freedom: Kant views freedom as moral constraint,where moral laws(Categorical Imperative)are inherently linked to freedom.Freedom implies that practical reason can be pure(non-instrumental,unconditional),thus we are bound by moral laws.Our moral constraints mean we must be free.

  Confucius's Propriety and Kant's Imperative Duty: Confucius's concept of propriety(Li)is central to Confucian thought for governing the state,maintaining social order,and promoting personal moral development.Propriety is not just a set of behavioral norms but also an expression of moral and ethical values.Kant's imperative duty requires us to respect all rational beings as"ends-in-themselves."Confucius's propriety is comparable to Kant's imperative duty in demanding individuals to follow universal principles and respect others.Both emphasize moral norms for individual actions and respect for others.

  Kant's Definition of"Rational Capacity": Kant defines rational capacity as the source of moral laws,where rationality is the authoritative principle guiding our actions and thoughts.Rational capacity demands that we follow universal principles,meaning our actions must be based on principles that all rational beings can adhere to.

  Influence of Confucianism on Chinese Humanity: Confucianism influences Chinese morality and behavior through propriety(Li)and benevolence(Ren).It emphasizes individual roles and responsibilities in society and achieving benevolence through propriety.This resonates with Kant's view that rational capacity requires us to respect others as ends-in-themselves.Confucianism plays a significant role in maintaining social order and promoting individual moral development.

  Similarities and Differences between Western and Confucian Rationality: Both Western and Confucian rationality emphasize universal principles and respect for others.Kant's moral laws and Confucius's propriety demand adherence to universal moral principles.

  Similarities: Western rationality and Confucian rationality both stress universal principles and respect for others.

  Differences: Western rationality focuses more on individual autonomy and self-legislation,while Confucian rationality emphasizes social order and harmony.Kant's moral laws highlight individual free will and moral autonomy,whereas Confucius's propriety is more about social norms and traditions.Additionally,Confucian rationality is closely linked to social roles and responsibilities,whereas Western rationality emphasizes the universality and abstraction of the individual.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  6班田甜 • 11-28

  -a)Freedom, according to Kant, is the ability to act in accordance with moral law without being determined by external factors. Confucius’ requisites on propriety emphasize social harmony and proper behavior. Kant’s idea of imperative duty is similar to Confucius’ propriety in that both involve moral obligations. However, Kant’s duty is based on universal rational principles, while Confucius’ propriety is rooted in social relationships.

   

   -b)Kant defines human’s “rational capacity” as the ability to think and act according to principles that one gives to oneself. From this perspective, Confucian influence on Chinese humanity can be seen as shaping moral character through education and social norms. Western rationality, as proposed by Kant, emphasizes individual autonomy and universal principles, while Confucian rationality focuses on social harmony and hierarchical relationships.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  2022级5班张冰涛 • 11-28

  1、Kant’s View of Freedom: For Kant, freedom isn’t unrestrained action but acting per rational moral law, following the categorical imperative, a universal duty principle for moral acts, overriding personal desires.

  2、Confucius’s Propriety (Li): In Confucianism, “li” comprises rituals, norms guiding behavior, for virtue cultivation, emotion regulation, respecting social roles and moral order.

  3、Comparison: Kant focuses on individual autonomy, Confucius on social harmony. Yet both hold freedom needs constraint. Kant’s is self-determined moral action; Confucius’s “li” aids virtuous acts in society. Both promote a higher freedom, Kant via duty, Confucius via harmony and virtue.

  4、Conclusion: Both see true freedom as aligning actions with moral principles. Kant uses rational duty, Confucius “li”, both stressing freedom in moral self-discipline.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  2班贺盈 • 11-28

  1. Confucian "rites" emphasize social order and the role of individuals within it, while Kant's practical freedom emphasizes individual self-discipline and moral law. Confucian "rites" can be seen as an external social norm, while Kant's freedom is an internal moral self-discipline.
  2. Confucian "rites" and Kant's practical freedom both involve moral behavior, but Kant distinguishes between moral law and natural law. In Kant's view, moral law is autonomous, while natural law is external. Confucian "rites" also include a moral dimension, but it is more closely associated with social norms and tradition.
  3. Kant's transcendental freedom and Confucian "rites" differ in their relationship between freedom and necessity. Kant's transcendental freedom emphasizes the spontaneity of individual actions and freedom from external constraints, while Confucian "rites" place more emphasis on the individual's position and responsibility within social and cosmic order.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  5班喻剑英 • 11-28

   a) What Indeed Is Freedom?

  Immanuel Kant's interpretation of freedom is grounded in his moral philosophy, where he presents freedom not merely as the absence of restraint but as the ability to act according to rational will and moral law. For Kant, true freedom involves autonomy—the capacity to act in accordance with one's rational understanding of moral duties rather than being driven solely by inclinations or external pressures.

  Confucius’s concept of propriety (li) emphasizes the significance of social rituals, norms, and ethical behavior in structuring personal and community life. While this may appear to conflict with individual emotional expression and spontaneity, it can also be viewed as a framework within which individuals can cultivate and exercise their moral capacities. Propriety, in this sense, serves to guide individuals toward making ethical choices that promote harmony and the common good, thereby aligning with Kant's notion of moral duty.

  Both Confucius and Kant advocate for a form of discipline that leads to moral growth. Confucius's li facilitates a structure that helps individuals develop virtues, while Kant's imperative duties provide a guiding principle for moral decisions. They both suggest that genuine freedom involves adherence to a moral framework, albeit one rooted in social customs for Confucius and rational law for Kant. 

   b) Kant's Definition of Human's "Rational Capacity"

  Kant defines human rational capacity in terms of the ability to reason, reflect upon moral principles, and make autonomous choices. He posits that humans are not just instinctual beings; rather, they possess the capability to evaluate their actions in light of universal moral laws, which he encapsulates in the concept of the categorical imperative—the principle that one should act only according to that maxim which they can will to become a universal law.

  From this perspective, Confucianism can be seen as an influence on Chinese humanity through its emphasis on moral education and the cultivation of virtues within a social context. Confucius encourages individuals to develop their moral character, not in isolation, but in accordance with established social roles and relationships. This cultivation of virtue reflects a commitment to rational deliberation about one's duties to family, community, and society.

  Similarities and Differences Between Western and Confucian Rationality

  Similarities:

  1. Moral Orientation: Both Western (especially Kantian) and Confucian rationalities emphasize moral behavior. They are concerned with the ethical implications of one's actions and the importance of adhering to certain moral standards or duties.

  2. Importance of Education: Both traditions value the role of education in developing rational capacities and moral sensibilities. Confucius emphasized learning and self-cultivation, akin to Kant's view on the necessity of moral education for understanding duty.

  Differences:

  1. Individual vs. Social Emphasis: Kantian rationality prioritizes individual autonomy and universal moral laws, asserting that moral principles should apply to all rational agents regardless of context. In contrast, Confucian rationality is deeply embedded in social relationships and communal values, emphasizing the importance of context, familial duties, and societal roles.

  2. Nature of Moral Law: For Kant, moral law is derived from rationality itself and is universally applicable. In Confucianism, moral norms are often based on traditions and cultural practices, which can vary across contexts. The emphasis is on harmony and relational morality rather than on a singular universal law.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  5班刘英 • 11-28

  A) Kant's interpretation of freedom is that freedom is a prerequisite for rational behavior and the basis of moral behavior. In Kant's moral philosophy, freedom means that individuals can self-legislate according to universal moral laws, rather than driven by external forces of cause and effect or inner desires. Kant believes that the law of freedom and unconditional practice (i.e. absolute command) are mutually implied. If I am free and can take a step back from my tendencies, then these tendencies cannot provide a definite reason for action. Tendencies can motivate, but they are not coercive. If someone asks me why I did something, the tendency may explain my actions - actions help me achieve what I want. But there is still an open question: Should I act according to these tendencies?

  Applying Kant's understanding of freedom to the understanding of Confucius' etiquette requirements, we can see that Confucius' etiquette requirements do not conflict with the spirit of freedom, but provide a way to achieve freedom through moral self-restraint. Confucius emphasized the importance of etiquette, which is similar to the moral law emphasized by Kant, that is, individuals should act according to the universal moral law. Confucius' etiquette can be regarded as a moral law of social and personal behavior, which requires individuals to achieve personal moral self-discipline while respecting others and social order. Therefore, Confucius' etiquette and Kant's absolute command are similar in requiring individuals to follow universal laws to achieve freedom and moral self-discipline.

  B) Kant defines human "rational ability" as the ability of self-legislation, that is, individuals can self-discipline according to universal moral laws, rather than being driven by external causal forces or inner desires. From this perspective, the influence of Confucianism on Chinese character is that it emphasizes the moral responsibility and self-cultivation of individuals in society, which is consistent with the self-legislation and moral self-discipline emphasized in Kant's rational ability. "Benevolence" and "courtesy" in Confucianism reflect the respect and cultivation of individual rational ability, and encourage individuals to achieve personal moral development while following social norms.

  Western rationality is similar to Confucian rationality in some aspects. For example, both emphasize the importance of reason in moral behavior, and both believe that individuals should act according to universal moral laws. However, they are also different in some ways. Western rationality, especially in the Enlightenment, emphasizes individual freedom and independence, while Confucian rationality emphasizes the role and responsibility of individual in society and family. Confucian rationality tends to link individual moral development with social harmony, while Western rationality emphasizes individual rights and individual autonomy more.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  2班唐绪香 • 11-28

  I believe they are similar. Because they both start from the inner desire , rather than outworld. We should behave subjecting to the heart. So Li and freedom are the principle of heart, and the principle is originated from what an individual really desire to do.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  3班刘昌美 • 11-28

  Freedom, in Kant's view, is acting according to self-legislated moral laws, which aligns with Confucius's emphasis on propriety as a moral compass. Both stress the importance of duty and moral conduct over natural desires. Confucius's propriety, like Kant's categorical imperative, is about adhering to ethical standards that guide behavior, fostering a harmonious society and personal integrity.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  7班杨双 • 11-28

  a) Kant sees freedom as acting per moral law by one's will. Confucius' propriety, like Kant's imperative duty, guides behavior for a moral social state. It's a framework for proper interaction, not a freedom restraint but a positive guide.

  b) Kant defines “rational capacity” as understanding and following moral principles via reason. Confucianism shapes Chinese values. Western rationality stresses individual rights and laws; Confucian rationality focuses on relationships and self-cultivation. They both seek moral behavior through thought and discipline but differ in value foci and manifestations. Russell's view of Confucius as inhumane is incorrect; Confucian thought promotes harmonious relations and moral growth.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  3班潘颜 • 11-28

  Kant defines freedom as acting according to self-imposed moral laws, not external desires. Similarly, Confucius’s li emphasizes self-discipline, aligning with Kant’s idea of autonomy. Both stress controlling impulses for harmony—Confucius within society, Kant through universal morals. The difference lies in focus: Confucius grounds li in social practices, while Kant centers on abstract moral duties. Kant sees rationality as living by universal moral laws, emphasizing independence and individual dignity. Confucianism shapes humanity by showing how rational behavior fosters social harmony. Western rationality prioritizes abstract reasoning, while Confucian rationality is relational and practical, focused on human connections. Both value reason but in distinct ways.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表
• 
  4班程迎会 • 11-28

  a) Freedom, in Kant's view, is autonomy under moral law. Confucius's "propriety" is similar to Kant's "imperative duty" in that both emphasize acting according to universal principles rather than personal desires.

  b) 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. Both recognize the importance of rationality but differ in their application and emphasis on the individual versus society.

  回复 收起

  回复内容

  发表

添加回复

×

图形验证码

换一个

确定