Is freedom unlimited? If you put certain restrictions on life, does it mean that you violate your freedom? To do whatever you want is not freedom but obedience to the will of nature. Is it freedom to fight against the will of nature? So Kant introduces the idea of reason, that we need to have our own laws for ourselves in order to defend freedom from natural desires and external constraints, which is exactly what Confucius said about acting according to etiquette
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
-
-
a)Freedom,according to Kant,is the ability to act according to universal laws of reason. Confucius's concept of propriety(Li)is comparable to Kant's imperative duty in that both emphasize the importance of acting in accordance with certain moral principles.For Confucius,propriety is about maintaining social harmony and personal integrity through adherence to rituals and norms,which is similar to Kant's view that moral actions should be guided by universalizable principles that respect the freedom of others。b)Kant defines human's"rational capacity"as the ability to act according to reason and universal moral laws,which is central to his ethics。From this perspective,Confucianism's influence on Chinese humanity can be seen as a form of rationality that emphasizes moral and social virtues,similar to Kant's emphasis on rationality in moral action.However,Confucian rationality is often more focused on social harmony and the collective good,while Western rationality,as influenced by Kant,tends to prioritize individual autonomy and the universalizability of moral principles。
-
For Kant, freedom is the ability to act in accordance with self - given moral laws. Confucius's propriety (Li) is not a constraint on human nature but a way to guide and regulate behaviors so that people can live in harmony. It is similar to Kant's concept of the categorical imperative in that both emphasize a kind of self - restraint and self - regulation according to moral and ethical norms.
-
Concept of Freedom
Li refers to the social norms and moral rites that guide behavior for social harmony.
Kant's concept of freedom emphasizes autonomy and the ability to act according to universal moral laws,distinct from arbitrary desires.
Moral Implications: ConfucianLi:Li is the basis for moral conduct,prescribing appropriate actions to maintain social order.
for Kant,is acting out of respect for the moral law,which is a form of self-governance rather than acting on impulse.
-
Concept Connotations:
"Li" in Chinese traditional philosophy is a principle and order that pervades the cosmos and human society. It regulates the relationships among things and human behaviors, and is related to the inner propriety and moral cultivation.
Kant's "freedom" refers to the ability of a rational being to act in accordance with self-imposed moral laws. True freedom for Kant lies in following the categorical imperative.
Differences in Bases:
"Li" has a more holistic and cosmological foundation, emerging from the understanding of the unity of heaven, earth, and humans.
Kant's "freedom" is rooted in the rationality and autonomy of the individual subject.
-
a) Kant's Interpretation of Freedom
- For Kant, freedom is the ability to act according to self - given moral laws. Autonomy is a central aspect of his concept of freedom. Moral agents are free when they act out of a sense of duty that is derived from reason, not from external coercion or inclination. The categorical imperative is a key formulation in Kant's moral philosophy, which commands that we should act only according to that maxim by which we can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.
- Confucius's propriety (Li) emphasizes a set of norms and rituals that govern human behavior. At first glance, it may seem that propriety is a set of external constraints. However, in the Confucian context, propriety is also related to the cultivation of an individual's inner moral character. When a person truly understands and internalizes propriety, they act in a way that is in line with social and moral order not because of external coercion, but because they have cultivated a sense of moral self - awareness. In a way, the person who adheres to propriety with a sincere heart is also free in the sense that they are following an internalized moral compass. Just as Kant's moral agent acts according to self - given moral laws (derived from reason), the Confucian gentleman who practices propriety is following an internalized moral standard.
- Kant's categorical imperative and Confucius's propriety both emphasize a kind of moral obligation. Kant's categorical imperative is a universal moral law that requires us to consider the universality of our actions. Confucius's propriety also implies a kind of universal standard for behavior in a social context. For example, the rules of propriety in Confucianism such as respecting elders and being sincere in social interactions have a certain universality within the social and moral order it construct.
b) Kant's Definition of "Rational Capacity"
- Kant defines human's rational capacity as the ability to think and act according to principles and laws that are not determined by sensuous impulses. Reason allows human beings to step back from their immediate desires and consider what is morally right in a more objective and universal way.
- Confucianism has had a profound impact on Chinese humanity. It emphasizes moral cultivation through self - reflection, learning, and the practice of virtues such as benevolence (Ren), righteousness (Yi), propriety (Li), wisdom (Zhi), and faithfulness (Xin). Confucian rationality is more focused on practical wisdom and the moral order of human relations. It aims to cultivate individuals who can maintain social harmony through moral behavior.
- Similarities between Western rationality (in Kant's sense) and Confucian rationality lie in the fact that both recognize the importance of moral principles and the ability of human beings to govern their actions according to certain values. They both aim to guide human behavior towards a more ethical and just state.
- Differences exist as well. Western rationality in Kant's framework emphasizes a more abstract and universal law - based reasoning. The categorical imperative is formulated in a very logical and deontological way. Confucian rationality, on the other hand, is deeply embedded in the context of human relations and social hierarchy. It pays more attention to specific social roles and the corresponding moral responsibilities in different relationships such as between ruler and subject, father and son, husband and wife.
-
a) Kant views freedom as acting according to reason, not desires. Confucius's propriety is similar to Kant's duty in that both require internalizing moral principles to guide actions, emphasizing character development through adherence to these principles.
b) Kant defines rational capacity as the ability to act based on reason and principles. Confucianism's influence on Chinese humanity can be seen as developing this capacity through moral and social harmony. Western rationality focuses on individual autonomy and universal principles, while Confucian rationality is more about relational harmony and context-specific actions. Both stress the role of reason in ethics, but differ in their approach to individual vs. collective rational action.
-
a：
Kant's interpretation of freedom is grounded in the idea that individuals are free to act according to their own rational will, which is expressed through the categorical imperative. This imperative is a moral law that individuals give to themselves and is based on reason, not on external influences or desires. Kant's categorical imperative has several formulations, but the most relevant to this discussion is the idea that one should act only according to maxims that can be willed to become universal laws.
Propriety, in Confucian thought, refers to the traditional norms, rituals, and social roles that govern behavior and maintain social harmony. Confucius believed that individuals should act in accordance with these established norms to achieve personal virtue and societal order.
To comprehend Confucius's requisites on propriety through Kant's interpretation of freedom, we can see that both philosophers value the importance of acting according to certain principles or norms. However, while Kant's principles are derived from reason and are universal, Confucius's propriety is more culturally and historically specific, derived from traditional customs and the maintenance of social order.
b：Western rationality, as defined by Kant, focuses on individual autonomy and universal moral principles, while Confucian rationality emphasizes social harmony, moral virtues, and the fulfillment of social roles within a specific cultural context. Both traditions value reason and morality, but they approach these concepts from different angles and with different priorities.
-
1. Rational Capacity and Reason:
- Confucius: While Confucius's concept of "li" (propriety) is often seen as a set of social rituals and moral behaviors, it is also deeply rooted in the rational capacity of individuals to discern right from wrong. Confucius believed that through education and practice, individuals could cultivate their moral sensibilities and reason, which would guide them in acting appropriately within the social order.
- Kant: Kant's moral philosophy places a strong emphasis on rational capacity and reason. His categorical imperative is a rational principle that all individuals can use to determine moral actions. It is a product of reason, not sentiment or desire, and it requires individuals to act according to universal laws that they can will to be universal.2. Autonomy:
- Confucius: Confucius's teachings, while emphasizing the importance of social roles and hierarchies, also acknowledge the autonomy of individuals. By cultivating one's moral character through "li," an individual is able to make choices that are in harmony with the greater social good, thus exercising a form of moral autonomy.
- Kant: Autonomy is a central concept in Kant's ethics. His categorical imperative is a moral law that individuals give to themselves, based on reason. It is the ability to act according to a self-imposed moral law, rather than being coerced by external forces or inclinations. This aligns with the idea that individuals have the freedom and right to make autonomous choices.3. Ideals and Not Being a Tool:
- Confucius: Confucius's concept of "ren" (benevolence) suggests that individuals should strive to be more than mere tools or instruments; they should be moral agents who act with benevolence and propriety. This aligns with the idea that everyone has ideals and should not be reduced to mere instruments of others' will.
- Kant: Kant's second formulation of the categorical imperative states that one should never treat another person merely as a means to an end, but always as an end in themselves. This directly addresses the idea that individuals have intrinsic value and should not be used as tools. It underscores the importance of treating individuals as ends in themselves, which is a reflection of their autonomy and rational capacity.In summary, both Confucius and Kant value the rational capacity and autonomy of individuals. They believe that individuals should act not out of compulsion but out of a reasoned understanding of moral principles. While Confucius's "li" is more socially oriented, and Kant's categorical imperative is more abstract and universal, both philosophies recognize the importance of individuals acting with autonomy and in accordance with their rational capacity, rather than being mere tools or instruments.
-
Kant believes that freedom is the ability of an individual to act according to self-imposed moral laws under the guidance of reason, which is known as autonomy. This freedom not only manifests as the capacity to control instinctual desires but also involves making choices based on reason and morality, enabling individuals to act in accordance with universally applicable moral laws, thereby achieving true self-determination and moral value.
-
Li, often translated as "ritual," "propriety," or "etiquette," is a central concept in Confucian philosophy, which has deeply influenced Chinese culture and society for over two millennia. On the other hand, Immanuel Kant, an 18th-century German philosopher, is renowned for his moral philosophy, particularly his concept of freedom as central to his ethical system. A comparative discussion of Li and Kant's interpretation of "freedom" can reveal both similarities and differences in their philosophical approaches.
1. Social Order and Harmony
2. Institutionalized Morality
3. Internalization of Values
4. Relational Ethics Confucianism
Kant's Interpretation of "Freedom"
1. Moral Autonomy:For Kant, freedom is closely linked to moral autonomy. He argues that individuals are free when they act according to the moral law, which they give to themselves through reason.
2. The Categorical Imperative: Kant's moral philosophy is grounded in the Categorical Imperative, which is a universal moral law that one must follow regardless of desires or external circumstances. Freedom is the capacity to act in accordance with this imperative.
3. The Kingdom of Ends: Kant envisions a "kingdom of ends," where individuals act as both subjects and objects of moral law, respecting each other's freedom and rationality.
4.Innate Rationality:Kant believes that human beings possess innate rationality, which allows them to understand and adhere to moral principles. Freedom is thus the ability to act rationally and morally.
-
Kant's view of freedom: "Self-discipline is freedom". Many people take this sentence as their motto to inspire themselves, but it is not a simple slogan, and there is profound connotation behind it. Let's start with "self-discipline is freedom". Self-discipline is freedom. The opposite of "self-discipline" here is "heteronomy". In Kant's view, if we pursue happiness and avoid pain like other animals, this is not true freedom. The actions we do have no moral value, just people who are swayed by desires and preferences.
its to act freely
to act according to a law I give myself
-
Kant believed that freedom is an essentially unrestrictable right and an inherent attribute of humanity. Kant defined freedom as "autonomy," the capacity for free will. Autonomy is the foundation of human beings' ability to act, an internal force unaffected by external factors. According to Kant, human free will is not disturbed by any external factors and is an untouchable core that exists deep within individuals.
On the other hand, what Confucius referred to as "ritual" (li) is actually a necessary condition for individuals to realize their sociality and morality. By practicing "ritual," individuals can better integrate into society and fulfill their value as social members. At the same time, "ritual" also helps cultivate individuals' character and moral cultivation, making them more complete human beings. In this sense, "ritual" is not a restriction on freedom but a guidance and sublimation of freedom.
In summary, we cannot simply conclude that Confucius was inhumane because he emphasized "ritual." In fact, Confucius' emphasis on "ritual" was precisely to achieve human freedom, self-discipline, and self-improvement.
-
（1）For Kant, freedom is the ability to act in accordance with moral laws that one gives to oneself through reason. It's not about unrestrained license. True freedom lies in self - legislation of the will and acting according to the categorical imperative.Confucius' idea of propriety is not a constraint that goes against human nature. Both concepts emphasize the importance of self - discipline. Kant believes that individuals should use reason to guide behavior and abide by moral laws. Confucius also emphasizes self - cultivation through learning and practicing propriety.
（2）Kant defines human's "rational capacity" as the capacity of a rational being to act according to principles, that is, according to the conception of laws. Confucianism emphasizes personal moral cultivation, such as the practice of benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and faithfulness. This is similar to Kant's view that rational beings should act according to moral principles, guiding people to regulate their behavior and pursue moral perfection. Western rationality pays more attention to the exploration of objective nature and the construction of abstract theoretical systems, and uses rational methods to study natural laws and logical relationships. Confucian rationality focuses more on human social relations and moral cultivation, and takes people's moral behavior and social harmony as the main objects of concern.
Both emphasize the guiding role of reason in morality. They believe that through rational thinking, people can establish moral principles and norms to guide behavior and judge right and wrong.
-
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 -
a) Freedom, according to Kant, is the autonomy of the will to act in accordance with the moral law, which is the categorical imperative. In understanding Confucius's requisites on propriety, we can draw parallels with Kant's concept of duty. Confucius emphasizes the importance of social harmony and individual behavior aligned with social norms and virtues. Proper behavior, or propriety, in Confucianism is not merely outward compliance but an internalization of moral principles.
b) Kant defines human's "rational capacity" as the ability to reason and to act in accordance with the moral law, which is derived from the autonomous use of reason. From this perspective, Confucianism has had a profound influence on Chinese humanity by emphasizing morality, virtue, and social harmony based on rational principles.Western rationality, as exemplified by Kant, focuses on the autonomous use of reason to derive moral principles and to guide one's actions. It emphasizes the universality and objectivity of moral principles. In contrast, Confucian rationality is more socially and culturally embedded, emphasizing harmony, respect for authority, and the fulfillment of one's role within society.
-
Freedom, according to Immanuel Kant, is the ability to act according to laws that one gives to oneself, distinguishing between autonomy—acting according to self-imposed rational laws—and heteronomy—acting according to desires or impulses not chosen independently. For Kant, true freedom lies in aligning one's actions with the dictates of reason, thereby achieving moral autonomy.Confucius’s concept of li (rituals or propriety) similarly emphasizes the importance of ethical guidelines for social and personal behavior. Li is not just a set of rigid rules but a framework for cultivating virtues and maintaining social harmony. When viewed through the lens of Kantian autonomy, Confucius’s li can be understood as a form of self-imposed ethical guidance. Individuals who internalize li as part of their moral reasoning act autonomously, aligning their actions with rational and ethical standards
-
Although Kant and Confucius lived in different times and cultures, their thoughts both focused on the nature of human nature and human capabilities. From Kant's understanding of human ability, we can understand that Confucianism emphasized by Confucius is actually advocating a kind of social relations based on the nature of human nature and harmonious coexistence. This kind of social relationship is not only conducive to the growth and development of individuals, but also conducive to the stability and progress of society.
-
In Kant's view, freedom is closely related to the autonomy of the will and acting in accordance with self-imposed moral laws. It emphasizes the individual's rational self-governance within the moral realm.
When it comes to "Li" in Chinese philosophy, it represents a set of social norms and etiquettes that govern interpersonal relationships and social order. The similarity is that both can be regarded as guiding principles for human behavior. Kant's freedom guides individuals to make moral choices based on reason, while "Li" guides people to behave properly in society.
However, the difference is significant. Kant's freedom focuses on the individual's internal rational and moral autonomy, which is more about personal moral decision-making. In contrast, "Li" is more externally manifested as a social convention and cultural norm, emphasizing the harmony and order of the whole society. "Li" is passed down through cultural traditions and social education, while Kant's freedom is derived from the individual's rational thinking and moral self-awareness.
-
A discussion on Li with a comparative vie w of Kant's interpretation of "freedom" ca n be an enlightening exploration. Below is a detailed discussion on this topic:
Li in Traditional Chinese Thought:
In traditional Chinese philosophy, the conc ept of "Li"（礼） encompasses a wide range of ethical, social, and behavioral norms. Iti s often associated with the idea of order, harmony, and respect for tradition. "Li" ref lects the values and customs of society.Kant's Interpretation of "Freedom".
For Kant, freedom is fundamentally distinct from natural necessity. His will is not determined by external factors such as natural laws, hunger, preferences, or desires. Instead, it is self-determined, or autonomous.
In conclusion, the discussion on "Li" with a comparative view of Kant's interpretation of "freedom" reveals significant differences between traditional Chinese and Western philosophical perspectives on morality an d individuality. While "Li" focuses on social harmony and respect for customs, Kant's f reedom emphasizes individual autonomy and rationality.
-
a) Understanding Freedom through Kant and Confucius
Kant's Interpretation of Freedom:
Kant defines freedom primarily as autonomy—acting according to moral laws that one gives to oneself. For Kant, true freedom is not merely the absence of constraints but rather the ability to act according to reason and the moral law. This rational capacity allows individuals to recognize and adhere to duties that arise from their rational nature.Confucius’s Requisites on Propriety:
Confucius emphasizes the significance of "Li" as a means of structuring social interactions and maintaining harmony within society. While at first glance it might seem that these rituals restrict individual freedom, a deeper analysis reveals that "Li" provides a framework within which individuals can express their moral responsibilities and fulfill their potential as social beings.Comparison:
In both Kant and Confucius, freedom is linked to a moral framework. Kant’s moral imperative emphasizes acting out of duty and respect for universal moral laws, while Confucius advocates for social harmony through adherence to rituals. The "Li" can be seen as a set of ethical guidelines that enable individuals to navigate their social environment responsibly.Thus, both perspectives suggest that true freedom is not merely personal license but rather a state achieved through ethical behavior and adherence to a moral code. While Kant frames this in terms of rational autonomy, Confucius frames it through social propriety. The apparent conflict between emotional instinct and behavior governed by rituals can be reconciled by recognizing that both ideas promote a higher form of freedom---one that includes social responsibility and moral integrity.
b) Kant's Definition of Human Rational Capacity and Confucian Influence
Kant's Definition of Rational Capacity:
Kant views human rational capacity as the ability to think critically, to discern moral laws through reason, and to act upon those laws autonomously. This capacity allows individuals to rise above mere instincts and inclinations, enabling them to make moral choices based on universal principles.Confucian Influence on Chinese Humanity:
From the perspective of Kant’s rationality, Confucianism contributes significantly to the moral fabric of Chinese culture. The emphasis on "Li" fosters an ethical community where individuals recognize their roles and duties towards others. Confucian thought encourages the development of virtues such as filial piety, loyalty, and respect for authority, all of which underpin a harmoniousBoth Western rationality (as defined by Kant) and Confucian rationality prioritize ethical behavior and the social good. However, they diverge in their foundations:
Similarities:Both emphasize the importance of moral duty and the development of ethical citizens. Each system values reason and the pursuit of the good life, encouraging individuals to rise above common instincts.
Differences:Kant’s rationality is individualistic and universal; he seeks moral laws that apply across all cultures, while Confucianism is more particularistic, focused on specific social roles and relationships within a community. Moreover, Confucian rationality does not reject emotional dimensions, seeing them as integral to human experience, unlike Kant, who often views emotions as potential barriers to rational moral action.
In examining both Confucian and Kantian frameworks, we see that freedom, duty, and rationality intertwine in complex ways. Propriety in Confucian thought doesn't negate freedom but instead contextualizes it within social harmony, aligning with Kant's notion that true freedom is realized through moral decision-making. This comparative lens enriches our understanding of how different philosophical traditions approach fundamental human concerns regarding morality and human behavior. -
a) According to Kant, freedom means acting in accordance with rational laws, independent of the constraints of natural causality. Confucius' emphasis on "rites" isn't restrictive. Instead, it guides people to restrain instinctual desires through following social norms, similar to Kant's concept of achieving freedom via moral discipline. In comparison with Kant's "categorical imperative", both the "rites" and the "categorical imperative" possess normativity, morality, and internal binding. "Rites" define behaviors and cultivate virtues, while the "categorical imperative" demands strict adherence to moral laws.
b) Kant defines "rational ability" as the thinking that transcends experience and explores the essence of things through logical reasoning. Confucianism shapes Chinese humanity by emphasizing moral self-awareness and social responsibility, thus forming moral values and stabilizing society. Western rationality focuses on logic and scientific verification for objective understanding. Different from Confucian rationality in application, the former emphasizes science and technology, while the latter focuses on moral cultivation.
-
a) Freedom, in Kant's interpretation, is the ability to act according to universal moral laws, which he refers to as the Categorical Imperative. This aligns with Confucius's emphasis on propriety (Li) as a moral framework that guides behavior. Both Kant and Confucius see a form of freedom in adhering to moral duties; for Kant, it's in acting out of duty, and for Confucius, it's in following rituals that maintain social harmony.
b) Kant defines "rational capacity" as the ability to reason and make decisions based on logic and universal principles, independent of personal desires. Confucianism's influence on Chinese humanity can be seen as promoting rationality through moral and social conduct, though it is often more focused on practical wisdom and social harmony than on abstract reasoning. Western rationality, influenced by Kant, tends to emphasize individual autonomy and logical deduction, while Confucian rationality is more about social roles and the collective good, valuing harmony and moral rectitude over individualistic logic.
-
"Li" in Chinese culture usually refers to rules of conduct or morality, and Kant's concept of freedom is quite complex and profound. He believed that freedom is the opposite of natural necessity, and that we act freely when we act autonomously, according to laws we give ourselves, rather than being determined by external factors. It's like a deep exploration of the human will and moral autonomy.
For Kant, freedom is the opposite of natural necessity. He believed that we act freely when we act autonomously, according to laws we give ourselves, rather than being determined by external factors like nature, hunger, desires, or physical laws. This autonomous action, or acting according to a law we give ourselves, is what Kant called freedom.
He also distinguished between heteronomy and autonomy. Heteronomy is acting according to desires or promptings that we haven't chosen ourselves, which is the opposite of autonomy. Kant emphasized that true freedom comes from acting autonomously, choosing the end itself rather than just the means to an end.
Moreover, Kant believed that our capacity to act freely gives human life its special dignity. He thought that what makes an action morally worthy is not the consequences it produces, but the motive behind it. The only motive that conforms to moral principles is the duty motive, which means acting for the right reason, out of a sense of duty.
So, in summary, Kant's view on freedom is deeply tied to our ability to act autonomously, choose the end itself, and act out of a sense of duty, rather than being determined by external factors or acting purely for personal gain. -
A discussion on Li with a comparative view of Kant's interpretation of "freedom" would involve examining the concepts of Li (礼) from Confucian philosophy and Kant's understanding of freedom in his moral philosophy. Li in Confucianism refers to ritual propriety, proper conduct, and social norms that guide individuals in their interactions with others and in society. It emphasizes the importance of harmony, respect, and ethical behavior in relationships.
On the other hand, Kant's interpretation of freedom is rooted in his moral philosophy, particularly in his concept of autonomy. Kant argues that true freedom is the ability to act according to moral principles that are self-imposed, rather than being driven by external influences or desires. He emphasizes the importance of rationality and moral duty in determining one's actions.
In comparing Li with Kant's interpretation of freedom, one could explore how both concepts address the idea of ethical behavior and individual agency. Li focuses on social harmony and proper conduct within a community, while Kant's notion of freedom emphasizes individual autonomy and moral responsibility. By examining these two perspectives, one can gain a deeper understanding of how different philosophical traditions approach the concept of freedom and ethical behavior.
-
Kant's Definition of Freedom:Kant defined freedom not as the absence of constraint but as the capacity to act according to moral laws determined by reason. In Kantian ethics, true freedom is found in acting autonomously, which means following the dictates of the moral law-the categorical imperative-rather than being driven by desires or external pressures. Kant's Categorical Imperative: It requires that we act only according to maxims that we can will to be universal laws. This moral duty binds all rational beings, ensuring ethical action.
Confucius emphasized Li (rituals and propriety) as a means of cultivating virtue, maintaining social harmony, and fostering personal moral development. Li structures behavior through established norms, encouraging respect, humility, and reverence in social relations.
Thus, while Confucius’s Li might seem restrictive, like Kant’s moral law, it aims to cultivate a deeper sense of moral freedom through discipline. Confucius would argue that Li refines human instincts rather than suppresses them.While Bertrand Russell critiqued Confucius’s emphasis on Li as rigid and inhumane, comparing it to Kant’s view of freedom reveals a nuanced perspective. Both systems seek to cultivate moral character, but Confucius sees freedom within the fulfillment of social roles and rituals, while Kant emphasizes autonomy through universal reason. Thus, labeling Confucius as “inhumane” overlooks the depth of Confucian humanism, which prioritizes harmony and moral refinement through disciplined, yet compassionate, adherence to rituals.
-
a) Kant views freedom as the ability to act in accordance with moral laws that one gives to oneself out of reason, rather than being determined by external factors or mere inclinations. It is about autonomous action within the realm of moral duty. Confucius's idea of propriety (Li) is not about restricting freedom in a negative sense. Propriety provides a framework for harmonious social interaction. Similar to Kant's imperative duty, it guides people's behaviors in a way that is aimed at maintaining social order and moral uprightness. It's not a conflict with freedom but rather a way to enable people to live in harmony with others while still being able to express their true selves within the bounds of moral and social norms.
b） Kant believes that humans have the rational capacity to understand and apply moral laws through pure reason. Confucianism has influenced Chinese humanity by instilling a sense of moral and social responsibility. It emphasizes virtues like benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and trustworthiness. Both Western rationality (as represented by Kant) and Confucian rationality aim to guide human behavior towards moral and just ends. Western rationality often emphasizes individual autonomy and the application of universal moral laws in a more abstract and decontextualized way. Confucian rationality, on the other hand, is deeply rooted in the context of social relationships and the maintenance of social harmony.
-
a)While there are some surface - level similarities between Confucius's propriety and Kant's concept of duty in terms of guiding human behavior in a morally upright way, their underlying foundations, scopes, and emphases are different due to the distinct cultural and philosophical contexts from which they emerged.
b)Similarities and Differences between Western Rationality and Confucian Rationality
- Similarities
- Moral Guidance: Both emphasize the guiding role of rationality in morality. Kant believes that rationality enables people to understand and follow moral laws, while Confucianism also believes that people should use rationality to understand and practice moral principles, and guide behavior with morality.
- Pursuit of Harmony: Western rationality pursues the harmony between individuals and society, as well as the order of the world. Confucian rationality also emphasizes the harmony of social relations and advocates achieving social stability and harmony through personal cultivation and following moral norms.
- Differences
- Origin and Foundation: Western rationality has its roots in ancient Greek philosophy and has been continuously developed and deepened in the context of Western history and culture. It emphasizes the independence and absoluteness of reason itself. Confucian rationality is deeply rooted in the agricultural civilization of ancient China, based on family ethics and social relations, and emphasizes the combination of personal cultivation and social practice.
-
Confucian freedom pays more attention to the fulfillment of social norms and moral responsibilities, and obtains freedom through abiding by "rites". This freedom is obtained within the framework of social roles and moral responsibilities, and is a socialized, ethical freedom.
Kant's freedom refers to the self-restraint and self-legislation of individual rationality to the universal moral law, which is a kind of rational and moral self-determination. Kant's freedom emphasizes the moral autonomy of individuals, rather than dependence on external social structures. -
a) Freedom, in Kant's view, is the ability to act according to self-imposed moral laws rather than external compulsions. Confucius's emphasis on propriety (Li) can be seen as a form of freedom in that it encourages individuals to act in ways that align with moral and social expectations, which are internalized as part of one's character. This is comparable to Kant's idea of imperative duty, where moral actions are not just about following external rules but about acting out of a sense of duty that one recognizes as rational and universal.
b) Kant defines "rational capacity" as the ability to use reason to make moral judgments and act accordingly. Confucianism's influence on Chinese humanity can be seen as promoting rational behavior through the cultivation of virtues and adherence to social norms. Western rationality often emphasizes individual reason and universal principles, while Confucian rationality focuses more on social harmony and the role of the individual within a community. Both stress the importance of reason, but they apply it in different cultural and social contexts.
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