For Kant, true freedom is not the license to follow one's inclinations but autonomy: the capacity to act according to a moral law we give ourselves through pure reason. This rational capacity is our ability to legislate universal, objective principles independent of sensory desires. From this vantage point, Confucius's propriety (li) can be seen as a social and practical form of autonomy. The rituals and norms of li are not merely external constraints; they are the objectively rational framework—the "moral law"—that a cultivated individual internalizes and willingly follows, thereby achieving a harmonious and free will. Through this lens, Confucianism's profound influence on Chinese humanity was to shape a collective rationality where moral agency is developed by embedding the individual within a network of ritualized social roles, fostering a freedom found in perfect accord with the ethical order. The core similarity between Kantian and Confucian rationality is this pursuit of an objective moral standard beyond mere subjective desire. The crucial difference lies in their source: Kant's rationality is a universal, internal faculty of abstract reasoning, while Confucian rationality is concretely embodied in the specific, time-honored practices of li and the cultivation of human relationships (ren).
教学团队
课程特色
视频(28)
考试(25)
文档(3)
讨论(3)
最新学员
Confucius's Li and Kant's freedom
Some people believe Li or Confucian rationality is 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)? Bear this question in your mind and answer the following questions:
What indeed is freedom? Use Kant’s interpretation (4:50) of freedom as a way to comprehend your understanding of Confucius’s requisites on propriety.
How does 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?
to comprehend your understanding of Confucius’s requisites on propriety.
How does 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?
dom as a way to comprehend your understanding of Confucius’s requisites on propriety.
How does 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?
283 回复
-
-
1. Kant on Freedom
Kantian freedom is autonomy—acting according to self-legislated moral laws of reason, not desires. Confucian li (礼) similarly refines conduct through ethical norms, but emphasizes relational duties (e.g., filial piety) over abstract principles.
2. Rational Capacity
Kantian rationality means universalizing moral maxims (e.g., "Act only on principles you will for all"). Confucian rationality focuses on relational roles (e.g., ruler-subject, parent-child), not individual rights.
3. Western vs. Confucian Rationality
Similarity: Both prioritize reason over emotion as ethical foundation.
Difference: Western thought (e.g., Kant) stresses individual rights, while Confucianism emphasizes relational harmony (e.g., ren 仁).
Response to Russell: Confucian li does not suppress humanity but cultivates virtue through ritual, balancing emotion and reason. -
1. Kant's concept of freedom: The core is "rational self - discipline". It's not about doing whatever you want. Instead, you gotta use the innate and universal moral laws like the "categorical imperative" to restrain your will, actively avoid emotional impulses, and make rational choices. That is, "legislating for yourself" is true freedom.
2. Confucius' concept of "ritual" from Kant's perspective of freedom: "Ritual" doesn't suppress freedom. It's a rational norm centered around "benevolence", like the idea of "restraining oneself and returning to propriety". Just as Kant believes that "self - discipline is freedom", Confucius' "ritual" allows people to internalize moral norms into their nature by practicing appropriate behaviors, and finally achieve the state of "following one's heart's desire without transgressing the rules" — reason guides instinct rather than being in opposition to it.
3. Kant's "rational ability": It's the ability of humans to transcend sensual desires and establish moral laws for themselves with innate reason. It's the core that differentiates humans from animals, enabling people to follow universal and objective moral standards instead of being dominated by instincts.
4. The influence of Confucianism on Chinese human nature (from Kant's rational perspective): Taking "rites and righteousness" as the carrier, it integrates rational norms like filial piety, humility with the benevolent heart of emotion, and internalizes them into the underlying nature of "benevolence, righteousness, propriety, and wisdom", shaping a "reasonable and emotional" personality. Reason doesn't exclude emotion. Instead, through ethical practices like filial piety and fraternal duty, it makes human nature more in line with morality.
5. The similarities and differences between Western and Chinese rationality:
① Similarities: Both use reason to restrain instincts and pursue the morality and normativity of behavior.
② Differences: Western rationality, represented by Kant, emphasizes the purity of "innate legislation" and focuses on logic and universal laws. Confucian rationality emphasizes "context - based rites and righteousness" and focuses on the unity of ethical practice and benevolent emotion.
-
Similarities and differences between Chinese and Western rationality and Confucian rationality:
The same: Both think that rationality is very important
The difference is that the rationality of Confucianism focuses on the ethics of family and society. Kant's rationality is to make oneself understand "right and wrong", and it leans more towards philosophical speculation
-
For Kant, freedom is grounded in individual reason and is universal and a priori. In contrast, Confucius's li is based on social traditions and historical context, making it particular and empirical. From Kant's perspective, freedom, strictly speaking, can only be rational autonomy. External norms like li, if not adopted by one's own reason, may become "heteronomy" and thus not free. Confucius, however, sees li itself as a pathway to freedom, because through the practice of li, the individual can achieve harmony and freedom of the mind.
-
1. Freedom: Kant defines it as will autonomy (acting on moral laws, not inclinations). Confucian li aligns—rational self-mastery via benevolence, not indulgence.
2. Kant’s Rational Capacity: Humans’ unique ability to use practical reason to follow universal moral principles, transcending instincts.
3. Confucian Influence: Nurtures rationality through self-cultivation, refining humanity by linking individual virtue to social harmony.
4. Western vs. Confucian Rationality: Similar—rational instinct control, dignity/moral maturity focus. Different—Western: individual/abstract; Confucian: relational/communal/harmony-
-
-
Kant defines freedom (4:50) as acting by moral law, not desire—Confucian li echoes this, as it’s rational norms harmonizing will and social good, not oppression. Kant sees rational capacity as reasoning morally to transcend instincts; Confucianism nurtures this via li and ren, shaping Chinese humanity for harmony. Both rationalities prioritize reason over instinct, but Western focuses on individual autonomy, Confucian on communal relational harmony.
-
-
-
True freedom (positive freedom) is not the unrestrained satisfaction of desires (negative freedom), but the capacity of reason to act autonomously in accordance with the "Categorical Imperative"—a universal moral law self-legislated by rational beings, independent of empirical inclinations.harmony between rational will and moral norms, not the absence of constraints.- Theoretical Reason: The ability to cognize the natural world through categories (e.g., causality), enabling humans to understand objective laws.- Practical Reason: The higher, moral dimension of reason that legislates universal moral principles (the Categorical Imperative), distinguishing humans from animals and endowing them with intrinsic dignity. It is practical reason that makes autonomous moral action—and thus freedom—possible.From this perspective, Confucianism’s influence on Chinese humanity lies in its cultivation of "practical reason" centered on ren and li.
-
-
-
Confucius’s "propriety" (li) aligns with this logic: it is not rigid external constraint, but a rational framework for behavior refined by humanity’s collective wisdom. Practicing li is not suppressing emotion, but using reason to guide emotion (e.g., "mourning with propriety" instead of unbridled grief). This mirrors Kant’s freedom—acting on rational principles (not raw instinct) to achieve true autonomy, not lawlessness.
-
Kant defines freedom not as following instincts, but as obeying self-given moral laws through reason. From this view, Confucian propriety (li) is not inhumanity but a training of reason to achieve moral freedom, shaping Chinese humanity to find virtue in social harmony rather than individual impulse. While both value rational self-mastery, Western rationality often focuses on the individual and universal logic, whereas Confucian rationality is more relational and rooted in social duties
-
Kant sees freedom as self-rule by reason—acting from moral law, not desire. Confucius’s Li also guides action by reason, but through social harmony, not pure autonomy. Kant’s rationality is individual and universal; Confucian rationality is relational and moral. Both stress reason over impulse—Kant seeks inner moral law, Confucius seeks outer moral order.
-
1. What is freedom?
Kant defines freedom as "acting by reason (moral law), not instinct." Confucius’ Li (propriety) isn’t restriction—it’s a rational framework rooted in ren (benevolence). Following Li is rational self-discipline, a form of freedom.
2. Kant’s "rational capacity" & Confucius’ impact on Chinese humanity
Kant’s rational capacity is humans’ ability to reason, recognize moral law, and act on it. Confucius’ Li cultivates rational, benevolent conduct—shaping a culture where humanity is practiced through ritualized reason.
3. Western vs. Confucian rationality
- Similarity: Both use reason to guide conduct and prioritize moral order.
- Difference: Western (Kant) emphasizes individual autonomous reason; Confucian rationality is relation/context-based ( Li adapts to roles). -
-
Definition of Freedom (with Kant):Kant defines "freedom" as the domination of one’s desires by reason—humans formulate moral laws through reason and abide by them voluntarily, rather than being controlled by instincts or external forces. This is "freedom as autonomy."
Confucian "Li" is not the suppression of human nature, but the realization of social and personal harmony through rational norms (ethical order). In essence, it is "appropriate behavior guided by reason," which aligns with Kant’s idea that "autonomy equals freedom."
-
-
-
Kant defines human reason as an innate cognitive faculty that transcends experience and pursues universal and necessary knowledge.It does not rely on the specific experiences we see or hear, yet it helps us understand the laws of the world and also guides us to do what is right.It has enabled the Chinese people to develop a strong "moral awareness" in interpersonal relationships .
-
Kant defines freedom not as "indulging instincts" but as "reason legislating for itself": true freedom lies in using reason to control instincts and follow moral laws (rather than being driven by desires)—this is "autonomy as freedom."
Confucius’s Li (propriety), though seemingly a "framework for regulating behavior," is essentially a rational order centered on Ren (benevolence). Li does not suppress emotions; instead, it guides emotions through reason (ethical conduct). For example, Xiao (filial piety) uses Li to standardize emotional expressions toward parents, rather than eliminating them. This aligns with Kant’s "autonomous freedom": following Li means "regulating instincts with moral reason (Ren) to achieve ethical self-management"—it is not the denial of freedom, but the realization of reason-led freedom.
-
1.Kant's view of freedom: Freedom is not "doing as one pleases", but rather autonomous action that legislates for oneself with reason (following the "categorical imperative") and is not dominated by instinctual desires.
2. Understanding Confucius' "Li" through Kant's concept of freedom: "Li" is not a suppression of freedom, but rather a rational and humane norm (such as with "Ren" at its core); voluntarily following "Li" is an embodiment of rational autonomy (similar to Kant's "self-legislation").
3. Kant's "rational capacity": It encompasses "theoretical reason" (cognition of the world) and "practical reason" (formulation of moral laws for oneself), which is the core that distinguishes humans from animals and enables autonomy.
4. The influence of Confucianism on Chinese human nature: "Li" + "Ren" is the combination of rationality and human nature, not "inhumane"; it has cultivated a social human nature that values ethics and empathy through rational norms.
-
1. Freedom & Confucius's Li
For Kant, true freedom is autonomy: acting according to self-given rational law, not desire. Confucius's “Li ”(propriety), when guided by “Ren” (humaneness), is not external oppression but a rational framework for self-cultivation. It becomes a social form of Kantian autonomy, where one freely chooses to follow ethical norms.
2. Rational Capacity & Confucian Influence
Kant defines rational capacity as the ability to use reason to derive universal moral laws.
From this view, Confucianism cultivated China's practical rationality—using reason to achieve social harmony and moral self-discipline. It strengthened ethical community but sometimes at the cost of individual critical autonomy.
-
What is freedom? Using Kant’s interpretation to comprehend Confucius’s Li.For Kant, freedom is not the absence of rules or the license to do whatever one wants based on fleeting desires. That, he would call "lawlessness" or being a slave to one's own inclinations. True freedom, according to Kant, is the freedom to be governed by one's own reason.
-
-
Kant defines human’s rational capacity as the ability to transcend sensual experience and establish universal laws for oneself and the world. It includes theoretical reason, which is the innate logic for cognizing the world, and practical reason, which is the innate moral law guiding moral actions.
-
-
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：
--
