confucianism   169

« earlier    

Public reason confucianism democratic perfectionism and constitutionalism east asia | Political theory | Cambridge University Press
"Recent proposals concerning Confucian meritocratic perfectionism have justified Confucian perfectionism in terms of political meritocracy. In contrast, 'Confucian democratic perfectionism' is a form of comprehensive Confucian perfectionism that can accommodate a plurality of values in civil society. It is also fully compatible with core values of democracy such as popular sovereignty, political equality, and the right to political participation. Sungmoon Kim presents 'public reason Confucianism' as the most attractive option for contemporary East Asian societies that are historically and culturally Confucian. Public reason Confucianism is a particular style of Confucian democratic perfectionism in which comprehensive Confucianism is connected with perfectionism via a distinctive form of public reason. It calls for an active role for the democratic state in promoting a Confucian conception of the good life, at the heart of which are such core Confucian values as filial piety and ritual propriety."
to:NB  political_philosophy  moral_philosophy  confucianism  democracy 
january 2019 by cshalizi
Korean textbook improvements
I'm not qualified to evaluate the textbooks in their total treatment of Korean history and culture, but there are a few areas in which I have personally conducted research where I think I can offer some suggestions for improvements.

First, in the area of understanding Confucianism, there is almost no mention of Korea's transformation into a classic ― maybe the best example on the planet ― patrilineal society, better known in Korea as bugye society ― or in simple terms a male-dominated society. What is meant by the sociologists jargon "a patrilineal society" is often called "the patriarchy" and it refers to control of society and family by males. This implies subjugation of women and denial of opportunities of equality for women.

The male-dominated society is often referred to as "Confucian society" and Confucianism gets the blame for supporting men and disadvantaging women in social action, such as property ownership and inheritance rights and even rights to perform rituals.
But there is another Confucianism.

The Confucianism of the last 300 years was a kind of "perfected" Confucianism ― the most fundamentalist and orthodox practice of Confucianism of any on earth ― compared to any other time or any other place. Certainly more orthodox than ever practiced in the homeland of Confucius ― China. It is this Confucianism that is generally thought of as Korean Confucianism. It is this Confucianism that gets the "bad rap"―the criticism today.

But there was another Confucianism in Korea ― that practiced from the earliest days when Confucianism came into Korea in the Three Kingdoms Period (about the fourth century) until the orthodox reform movement of the late 17th century.

For over a thousand years, actually thirteen hundred years, Korea practiced a form of Confucianism that was "compromised," "adapted," ― a Korean-style Confucianism. How was it different? Basically, the role of the oldest son; it was only after the late 7th century reform that Korea utilized the oldest son of the family as the primary official at ceremonies and as the primary heir in the household. But for over a millennium under Korean-style Confucianism, inheritances were equally distributed between all the sons and the daughters, and Confucian ceremonies were hosted in rotation between the children of the father and mother after their deaths.

Textbooks ought to cover this.

There were two forms of Confucianism practiced in Korea. The Korean-style, egalitarian Confucianism of the Three Kingdoms period, the Unified Silla period, the Goryeo period and the first three centuries of the five-century Joseon period ― 1,300 years. And then the orthodox, patrilineal, fundamentalist Confucianism of the last two centuries of the Joseon era and the transformative 20th century ― 300 years.

So, what was Korean Confucianism? It depends on the era you are looking at.

And what do the Korean textbooks say?

I am calling on the Korean textbook establishment to make clear that there was an orthodox Confucian transformation in the late 17th century. It is a knowable fact. It should be in the textbooks. But it is not.

In the orthodoxy movement Confucianism in Korea came in line with the teachings of Confucius in the ritual texts (the Chou Li [Jurye] and the Li Ji [Yeji]) which came out of Confucius' time and society, a society that was "patrilineal" ― with an emphasis on the oldest son.

In the transformation to orthodox Confucianism, daughters lost their inheritance rights and were omitted from the ceremonies. This impacted marriage practices ― there was no longer the option of marrying and living at the wife's home, but now, all marriages became patrilocal ― at the husband's home. This impacted the organization of the villages with the appearance of the "lineage village" where all the men are related to each other. And this all shows up in the style and content of genealogical books (jokbo) that were published.

These social changes are all documentable. These facts are all knowable.

But the textbooks ignore it. Confucianism, unjustly, is treated as a monolith over all time, and the fundamentalist reform that had such large impact on Korea remains obscure and students and society are kept in the dark.

It is time for the textbooks writers to wake up and include the story of Korean Confucianism in the textbooks.

Mark Peterson (markpeterson@byu.edu) is professor emeritus of Korean, Asian and Near Eastern languages at Brigham Young University in Utah.
Confucianism  Neo-Confucianism  Korean-history 
january 2019 by thegrandnarrative
陈浩武:为什么要让石门坎重新回归公众视野?
我们今天要让石门坎重新回归公众视野,并非突然发思古之幽情,而是因为中国当下普遍面临着一种深刻的精神危机,这种危机就表现在社会仅仅关注经济增长而罔顾对环境造成的破坏,甚至有断子绝孙之忧;再加上人际之间信任关系丧失,精神领域的荒废、理想的荒芜、信仰的崩溃、道德的沦丧这些方面,我相信所有的人都不会怀疑当今社会所存在的这些问题。

唐代“会昌法难”以后,佛教的精神气质在发生变化,它不再是原来印度的那个佛教。其中,以龙树为代表的大乘佛教哲学思想,逐步被佛教的净土宗和禅宗取代;佛教的净土宗和禅宗是非常世俗化的宗教,而具有哲学思辨意义的“三论宗”和“天台宗”基本消失。今天在中国大陆,已经找不到原教旨意义上的天台宗寺院。我几乎走遍了中国现存的大概几十座天台宗的寺庙,它们都成了禅宗寺院。

佛家由于没有经历过宗教改革,没有神学思想的觉悟,它对精英阶层慢慢地丧失了吸引力。另外,我们在全世界的范围内,也找不到一个佛家文化导致这个国家现代化的范本,说明佛教和现代文明是明显地缺乏亲和力的。

“五四运动”带来的一个最直接的结果,就是马克思主义在中国的传播。当时的思想领域有三大流派:以陈独秀、李大钊为代表的激进的革命派,以胡适、蔡元培为代表的所谓自由主义,和以章士钊、严复为代表的保守主义。前面两派在五四运动以后形成国共两党,他们在某一点上是完全一致的,就是主张激进革命,主张反传统,打倒孔家店;而保守主义的一派很快销声匿迹。在这种情况下,中国无论是儒、释、道,到了文革,统统都变得奄奄一息。
minguo  intelligentsia  religion  buddhism  confucianism  activist  today 
october 2018 by aries1988
当“无神论”的儒家遭遇“一神教”的基督教:中西文化之间的普世价值与多元主义

一神论的出现在宗教上导致过排他性,专断性。但是,一神论在人类认识发展史上导致了一种非常积极的成果,这就是对真理的无限向往和热烈追求。因为把所有的真理都归结为一个上帝,所以避免了认识上的混乱和相对。理性受信仰的支持而进步,而信仰也因理性的论证而稳定。
christianity  confucianism  ming  conflict  from instapaper
october 2018 by aries1988
专访余英时:中国现代学术“典范”的建立

在《余英时作品系列总序》中,余英时先生自陈:“我的专业是十九世纪以前的中国史,就已发表的专题论述而言,大致上起春秋、战国,下迄清代中期,所涉及的方面也很宽广:包括社会史、文化史、思想史、政治史、中外关系史汉代等。”但诚如其所言,他涉猎广泛的研究也不是无的放矢,“我自早年进入史学领域之后,便有一个构想,即在西方(主要是西欧)文化系统对照之下,怎样去认识中国文化传统的特色。”

微观相当于考证,即对于具体历史事实做最彻底的考察和阐释,但这样的工作往往只见个树木而不见森林。因此在历史研究中,宏观绝不可少。宏观相当于孟子所谓“观其大”,其涵义比宋学所谓“义理”要丰富得多,这是“见森林”的必经之路。但“见森林”又不能不看清楚林中一颗颗的树,否则便不免如傅斯年的名言所说,可能将天际浮云当作森林了。

有关我研究中国史的构想所在,简略概括:在西方现代文化及其发展出来的普世价值挑战之下,我们怎样才能认识中国传统文化的特色?我认为只有抓住了它的特色,我们才能够认识中、西文化的异同,并进一步追问,中国文化中有哪些成分和现代普世价值是互相冲突的?哪些是可以互相呼应的?

我研究中国史特别选择变革时代的独特动态。因为这种独特动态最能显示出精神价值的流变。

已故陈荣捷先生毕生在美国介绍中国哲学和思想。他曾说,如果用一个词字来概括全部中国哲学史的话,那个字便是“人文主义”。这句话在西方已被普遍地接受了。陈先生的人文主义当然是指中国文化对“人”的尊重,尤以儒家为最显著。孔子的“仁”便是“人道”,孟子强调人性善,又特别提醒“人之异于禽兽”,更是把人的尊严提升到最高的地位。所以“天地之性人为贵”成为中国人的共同信仰。稍稍认识西方近代文化史的人都知道,“人文主义”兴起于文艺复兴时期的意大利,当时人文主义者特别倡导人的尊严和人在宇宙中的独特地位。这种人文主义的精神稍后进入西方教育界,塑造了西方现代的独立人格,其影响一直延续到十九世纪。西方自由和民主的成长得力于人文主义教育,无人不知,就不用再说了。

中古时期,由于种种原因,希腊文学传统已在意大利地区消失无踪,既无人讲授,也无人研究。直到十三四世纪以后,意大利人文学者才逐渐从法国图书馆中发现希腊文稿,包括荷马史诗的原稿之类,终于酿成了“文艺复兴”运动。这是文化价值失而复得的一个最伟大的史证。中国经史子集的典籍俱在,何况,当年在传统精神价值中成长起来的先一辈人,早就在有意无意之间把他们的价值意识传到下一代身上。所以“守先待后”决不是一种幻想。

1949年以后的大错误,不在其为“进步史观”,而在其“定于一尊”。

西方的思想界是开放的,种种不同的史观都出现过,其中还有反“进步”的史观大行其道的,如斯宾格勒(Oswald Spengler 1880-1936)的《西方的没落》(The Decline of the West)和汤因比(Arnold J Toynbee 1889-1975)的《历史研究》(A Study of History)

今天很少人还相信有什么普遍规律为各民族或文化所共有;更不相信西方是先走上“现代”阶段,其他各民族落后了一步,但最后也会赶上来。换句话说,现在不存在什么“进步史观”足以构成“挑战”的对象了。
confucianism  chinese  tradition  culture  crisis  evolution  west  book  leader  intelligentsia  taiwan  dissident  instapaper_favs  from instapaper
october 2018 by aries1988
人情、面子与关系:中国式人际关系背后的权力与话语权争夺

儒家在构思礼的时候,是用它来连接天人之间的关系的。在“天理人情”的说法中,理是天的运作规则,这个规则是自然规则,人不能改变,不能反抗,因此是命定的,而原初的情又是个人化的,能改变的,是随意的。在连接这个不变与变的过程中,先王(圣人)承天之道制定了礼,就是以天的名义来规范人的七情六欲,也就是想让人情来顺从天意。

孝,它不是作为生物性的后代对生者养者的自然感情的随意流露,而是对一种义务和伦理化的情感的控制。如果一个人能对自己父母有这份感情,然后将此感情再弥漫到长辈乃至于君王身上,最后就可以达到尽心知天命的境界,而人人如此便可以达到天下之大治。
theory  society  chinese  communication  confucianism  explained  from instapaper
october 2018 by aries1988
Why isn't the Confucianization story known in Korea?
By Mark Peterson

I have spent several weeks writing about the transformation of Korea in the late 17th century. I have outlined seven major social practices that were completely turned upside down at the close of the 17th, and into the 18th century. And these are not insignificant social events: the disinheritance of daughters, dropping daughters from ceremonies, dropping daughter's posterity from genealogies, the all-consuming desire to have a son, and adoption of a son if one is not born, the location of the marriage at the husband's father's house, and the establishment of "clan villages" where everyone in the village is a member of the patrilineage, except for the women ― these were fundamental developments that changed Korea forever.

So fundamental were these changes that Korean society today looks back at the "traditional family system" ― meaning this Confucianized system ― and thinks that it has been this way "forever," or for at least as long as we can know. This is wrong. The Confucianized family system is relatively recent ― only 300 years or so. And it covered an indigenous Korean system that was much more harmonious, less exploitative of women, and in many ways similar to the modern family organization found in Korea today, and in most Western countries.

Yet women's organizations have looked to the West for inspiration and role models, ignoring the examples of the society of Shin Saimdang in earlier years in Korea.

I have argued in previous articles that Korea should look into its own roots to find answers to questions about how to treat women justly and fairly and equally, in today's society.

But today's article has another point. Why is this documented, easy-to-find transition so ignored in Korea today? Why is it not in the textbooks? Why don't people know about it?

I can only speculate. I don't think it is anything sinister. I don't think the Sungkyunkwan (the headquarters of Confucianism in Korea) or Confucians in general have conspired to hide the truth from the wider population. I don't know why the educational community has missed this. But they have.

I wrote a book on this Confucianization process in the mid-90s. It was published at a good American academic publishing house ― Cornell University ― "Korean Adoption and Inheritance: The Creation of a Classic Confucian Society." The book was based on my PhD dissertation at Harvard. And in the late '90s, in a desire to see this research disseminated in Korea, wanting my Korean colleagues, friends, students, everyone, to know about this, I worked with a wonderful young graduate student, Kim Hyejeong , who was then between her master's degree and a Ph.D. at Sogang, to get the book translated into Korean. In Korean it was called "The Emergence of Confucian Society" ― "유교사회의 창출."

My hope was that it would be read, and textbook authors and editors would read it and incorporate its findings into the textbooks.

It hasn't happened.

Why? I don't know the answer. I need to publish a piece in a Korean newspaper and see what people will say. But I have my suspicions. Again, I don't think it's anything sinister; there's no willful conspiracy afoot. I don't think it's laziness, although that could be part of the answer.

I think the answer is the high school exam ― the suneung siheom. I don't know how the science portions of the exam are written, but I suspect the history part ― and maybe literature and English and some other parts ― is written from the perspective of "truth never changes." More specifically, since history is history, and it's what happened long ago, it doesn't change. And if the exam is changed, reflecting a different interpretation of history, then there would be trouble. Because the exam is the standard. And we see what was written, after the fact, in previous exams, and if something new is added, it will shake up the whole system. How can a student prepare for the exam if he can't look at last year's example. And the textbooks are similarly locked-in. No changes in the exam.

I don't know. I'm asking you, dear readers, if you know.
Is the examination system so rigid, and so inflexible that new knowledge cannot be added. Such would seem imponderable. Yet, that is what I have seen.

The fact-based study of my own, and several other scholars, shows clearly that society changed in the late 17th century. It is then that we see the roots of the so-called bugye sytem ― the patrilineal social organization of traditional Korea.

It is, historically, a fairly recent phenomena. To know that makes a huge difference in how we see society and social change today. Yet, Korea has willfully ignored the evidence and most people assume that the traditional family system, the bugye system, has been around from a point in time that we cannot find? It's not true, but that's what most people think.

Mark Peterson (markpeterson@byu.edu) is professor emeritus of Korean, Asian and Near Eastern languages at Brigham Young University in Utah.
Korean-history  Confucianism  Neo-Confucianism  Korean-families  Korean-hierarchy  Korean-feminism 
october 2018 by thegrandnarrative
'Traditional' Korean family system began
By Mark Peterson

In my previous installment, I argued that the so-called traditional family system of Korea, that was marked by Confucian ideology and practices, and called the "bugye family system" (patrilineal system), is of fairly recent ancestry. Many people in Korea assume that the system is ancient, dating back to at least the founding of the Joseon Kingdom in 1392, if not before.

While it's true that some elements of Confucianization took place at the start of the Joseon Kingdom, there were elements of Confucianism adopted as early as the late Three Kingdoms period, and certainly by the Unified Silla period ― there were famous Confucian scholars, Seol Chong and Choe Chiwon, from the Silla period. But the ultimate practice of Confucianism, with all of its attendant ceremonies (ancestor ceremonies particularly) was not achieved until the late Joseon period.

When we look at the hallmarks of the fully articulated Confucian society, there are several items that we can isolate as having changed in the late Joseon period, specifically, in the late 17th century. I will list seven of them ― seven social changes that took place as part of the Neo-Confucian "revolution" of the late 17th century. These seven were interconnected and were all inspired or channeled by Confucian ways of dealing with the world.

1. Disinheritance of daughters. Prior to 1660 in some families, 1680 in others and 1700 in still others, daughters received an equal inheritance with sons. The eldest son did NOT get the largest share ― until after this time frame.

2. Son preference. After daughters were disinherited, the desire, often ultimate desire, to bear a son came into being. Prior to the late 17th century, if a couple had only daughters, that was fine ― they could be heirs. But after this point, one had to have a son as an heir.

3. Adoption of a son. Prior to this transition, sons were adopted only if there were no children, and sometimes childless couples would adopt a daughter as an heir. After the transition, as many as 15% of male children were adopted as heirs to the lines of brothers or cousins who had no children, or who may have had daughters, but no sons.

4. Daughters excluded from jesa (ancestor ceremonies). Prior to the transition, daughters hosted ceremonies on an equal footing with sons. Ceremonies were hosted in rotation with each child, son or daughter, taking a turn. After the transition, daughters were excluded and only the eldest son had responsibility for the ceremonies, with younger sons in attendance.

5. Changes in the jokbo (the printed genealogical books). Before the transition, daughter and daughters' lines of descent were recorded in as full detail as that of the sons. After the transition, daughters' entries were limited to a citation of who the daughter married, and their descendants were dropped from the record with the rare exception of mentioning a prominent son or grandson.

6. Changes in marriage practices. Prior to the late 17th century, marriages were on an equal footing, that is to say, men would sometimes take up residence in their wives' home village, and sometimes women would take up residence in the men's village. After the transition, "patrilocal marriage" becomes the rule ― that is, men stay home, and women marry in. The earlier practice is still preserved in linguistics ― women marrying will say "sijip ganda," and men will say "jangga ganda."

7. Changes in village settlements. Prior to the transition, there were villages of people having various surnames; but after the late 17th century, you start to see "single-surname villages" where everyone in the village has the same surname and are indeed related to one another. Such villages were the hallmark of the aristocratic "yangban" society.

When we talk about the male-dominated, Confucian society ― what in Korean is referred to as "bugye sahoe" _ the markers of that society are exactly these seven categories mentioned above. Most people, when they define this bugye society, do not list all seven of them, but they will list two or three or four, saying those things are what are meant by the traditional family system of Korea. They tend to note that it was "Confucian" in nature, generally, and are sometimes laudatory, but more often critical of such a tradition for its inequities and suppression of women.

My argument is that Korean society should realize that these things that happened, these "Confucianizations" were linked to each other, and that they all took place at the same point in the late 17th century.

Why is that important? If we can understand that "traditional" Korean society ―what usually refers to this "Confucianized" society ― is really only 300 years old, and that it is NOT the true Korean society ― rather it is an aberration imported from China. That the true Korean society was what preceded the late 17th changes ― a more-equal society with women holding property, participating in ceremonies, being recorded in genealogies, owning a house that the husband could move in to, and living in a village that was not dominated by her husband's kinsmen. This change in society is knowable, and yet it is not in the textbooks and is a secret known only by a handful of historians. Unfortunately.


Mark Peterson (markpeterson@byu.edu) is associate professor of Korean, Asian and Near Eastern languages at Brigham Young University in Utah.
Korean-history  Confucianism  Neo-Confucianism  Korean-patriarchy  Hoju-je  Korean-hierarchy 
august 2018 by thegrandnarrative
Shen Gua’s Empiricism — Ya Zuo | Harvard University Press
"Shen Gua (1031–1095) is a household name in China, known as a distinguished renaissance man and the author of Brush Talks from Dream Brook, an old text whose remarkable “scientific” discoveries make it appear curiously ahead of its time. In this first book-length study of Shen in English, Ya Zuo reveals the connection between Shen’s life as an active statesman and his ideas, specifically the empirical stance manifested through his wide-ranging inquiries. She places Shen on the broad horizon of premodern Chinese thought, and presents his empiricism within an extensive narrative of Chinese epistemology.
"Relying on Shen as a searchlight, Zuo focuses in on how an individual thinker summoned conditions and concepts from the vast Chinese intellectual tradition to build a singular way of knowing. Moreover, her study of Shen provides insights into the complex dynamics in play at the dawn of the age of Neo-Confucianism and compels readers to achieve a deeper appreciation of the diversity in Chinese thinking."
to:NB  books:noted  history_of_ideas  song_dynasty  china  empiricism  confucianism  philosophy  epistemology 
august 2018 by cshalizi
Twitter
RT : is at the center of many East Asian philosophies. in explored how Confucianis…
Hawaii  Confucianism  from twitter
august 2018 by LibrariesVal
赵鼎新:加州学派与工业资本主义的兴起
笔者强调的是经济行动者的特性,以及与军事和经济竞争相关联的机制的重要性;笔者同时强调以私利为导向的工具理性成为可被正面价值观是工业资本主义兴起中的一个关键。

反事实思维在历史分析中按说是破坏目的论思想的利器,但实际上,它更多地被用来制造另一种奇思幻想的目的论,在其中,某一因素被无限地从历史情境中抽离、拔高,成为历史进程的主要推动力。

儒家学者则更多地将儒家思想视为道德体系而非超验真理。当李贽表达他的非正统的观点时,它引起的是李贽和与他交好的耿定理的哥哥耿定向之间带有私人性质的争论。主流儒生更感兴趣的是掌握理学经义以通过科举考试,而不是这种辩论。明朝中央政府甚至没有插手其间。

中国的城市仍有不同于欧洲城市的几个关键方面。最明显的是,中国的城市从来没有拥有过自治的政治和法律地位,并且它们也没有像中世纪一些获得特许状的城镇或自由城镇那样拥有属于自己的军队。因此,研究中国城市的学者都承认政治和行政命令对中国城市的命运有着决定性的影响。

面对国家的政治主宰和理学思想的统治地位,明清商人非常热衷于让他们的孩子接受儒家教育,取得科举功名并致仕。他们与地方官员建立密切的关系,并且与仕宦家族联姻。他们为政府征收税款,并且介入乡镇治理活动。他参与地方慈善活动,仿效士人的生活方式,旨在获取尊重与信任,并使得商业活动能更顺利开展。然而,这些经济行动者无法构建诸如自由主义或“看不见的手”这样的非正统的价值观来为他们的经营性行为正名,而且他们必须严格隶从官府。这些都显示了中国经济行动者的弱势,更进一步表明在西方到来之前工业资本主义很难在中国自发地崛起。

由于商业发展和繁荣,中国的富庶地区有着较高的生活水准,然而,明清时候的中国,技术创新并没有鼓励性的回报,理论/形式理性极不发达;最重要的是,新儒家意识形态没有面临重大的挑战,而商人无法利用他们的财富来获取政治、军事和意识形态方面的权力从而抗衡国家的权力。与欧洲情况不同的是,晚期中华帝国维持灿烂的商业的原因不是新儒家世界的衰弱和资产阶级力量的崛起,而是帝国庞大的领土和人口所带来的巨大市场和王朝中期特有的长期政治稳定。当欧洲人在19 世纪持着现代武器抵达中国时,中国并没有走向工业革命而是走向王朝的衰落。中国并非自发地迈入现代化,而是被西方和日本帝国主义拖入到工业化和现代化的历史进程当中。
debate  china  qing  ming  capitalism  modernity  society  state  question  europe  confucianism  to:pdf 
july 2018 by aries1988
The influential Confucian philosopher you’ve never heard of | Aeon Essays
Confucian philosopher Mengzi provides an intriguing (and oddly modern) alternative to Aristotelian accounts of human virtue
ethics  philosophy  psychology  chinesephilosophy  confucianism 
april 2018 by morganwatch

« earlier