Journal of Chinese Philosophy
Volume 39, Issue 4 Pages 469 – 624, December 2012 <http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jocp.2012.39.issue-4/issuetoc>
Journal of Chinese Philosophy
Volume 39, Issue 4 Pages 469 – 624, December 2012 <http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jocp.2012.39.issue-4/issuetoc>
Friends, all existing email subscriptions to the blog prior to our move to a new server, have been transferred. If you thought you were email subscribed before and did not receive a message about this post, you may wish to resubscribe using the link at the right. Or, skip email subscription altogether and friend us at our Facebook page to receive updates that way. Cheers, everyone.
Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews has just published a review by John Berthrong (Boston University) of a book by Zhihe Wang (Executive Director, The Institute for Postmodern Development of China) called Process and Pluralism: Chinese Thought on the Harmony of Diversity. The table of contents of the book is accessible via Google Books.
Sungmoon Kim (City University of Hong Kong)’s thought-provoking review of Fred Dallmayr and Zhao Tingyang (eds.), Contemporary Chinese Political Thought: Debates and Perspectives, has just been published at NDPR. Kim focuses primarily on the book’s chapters on contemporary Confucianism by Chen Ming, He Baogang, and Ni Peimin, plus paying some significant attention to Jiwei Ci’s chapter, “The Dialectic of the Chinese Revolution Revisited.” By focusing his attention in this way, Kim is able to make some novel and stimulating points: this is no mere summary of the book. Comments welcome!
The Confucian Traditions Group of the AAR invites proposals concerning any aspect of Confucianism from any geographical area. Topics of particular interest this coming year are:
Proposals for a panel with a well-conceived theme and structure stand the strongest chance of acceptance, whereas proposals for an individual paper do not.
Some readers might be interested in a symposium cosponsored by the Center for the Study of World Religions, Harvard Divinity School, and the Center for Humanities, Science and Religion, Ryukoku University:
Close Voices from Far Away: Japanese Buddhism and Continental Philosophy
Friday, November 30, 2012
4:00-6:00
Harvard University
Center for the Study of World Religions
42 Francis Avenue
Cambridge, MA
A fascinating experiment this next week: live like a stoic. Having taught a course, “Philosophy as a Way of Life,” that included a five-day practical exercise at the end (living for those five days as inspired by Seneca was one option; the Analects and Zhuangzi were other options), I am intrigued! (Here is a link to some discussion on our blog here prior to my teaching that class. I keep meaning to post some follow-up thoughts, but haven’t yet gotten around to it….) There is a lot of interesting material available at the website linked above, including specific exercises!
Call for papers: Animals in Asian history, society, thought
Workshop, January 24-26, 2013
Manchester, Centre for Chinese Studies, BICC
Deadline for Submission: December 15, 2012, send to:
dagmar.schaefer@manchester.ac.uk
When Confucius criticizes Zhu Xi and more stories…
I have had the chance to come across fascinating interpretations of the Great Learning in a book titled Daxue zhengshi 大學證釋 (Evidential Interpretation of the Great Learning). To be more accurate, the striking part of the story lies less in the philosophical originality of the interpretations than in the identity of the commentators.
In this volume, the original Daxue text is commented upon by a series of sages (liesheng qishu 列聖齊述) including Confucius, Yan Hui, Zengzi and Mencius… Zhu Xi was also a contributor to this volume and wrote a nice self-criticism piece about his problematic Song-dynasty interpretations of the text. He finally admitted that he got it completely wrong with his former discussions on the “extension of knowledge lying in the investigation of things” (zhizhi zai gewu 致知在格物), etc… Among the other contributions, the one of Confucius was interesting but I doubt that Zhu Xi enjoyed it much because it happens that he was wrong again ! Kongzi’s line of argument was the following: basing himself on Zhu Xi’s edited introductory sentence of the Daxue (大學之道,在明明德 , 在親民,在止於至善) he criticized Zhu’s replacement of the original 在親親 , 在新民 by 在親民 (understood as: 在新民). He posited that these changes did not reflect “the entirety of Confucian doctrine” (fei rujiao jiaoyi zhi quan yi 非儒教教義之全矣) and highlighted the fact that ideas such as “ruling the country primarily requires to regulate the family” (zhi guo bi xian qi jia 治國必先齊家) or “the foundations of the country lie in the family” (guo zhi ben zai jia 國之本在家) all originated from the “affection to the kindred” (親親), that is, from characters cut off by Zhu Xi….
I will skip my comments on these comments and concentrate on some background information that might be more interesting. Continue reading →