Sor-hoon Tan and I are pleased to let you know that SEP is committed to developing more integrated entries that include perspectives from nonwestern philosophies. In the first instance, we’re seeking to provide cross-links between entries so that the Chinese philosophy entries don’t stand alone as just that.
One example would look like this:
Consequentialism (Walter Sinnott-Armstrong)
The entry should provide a reference to early consequentialist views in classical Chinese philosophy. Mohism, a rival of Confucianism, “formulated China’s first explicit ethical and political theories and advanced the world’s earliest form of consequentialism, a remarkably sophisticated version based on a plurality of intrinsic goods taken as constitutive of human welfare” (SEP “Mohism”)
Sections 3 (What is Good? Hedonistic vs. Pluralistic Consequentialisms), 5 (Consequences of What? Rights, Relativity, and Rules), and 6 (Consequences for Whom? Limiting the Demands of Morality) would especially benefit from a link to the Mohism entry.
The SEP entry on Mohism includes a comparative discussion of their consequentalism and Bentham and Mill’s versions. The Bentham and Mill entries should at the very least cross-reference this section (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mohism/#ethics).
Please email your suggestions to me (K.Lai@unsw.edu.au). We will do our best to incorporate the cross-links, bearing in mind the need to preserve their overall accessibility and readability.
If you send me your comments by 30th June 2020, I’ll compile a first set for the editors. Moving forward, we’ll think about how we can implement this exercise at periodic intervals.
Many thanks – Karyn and Sor-hoon