- Confucian freedom: assessing the debate By Robert A. Carleo III
- Did Confucius advise Zai Wo to do what he believed to be morally wrong? Interpreting Analects 17.21 By Mathew A. Foust
- An Abhidharmic theory of welfare By Javier Hidalgo
- Differences and similarities between the later-Wittgenstein’s philosophy of religion and the Islamic mystical tradition By Vahid Taebnia
We welcome papers on pre-Song China from a variety of disciplinary perspectives, including anthropology, archaeology, art history, history, literature, philosophy, and religion. Please send short abstracts of individual papers (250 words) to Stephan N. Kory (firstname.lastname@example.org) by August 1, 2021. For all abstract submissions, please mark the subject line as “SEECR Submission 2021.”For more information about SEECR, please visit the SEECR website:
January 20-21, 2022 (online)
Chinese philosophy is often considered as a pragmatic, intrinsically “political” discourse, more oriented towards the stabilization of a community (be it social, cultural or institutional) and the establishment of an organic, well-functioning state apparatus than to the understanding of the metaphysical realm of thought.
This is a largely biased and simplistic reduction of its thematic richness and its high level of theoretical sophistication, yet the formative centuries of Chinese thought – amidst the turmoil of the Warring States – undeniably urged the main intellectual actors of the time to a reflection on how to rebuild the lost “political order”.
And yet, even as China is becoming a global power, Chinese political thought is rarely allowed to participate in discussions beyond the disciplinary “wall” of Sinology and Asian Studies and their categories of thought. In other words, if Plato, Machiavelli or Rousseau are unanimously considered to speak the universal language of “political philosophy”, the reflections on power, authority and legitimacy offered by Laozi, Han Fei or Mencius tend to remained confined to a specialized (sometimes still considered and treated as “exotic”) Chinese context.
This workshop, jointly organized by the University of Naples “L’Orientale”- Centre for East Asian Studies, Tallinn University and EURICS-European Institute for Chinese Studies, intends to fill this gap and foster an interdisciplinary dialogue among disciplines by inviting sinologists, political philosophers, and intellectual historians to discuss Chinese political thought (of any period), favoring a focus on its comparative and/or global potential. Contributions focusing on more than one country, area, or period are also encouraged.
Jana S. Rošker’s Interpreting Chinese Philosophy: A New Methodology has been published by Bloomsbury.
Understanding Chinese philosophy requires knowledge of the referential framework prevailing in Chinese intellectual traditions. But Chinese philosophical texts are frequently approached through the lens of Western paradigms. Analysing the most common misconceptions surrounding Western Sinology, Jana Rošker alerts us to unseen dangers and introduces us to a new more effective way of reading Chinese philosophy.
Winner: Shu-shan Lee, “ ‘What Did the Emperor Ever Say’—The Public Transcript of Confucian Political Obligation,” Dao 19. 2: 231-250
What is the Confucian conception of political obligation? While there is a widespread view
that it demands people’s absolute obedience to their rulers, there are also scholars arguing
that it includes people’s duty to correct rulers. In this award-winning essay, Shu-shan Lee
shows that the former lacks textual support, while the latter confuses Confucian scholar-
officials’ political duty with commoners’ political obligations. Instead, Lee argues,
convincingly, that imperial Confucian political obligation is a conditional theory of
paternalistic gratitude: common people’s obedience to their rulers is an expression of, and
thus is conditional upon, their rulers’ benevolent care for them. This ground-breaking
conception of Confucian political obligation results from Lee’s careful study, integrating
multi-faceted perspectives, philosophical and historical, theoretical and empirical, and
ancient and contemporary. It is the type of research that Dao aims to promote.
Wai-ming Ng, ed., The Making of the Global Yijing in the Modern World (Springer, 2021)
This book represents an ambitious effort to bring leading Yijing scholars together to examine the globalisation and localisation of the ‘Book of Changes’ from cross-cultural and comparative perspectives. It focuses on how the Yijing has been used to support ideologies, converted into knowledge, and assimilated into global cultures in the modern period, transported from the Sinosphere to British, American and French cultural traditions, travelling from East Asia to Europe and the United States. The book provides conceptualised narratives and cross-cultural analyses of the global popularisation and local assimilation of the Yijing, highlighting the transformation and application of the Yijing in different cultural traditions, and demonstrating how it acquired different meanings and took on different roles in the context of a global setting. In presenting a novel contribution to understandings of the multifaceted nature of the Yijing, this book is essential reading for scholars and students interested in the ‘Classic of Changes’. It is also a useful reference for those studying Chinese culture, Asian philosophy, East Asian studies, and translation studies.
Click here to see full Table of Contents.
We are pleased to announce the U.S.-China Research Group on Cosmopolitanism, convened by
Philip J. Ivanhoe of Georgetown University in collaboration with Peng Guoxiang of Zhejiang
University, sponsored by the U.S.-China Dialogue on Global Issues at Georgetown University.
The Research Group on Cosmopolitanism brings together nine scholars from the United States
and the Chinese cultural sphere. Over the coming three years, it aims to develop and pursue a
structured dialogue around theoretical and practical problems related to cosmopolitanism with
the goal of identifying issues of shared concern.
For more details about the group, please see the preliminary web page:
The Sinological Development Charitable Foundation (SDCF) is inviting to join our 2021 Summer Program that will take place from 16th July to 14th August 2021.
This year’s schedule can be consulted here: http://sinological.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/2021-Program-only.pdf
Application form and other information: http://sinological.org/?page_id=113
Reason and Moral Motivation in Mòzǐ By Myeong-seok Kim
How to Defend a Small State?—Han Fei Zi, Plato, and Mencius By Tongdong Bai
The Need for More than Role Relations By I. M. Sullivan
Global Justice without Self-centrism: Tianxia in Dialogue on Mount Uisan By Jun-Hyeok Kwak
(*A note from APA regarding Meeting 2022:Note: The next Eastern Division meeting will be held in person in early January 2022. . .Because of complications resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, we do not yet have a confirmed location or dates for the meeting. We hope to have such information soon, . . .)