This post expands a question I asked once in the old Discussions section.
It is sometimes said that the (or a) Ruist picture of moral psychology stresses family because Ruists stress the development of moral sensibilities starting with people’s earliest relationships, which are their childhood relationships at home. So … what about household servants?
Invitation for proposal (abstract) submission for the conference on “The Future of Whole Person Education in East Asian Higher Education: Its Philosophy and Endeavour from Within and Abroad,” 2019
With the support of generous donation from Tin Ka Ping Foundation, the Department of Religion and Philosophy and the Centre for Sino-Christian Studies at Hong Kong Baptist University are going to organize a conference on the theme “The Future of Whole Person Education in East Asian Higher Education: Its Philosophy and Endeavour from Within and Abroad”, to be held at Hong Kong Baptist University on Friday and Saturday, September 27-28, 2019. The conference is organized to pay tribute to the late Dr. Tin Ka Ping, a renowned education benefactor in the Greater China Region. The Foundation has provided funds to more than 90 tertiary institutions, 166 secondary schools, more than 40 primary schools and kindergartens, and over 1,650 suburban libraries across 34 provinces, municipalities and autonomous regions in the mainland China. In Hong Kong, more than 20 primary and secondary schools, kindergartens and elderly and youth care centers are named after Dr. Tin. We anticipate that the conference will share the vision of the importance of moral education and develop a culture of service and virtue cultivation in Chinese and East Asian Societies.
The Journal of School & Society is the John Dewey Society’s journal of intelligent practice. The Journal is pleased to announce its next issue: Comparative Approaches to Moral Education: Somatic and Democratic Practices in an Intercultural Philosophical Horizon. This issue will be co-edited by Kyle Greenwalt and Joseph Harroff at Temple University.
This issue is part of the John Dewey Society’s commemoration of the 100-year anniversary of Dewey’s trip to China. Read the call to learn more; it’s available on the website (schoolandsociety.org) or directly at:
Confucius’ remark at Analects 1.6 is often cited to show that he thought proper moral development begins with filial piety and then extends that attitude to ever-larger groups of people (ever less intensely). I shall argue that the remark does not display such a view. Confucius did not in general envision moral progress as extension.
Here are some reasons to think that Youzi did not regard family as the root of humanity or of the Way. (I used to think he did.)
Most of my argument focuses on defending a view held by Soothill, Leys, Chin, and maybe Lau and Slingerland: that by 弟 in Analects 1.2, Youzi meant elder-respect, a virtue commonly associated specifically with life outside the family. It would follow that according to 1.2, only one of the two parts of the root of humanity is specifically a family virtue. If 孝 and 弟 have something relevantly in common for Youzi, family isn’t it.
SUNY Press has just published Xu Di and Hunter McEwan’s (eds.) Chinese Philosophy on Teaching and Learning: Xueji in the Twenty-first Century. This is a translation of the “Xueji 學記” and several essays on its contemporary significance. More information is available at Amazon here.