“Swimming Happily in Chinese Logic” By Michael Beaney
MONDAY, 21 JUNE 2021 17.30 – 19.15
More information here: https://www.aristoteliansociety.org.uk/the-proceedings/the-2020-21-programme/michael-beaney/ (including the Zoom link)
(Brought to my attention by an ex-student)
Huang Yong writes to share this news:
Dao Companion to Chinese Philosophy of Logic (volume 12 in the series of Dao Companions to Chinese Philosophy), edited by Yiuming Fung, has just been published by Springer. Below is an overview of the book. Here is a link to the Dao Companions series.
Continue reading →
The Organisers of the 2nd World Congress on Logic and Religion, to be held at the University of Warsaw (Poland), 18-22 June, 2017, have the pleasure of inviting you to the Congress: http://logicandreligion.uw.edu.pl/
The Congress will have a separate section on Logic in the religions of East Asia. As with the other sections of the Congress (such as Logic in the religions of South Asia, Logic in Arabic philosophy and the Islamicate world, etc.), we are seeking papers that concern the relation between logic and East Asian philosophies/religions in all possible aspects. We would welcome both established and early-career researchers working in the field to participate. In keeping with our practice in the other sections of the Congress, we welcome papers that concern the relation between the logic and religions of East Asia and South East Asia, taken in the broadest sense of those terms.
The registration form can be found at: http://logicandreligion.uw.edu.pl/registration/
FALL 2016 Logic and Metaphysics Workshop
Date: Monday December 12, 4.15-6.15
Place: Room 5382, CUNY Graduate Center.
Speaker: Irena Cronin, UCLA
Title: The Notion of Accepted Contradiction in Early Chinese Daoism
Abstract: Although the representation of the Dao differs a little between the representative Early Chinese Daoist works Zhuangzi and Dao de jing, the differences are one of degree, rather than “substance”. In Zhuangzi, the common man as possible master craftsman, whether it be as a cook, woodmaker, or fisherman, or other kind of craftsman, has the capability of understanding and embracing the Dao (although these occurrences would be relatively rare), while in Dao de jing, it is only the Sage, a rare man of extreme ability that can do so; all others do not have this capability and have minor, shadowy and totally indeterminable experiences of the Dao, and are “condemned” to live an ignorant and almost animal-like existence, finding solace in creature comforts.
Continue reading →
Many folks interested in the history of logic in China probably already know about this website, but I just discovered it and thought I’d share. Also of interest is the book History of Logic in China: 5 Questions, which poses the following 5 questions to a lengthy series of specialists and presents their answers:
- Why did you begin working on history of Chinese logic in China?
- What is the best way to define your area in terms of historical period, textual sources, methodology or other factors?
- What is your favorite example of logical acumen by an early Chinese thinker?
- In your opinion what is the most difficult or problematic aspect of studying logical thinking by Chinese in the past?
- Which other areas of study could benefit from a better understanding of Chinese logic, or vice versa? (For example, other aspects of the history of Chinese thought, the relationship between early and later study of logic in China, or the relationship with other branches of philosophy such as the philosophy of science, ethics, etc.)
Apparently there is a current meme in China alledging that Chinese people are too often illogical (and, instead, swayed by rhetoric, emotions, and politics) and that the cause of this may be the lack of concern for logical reasoning in China’s philsoophical traditions. Recently a journalist from the magazine Window on the Southern Wind 南风窗 interviewed well-known CASS philosopher Zhao Tingyang concerning these ideas. The conversation is pretty interesting: Zhao suggests that too much attention to “dialectic” and too little training in logic–and, more generally, in critical reasoning–is the main culprit. He grants that early Chinese classics mainly were concerned with “thought 思想” rather than “theory 理论,” and adds that in this context:
…to have some inconsistencies between a few concepts would not be odd; and we should also consider, life itself is full of contraditions, therefore “thought” that seeks to express life and thus has some self-contradictions is actually in this way reflecting life. This is not to be illogical.
In light of all this, Joachim Kurz’s recent Discovery of Chinese Logic takes on added significance. (My review of Kurz’s excellent book can be found here.)