David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Asian Philosophy 15 (2):173 – 189 (2005)
The paper is an effort to better understand, through a comparison, how Confucius and Socrates initate their ethical inquiries that have laid down, respectively, the foundations of Chinese and Western ethics. Since both Confucius and Socrates claim to have a divine mission to undertake their investigations, the paper focuses on the issue about how religion and rational philosophy are related when ethics begins. It shows that both have serious religious belief, yet each has secular rational grounds for doing what he is doing. Finally, each philosopher has a different view about how human beings are related to the divine being, and the difference determines their different approaches to ethics.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Plato, John M. Cooper & D. S. Hutchinson (eds.) (1997). Plato: Complete Works. Hackett Publishing Co..
P. J. Ivanhoe (2000). Confucian Moral Self Cultivation. Monograph Collection (Matt - Pseudo).
E. Bruce Brooks & A. Taeko Brooks (1998). The Original Analects: Sayings of Confucius and His Successors. Columbia University Press.
Thomas C. Brickhouse & Nicholas D. Smith (1990). Socrates on Trial. Princeton University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Michael A. Peters (2015). Socrates and Confucius: The Cultural Foundations and Ethics of Learning. Educational Philosophy and Theory 47 (5):423-427.
Duck-Joo Kwak (2015). Commentary on Michael A. Peters’ Short Essay, ‘Socrates and Confucius: The Cultural Foundations and Ethics of Learning. Educational Philosophy and Theory 47 (8):755-757.
Qingping Liu (2013). Emotionales Versus Rationales: A Comparison Between Confucius’ and Socrates’ Ethics. Asian Philosophy 23 (1):86-99.
Similar books and articles
Tang Yijie & Yan Xin (2008). The Contemporary Significance of Confucianism. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 3 (4):477 - 501.
Tongdong Bai (2010). What to Do in an Unjust State?: On Confucius's and Socrates's Views on Political Duty. [REVIEW] Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 9 (4):375-390.
H. E. Baber (1987). How Bad Is Rape? Hypatia 2 (2):125 - 138.
H. M. Malm (1989). Commodification or Compensation: A Reply to Ketchum. Hypatia 4 (3):128 - 135.
P. X. Monaghan (2010). A Novel Interpretation of Plato's Theory of Forms. Metaphysica 11 (1):63-78.
Shuo Dongfang & Hongcheng Lin (2006). Separation of Politics and Morality: A Commentary on Analects of Confucius. [REVIEW] Frontiers of Philosophy in China 1 (3):401-417.
J. L. Schellenberg (2005). The Hiddenness Argument Revisited (II). Religious Studies 41 (3):287 - 303.
Peter J. Taylor (1994). Shifting Frames: From Divided to Distributed Psychologies of Scientific Agents. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:304 - 310.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads37 ( #89,182 of 1,726,249 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #289,836 of 1,726,249 )
How can I increase my downloads?