近世大阪にあって公儀と不即不離の関係を保ち、独自の学風を築いた懐徳堂朱子学派の学問・思想の伝統と特質を、豊富な史料に基づいて考察した本格的な研究書。.

In 19th century Germany, the number of publications in the history of philosophy increased dramatically. According to Ulrich Schneider’s calculations, from 1810 through 1899, 148 original textbooks by 114 authors were published in German. The aim of this article is to analyse how the documented in these publications canonic vision of 19th century German philosophy evolved. An analysis of 66 treatises published from 1802 through 1918 allows dividing 19th century philosophers into groups based on the frequency of their names across (...) the tables of contents, describing the changes in the leading group composition and in the share of attention received by a given philosopher over time. The paper presents thus a formal analysis of how historical reputations of philosophers were made, how they stabilised, or faded. The authors claim that the current understanding of the history of 19th century philosophy differs significantly from the one recorded in the German textbooks of the era. (shrink)

During the nineteenth century, German philosophy developed from a type of general knowledge to an academic discipline at the university. Changes across disciplines to the philosophy of science and psychological surveys created new challenges for the place and purpose of philosophy in the educational system. The content of logic courses for secondary schools (Gymnasiums) was centred on the dissociation of nature and the scale of logic. In this paper, I will examine a number of projects for teaching philosophy at the (...) secondary school level from new humanism to reduce philosophical to philological concerns about different projects offered by Niethammer, Hegel and Herbart. Then, I will focus on the most successful – Adolf Trendelenburg’s Elements of Aristotle’s Logic (1st edition of 1836). This work is a compilation of the logical texts of Aristotle, and for as long as sixty years, it was an official textbook in Prussian secondary schools. The aim of the paper is to show how the rethinking of Aristotle’s heritage affected the theoretical and ideological expectations of propaedeutic courses and transformed the image of logic as a philosophical discipline. (shrink)

The theme of this issue of Ethical Perspectives is the French tradition in liberal thought, and the unique contribution that this tradition can make to debates in contemporary liberalism. It is inspired by a colloquium held at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in December of 2008 entitled “In Search of a Lost Liberalism: Constant, Tocqueville, and the singularity of French Liberalism.” This colloquium was held in conjunction with the retirement of Leuven professor and former Dean of the Institute of Philosophy, André (...) Van de Putte, who found much inspiration in this tradition. A revised version of his valedictory lecture from the conference serves as the final contribution to this issue. Much contemporary liberal political philosophy is currently done in conversation with a line of liberal thinkers starting with John Locke, running through Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill, and culminating in the work of John Rawls and his followers. The reasons for the enormous appeal of this philosophical tradition are, among other things, the combination of the central role of the intuitively appealing value of individual liberty with a strong rationalistic, universalistic, and normative character. The thread running through most of these liberal theories is a commitment to what the French liberal Benjamin Constant referred to as “the liberty of the moderns,” that is, liberty in a negative sense, as a lack of interference in one’s activity from others and from government. This focus has expanded over time to include a richer body of civil, political, social, economic and cultural rights, for instance, in the work of liberal thinkers who have tried to integrate the insights of communitarian thought and discourse ethics in their work. However, the emphasis on individual liberty in the negative sense continues to be the normative and theoretical touchstone and default position for many contemporary liberal theories. The limitation of the canon of liberal thought to the aforementioned authors and themes deprives the contemporary debate of a rich source of ideas: the French liberal tradition. Montesquieu, considered to be the father of this tradition, provides a good example of how it can enrich current debates in liberal theory. Montesquieu’s work evinces a keen eye for the dynamics of power relations and the limitations of the power of the better rational argument. His insight that power can sometimes only be checked by an equal and opposing power, so that a system of separation and balance of powers is necessary in order to preserve liberty, is reflected in the foundations of most modern democracies. Montesquieu also argues that contingent environmental, historical, social and economic conditions play a dramatic role in determining what kind of government is appropriate for a particular society. On his view, ignoring these facts when framing a government can inadvertently end in despotism. Montesquieu’s observations challenge us to reexamine some of contemporary liberalism’s universalist and rationalist claims. Benjamin Constant is most famous for his distinction between two kinds of liberty: the liberty of the ancients and the liberty of the moderns. The ancient form of liberty manifested itself in the active political participation of citizens in the ancient republic. While this form of government and decision-making was suitable for small, homogeneous city-states, Constant argues that it is impracticable for large modern nation-states. Hence, the concept of modern liberty shifts to an emphasis on the rule of law and the non-interference of the state in private matters. This form of liberty is familiar to us from contemporary liberalism – and Constant cherishes this form of freedom as much as any liberal does today. However, his position is complex: he also argues that the liberty of the ancients should not be neglected. Active political participation is needed to ensure that the government is executing its duty of preserving the modern form of liberty by publicly pointing out violations. The contemporary relevance of Constant’s work is clear when we consider the alleged “democratic deficit” that plagues the EU and international institutions such as the UN, the IMF, and the World Bank. Not only does this democratic deficit threaten the modern form of liberty by placing decision-making processes out of sight of the people, it also threatens citizens’ sense of self-respect derived from self-governance. Constant’s argument for the necessity of combining the liberty of the ancients with that of the moderns provides a fruitful resource for confronting these contemporary issues. Tocqueville’s work on liberalism benefits from his opportunity to observe a society founded on liberal democratic principles – the United States of America – in action. In his Democracy in America, he examines the social consequences, both intended and unintended, of building a society on ‘the equality of conditions’, as he defines ‘democracy’. Tocqueville sees a tension between the democratic value of equality and the aristocratic value of the rule of the best. He observes that democratic societies do not necessarily choose the best leaders and instead promote mediocrity instead of virtue, talent, and excellence. Democracy also confronts citizens with the threat of ‘soft despotism’, where a government that preserves the outer signs of the liberty of the moderns nevertheless controls the behavior of its citizens in minute detail through a system of detailed rules ostensibly aimed at their welfare. This paternalism is an even more insidious threat to liberal values than the hard variety of despotism, since it is so difficult to detect and done in the name of liberal values themselves. Taking Tocqueville’s observations seriously would add complexity to attempts to theorize about the modern social-democratic welfare state. The contributions to this issue supplement and critique mainstream liberal thought and its relation to contemporary issues through a serious engagement with the French liberal tradition. Annelien De Dijn’s contribution discusses Bertrand de Jouvenel, a lesser-known 20th Century representative of the French political tradition she terms ‘aristocratic liberalism’. This tradition has its roots in the work of Montesquieu, and emphasizes the importance of intermediary bodies, most importantly the aristocracy, in providing a check to the top-down power of despotic state authorities and the bottom-up power of revolutionary leveling tendencies, both of which threaten liberty. De Dijn situates Jouvenel in this tradition, but then indicates an important difference between his thought and that of his predecessors: his most significant work, On Power, is not only on French history, but on European history. Pointing to the enthusiastic reception of this work in the Anglophone world, she suggests that the rise of totalitarianism in Europe gave the anti-totalitarian features of aristocratic liberalism a broader appeal. Valentino Lumowa’s paper concerns Constant’s classic text, The Liberty of the Ancients Compared with that of the Moderns. Lumowa argues that in order to understand Constant’s piece, we must be aware that its two parts were written under different historical circumstances and decipher the argumentative thrust inherent in the text. Following Stephen Holmes, he argues that to understand the shift Constant made in the second part of the text, we should read it within the context of the increasing influence of the ultra-Royalists in the legislature during the Bourbon Restoration. However, in contrast to Holmes, he contends that the spirit of both civic and individual freedom, which enlivens representative system, is the backbone of the text in its unity. Demin Duan’s essay investigates an apparent ambivalence between liberal and imperialist tendencies in the work of Alexis de Tocqueville, which has already drawn some attention from Tocquevillian scholars. These interpretations of Tocqueville and his writings on empire generally agree that Tocqueville stands in a recognized tradition of liberalism, which is characterized by respect for human rights, individual freedom and a sense of universal humanism. On this standard view, Tocqueville’s support of imperialism represents nothing but an unfortunate breach of his own otherwise consistent liberal thinking. Duan’s article questions this standard position. By questioning the assumption of Tocqueville’s liberalism in the first place, he tries to gauge the influence of both the old republican tradition and the new liberal perspective on his thinking. In conclusion, he argues that Tocqueville’s overall thought, especially his notion of freedom, is very much informed by an old republican tradition. His support of French imperialism could be better understood from this perspective rather than be rendered simply as a deviation from liberal norms. Pawel Marczewski’s contribution is an attempt to show that Tocqueville’s conception of liberty transcends the divisions between negative and positive aspects of freedom. He begins by juxtaposing this conception with the opposition drawn by Constant between liberty of the ancients and liberty of the moderns. While Tocqueville and Constant shared a concern for the preservation of individual rights, Tocqueville was much more reluctant to accept the modern loss of the communal dimension of liberty. He did not accept the view that jouissances privées, private pleasures, are the main compensation that the modern world has to offer for the lost ancient treasure of political participation. The essay then looks into the relevance of Tocqueville’s standpoint for current debates between liberal defenders of negative freedom and republican advocates of freedom as non-domination. Participants on both sides of the debate seem to be so devoted to showing that their particular approach provides the best guarantees against actual and possible threats to liberty that they overlook the fact that their definitions of freedom remain significantly similar. By arguing that ‘to be free is to be guided by one’s own will’, contemporary republicans, as well as their liberal counterparts, move along the lines drawn by Constant towards private pleasures. By questioning the inevitability of this turn, Tocqueville provides us with a valuable contribution to these discussions in contemporary political philosophy. Finally, André Van de Putte’s contribution, an adaptation of his emeritus speech that closed the conference on French Liberalism, appeals to Tocqueville in order to draw attention to the importance of intermediary, dialogical bodies in mitigating the implicit despotic tendencies of the democratic drive to equality. In Tocqueville’s view, the transition from the feudal corporate inequality to democratic individual equality was not a clean break. Rather, this transition is a continual process of democratization that is driven by a desire for equality, or egalité des conditions. This dissolution of distinctions of estate, class and status has the unintended consequence of concentrating the diffuse power of these entities into a centralized state, which is responsible for ensuring the equality of all under the law. This process leaves increasingly isolated and atomized individuals to face the power of a monolithic state in defense of their freedom, and moves toward a soft, paternalistic despotism. Constant’s freedom of the moderns is not sufficient to protect individuals from this centralized power. Democracy also requires the political freedom of the ancients. Van de Putte argues for a system in which atomized individuals organize themselves into intermediary bodies that, in a Montesquieuian balance of powers, can enter into dialogue with each other and the state on more equitable terms. Van de Putte’s contribution closes with a plea for a conception of democracy as a regime of dialogue. (shrink)

Tocqueville’s imperialism has recently attracted much attention in Tocqueville studies. The challenge is to reconcile his imperialism to his liberalism. Is Tocqueville merely a classical liberal thinker who based his liberal theory on human rights and universal humanism? If so, then his support for imperialism would inevitably seem irrational and awkward. The present contribution questions this approach and argues that Tocqueville is more influenced by a republican tradition of freedom, on account of which he grants a positive value to both (...) the state as a political community and to its power as a necessary instrument in the protection of freedom. On these grounds we may explain his sense of empire from the perspective of his liberal theory, while simultaneously adjusting our understanding of his liberalism. (shrink)

The issue of (in)compatibility between Confucianism and modern democracy, particularly in China, has attracted much debate over the decade. This article singles out the particular notion of Minben ??, which is at the center of the argument for a ?Confucian democracy?, and argues that it is fundamentally different from modern democracy. However, this does not mean that Confucianism could not be connected with modern democracy. The important question is: what exactly does it mean to ?connect? Confucianism to the modern society? (...) The author argues that only by being disconnected with political power could there be meaningful ?Confucian democracy? today in China. (shrink)

本书着重研究惩罚的社会必要性和心理基础,并分析惩罚的客体、根据、内容和主体,进而构建惩罚的公正、人道和功利原则,并提醒人们注意正义的局限所在以及宽恕的意义。.

本书从法哲学角度对理性及由它而引申出来的法理性和法理念作了系统的研究,并进而对当代吕国法治实践的理念进行了探讨,提出了自己对相关的问题的一些思考.

本书是著者晚年耗费十年心血完成的一部巨著。它以晚清孙诒让《墨子闲诂》为底本,参考近百年学术界有关《墨子》校释的重要见解和发现,提出了许多新的见解。.

本书是浙江大学王元骧教授七十寿庆暨浙江大学文艺学研究所成立五周年纪念文集。全书分为王元骧先生的文艺学道路、文艺学思想的自由探索、文艺学思想的现代性解释三辑。.

Divergences and controversies are inevitable in the discussion of freedoms and rights, especially in the matter of reproduction. The Chinese first social egg freezing lawsuit raises the question: is the freedom to freeze eggs for social reasons justified because it is an instance of reproductive rights? This paper accepts social egg freezing as desirable reproductive freedom, but following Harel's approach and considering two theories of rights, the choice and interest theories of rights, we argue that social egg freezing is not (...) a reproductive right because one cannot justify a right or an instance of rights via merely describing the function of those instances that have been justified as right, that is, the choice theory lacks justifying normativity. Since reserving fertility and a suspension from reproduction do not serve reproductive ends per se, the sufficient reason for demanding social egg freezing as a right should be found in other ends rather than in right‐to‐reproduce, that is, the interest theory denies the demand as a right‐to‐reproduce. Permitting it on any grounds without guaranteeing adequate and accessible resources, especially in light of cross‐border reproductive care, raises serious questions about reproductive equality and violates the idea of reproductive rights. Therefore, any ground for social egg freezing should be weighed against whether more pressing reproductive needs, specifically those that are justified as rights, have been met. It would be social progress to shoulder these burdens for the vulnerable and then allow social egg freezing—if right‐to‐reproduce were not the only privilege of the few. (shrink)

This article uses a Chinese narrative of ‘nature-human harmony’ as the main thread to connect the contributions of ontological anthropology. I argue that the best of the critiques of nature-human or nature-culture dualism in social anthropology propose rebuilding a world that ‘pursues harmony while preserving difference’ in the double sense of nature and culture. Given that most social scientific problems are indeed related to utilitarian individualism, I argue that research on ‘ontology’ should re-engage the ancient notion of ‘ ji’, construed (...) as ‘others-comprised self’, which forms the foundation of a perspective of ‘broad human relationship’ between humans and their others (other humans, things, and divinities). Perspectivism inherits many categories of Western cosmology that it critiques and represents a kind of inert ontology. Grounded in the cosmology of life ( sheng), we hope to contribute to a new anthropology of the compatibility between self/others and subject/objects. (shrink)

This book treats Chinese philosophy today as a global project, presenting the work of both Chinese and Western philosophers.

The emergence of any idea must have a deep-seated social background, and at the same time there must be an intellectual source that cannot be neglected. That is to say, every idea must have as its foundation some piece of intellectual material that has been handed down by people of the past. Lao Zi once said: "All Things Under Heaven [tianxia wanwu] are born of Existence [you]; Existence [you] is born of Nonexistence [wu]." This does not mean that existence is (...) born out of nothingness or nonexistence [xuwu]. In reality, what Lao Zi meant by "Nonexistence" [wu] is actually itself a kind of existence; but because its state of existence [cunzai zhuangtai] is different from that of Existence [you], it is called "Nonexistence" [wu] instead. This difference of the states of existence lies in [the following]: Existence has form, and therefore can be sensed; Non-existence has no form, and therefore cannot be sensed. In the chapter "Fei ming" of the book Mo Zi there is the passage that says: "Something can be heard, something can be seen; we call it Existence; something cannot be heard, cannot be seen; we call it Destruction [wang] [wu]." Even though the meanings of "Existence" and "Nonexistence" here are different from those in Lao Zi's idea, we may still trust that the general interpretation of "Existence" and "Nonexistence" here would still meet with Lao Zi's approval. In Lao Zi's view, even though Nonexistence cannot be comprehended through sensation, it can be grasped by metaphysical and mystical "vision." Lao Zi's expression that "Existence is born of Nonexistence" was not only an expression of his viewpoint on the question of the origin of "all things under heaven," but also a general rule for us to follow in examining the evolution of human thought. On the one hand, it demonstrates that every single idea must have its source, its intellectual origin; on the other hand, it points out that the idea that serves another as intellectual source may be hidden, not overt, at times. On the surface, some ideas may appear to have no "genealogical origin"—water without a fountainhead or well spring, and yet, perhaps, if we were to conduct further investigation and research, we would discover that they all have some ancient source, some long-forgotten well spring. That is precisely what this essay hopes to accomplish—to attempt to explore in a preliminary way the ancient source of Lao Zi's thought. (shrink)

EDITOR’S ABSTRACTThis paper discusses the Laozi from the perspective of the history of thought. Rather than trying to establish one correct edition and interpretation of Lao Zi’s work, Wang Bo traces the evolution from a political interpretation toward a more esoteric and life-cultivating reading. He shows how these different interpretations may have influenced the text itself. Focusing on differences between the recently acquired Peking University Han Bamboo Slips version and the transmitted edition, he analyzed two cases of remarkable variants: (...) the description of the Way as “profuse” versus “hidden,” and “having desire” versus “having the Way.”. (shrink)

The excavation of the bamboo slips from Jingmen Guodian Tomb No. 1 in Hubei has had major significance for scholarship. How to determine the date of this tomb has thus become a key issue in current research. A paper entitled "Jingmen Guodian Chu Tomb No. 1," published in Wenwu 7, noted: As Guodian Tomb M 1 had been robbed, the accompanying grave goods are not complete. And though a large number of bamboo slips was excavated, there is a lack of (...) precise chronological records able to determine the date of the tomb. Therefore we can only roughly infer its date from the structure of the tomb and the excavated items. (shrink)

本书从传统人伦关系的视角,探讨传统中国的民间秩序,以社会心理学的观点进行现代诠释,揭示传统民间社会诸多隐而不显的人伦现状,真实地展现传统人伦关系的本来面目。.

本书主要从传统文化与民族精神、诚信的思考、传统与时代、德治与法制等八个方面,阐述了中国的传统文化与道德建设。.

本书集中反映了作者近几年对艺术与审美问题的思考,收录论文有:《中国古代文学批评模式浅论》、《优美与崇高》、《论音乐艺术的审美特征》等。.

本书探讨了中国传统伦理道德问题,包括中国传统道德哲学和道德教育、中国传统道德思想和道德教育思想的基本特点、孔子以“仁”为核心的道德观和道德教育思想等内容。.

This article seeks through Ejagham women’s experience in the ritual dances of Ngbokondem and Moninkim to engage the notion of patriarchal control of African women’s sexuality in ‘female genital mutilation’ discourses as postulated by second-wave feminist theorists such as Daly, Koedt, Hosken and so on. A firmly based patriarchy threatens culture, sexuality and identity; the article shows how women use varied coping mechanisms, including aid schemes, sexual insurgency and even breaking of bodies to define their place and identity in a (...) patriarchal society. However, some Ejagham women’s practices are themselves laced with patriarchal violence where women postulate as main participants. The article coins the term ‘triple patriarchy’ to capture this phenomenon. It portrays how Ejagham women, who are interrogating domination, also act in ways that reinforce patriarchy. Using womanist theological lens as the hermeneutic framework, the article concludes that women initiation practices are the foundations through which women grasp the meanings of Christian initiation rituals such as baptism, eucharist, marriage and so on. Hence, they should not be destroyed but fine-tuned; for there is more about the women’s practices that need to be engaged than labelled. (shrink)

We study whether greater social trust is associated with a lower incidence of corporate misconduct. Both social norm and network theory suggest that social trust can affect managerial behavior and reduce the likelihood of misconduct behavior. Consistent with this prediction, we find that social trust is negatively associated with corporate misconduct behavior. Moreover, we show that, when media coverage is higher, the negative relation between social trust and corporate misconduct behavior is more pronounced. Further analyses suggest that social trust can (...) help mitigate both disclosure-related and nondisclosure-related misconduct. (shrink)

Author Julia Annas Aristotle made ​​the German Asia-mile out and fortunately Fuk The arguments related point, and the role of external good fortune Fook in the problems caused. And text analysis and dialectical Happy Stoic school and school for good moral behavior and external point of view. Author argues, Aristotle on the German sub-km behavior regardless of the state with the fortunate Fook, reflecting the hope臘human ethics ideological consensus, and he left to posterity to resolve the discovery. Aristotle on the (...) German sub-km conduct the test volume and fortunately Fook to take the views of ordinary people, and thus for long-term development. We take this to understand the Stoic school and get away with school, behavior and fortunately for Germany Fuk related views and noted against the intentions are. Julia Annas presents Aristotle's view of the relation of virtue and happiness, and the resulting problem of the role of the external goods in happiness. The Stoics and Peripatetic views on virtue and external goods have been analyzed and argued. The writer suggests what Aristotle says about virtue and happiness reflects common sense of Greek ethical thought and leaves the issue. Aristotle's account of virtue and happiness takes ordinary thought on the matter and develops it far. We can see what the Stoics and Peripatetics are going to say on this matter and the opposing tendencies in this article. (shrink)