Switch to: References

Citations of:

Confucius: A Guide for the Perplexed

Bloomsbury Publishing (2013)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. How Kierkegaard Can Help Us Understand Covering in Analects 13.18.Andrew James Komasinski - 2016 - Asian Philosophy 26 (2):133-148.
    ABSTRACTI suggest that Kierkegaard proves a helpful interlocutor in the debate about Analects 13.18 and the meaning of yin 隱. After surveying the contemporary debate, I argue that Kierkegaard and the Confucians agree on three important points. First, they both present relational selves. Second, both believe certain relationships are integral for moral knowledge. Third, both present a differentiated account of love where our obligations are highest to those with whom we are closest. Moreover, Kierkegaard’s ‘covering’ in the deliberation ‘Love covers (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Yin , Zhi , and Ren : A New Round of Debate Concerning Analects 13.18: Guest Editor’s Introduction.Yong Huang - 2015 - Contemporary Chinese Thought 46 (3):3-16.
    Analects 13.18 continues to be the central focus of a prolonged debate among contemporary scholars in the mainland China. The newest stage of this debate is initiated by Liao Mingchun of Tsinghua University and Liang Tao of Renmin University of China, respectively, and responded to by Guo Qiyong and his students. There are three main issues involved in this new round of debate: whether the Chinese character yin in this passage means nondisclosure, as has been traditionally interpreted, or rectification; what (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Is Confucianism a Source of Corruption in Chinese Society? A New Round of Debate in Mainland China.Tangjia Wang - 2014 - Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 13 (1):111-121.
    The debate on whether Confucianism is a source of corruption or root of morality, which initiated about ten years ago in China and was mainly between Liu Qingping 劉清平 and Guo Qiyong 郭齊勇, entered a second stage when Deng Xiaomang 鄧曉芒 criticized Confucian ethics based on filial piety, and Guo Qiyong and (mainly) his (former) students persistently defended their points of view. This essay is a review of the main theme of the debate at this second stage.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark