requestId:68753bf9377f62.45356353.
The characteristics and modern value of Confucian thinking about “morality”
Author: Cheng Zhimin (Hainan University of Social Sciences, Hainan University of Humanities, Marxism College)
Source: “Ethics Research” No. 1, 2024
Abstract: The academic community has been far from broadly interpreting “moralism” or “general moralism”. If we use this to learn the comprehensive Confucianism and even Chinese civilization, it is undoubtedly a kind of civil war, but this badged sign has unexpectedly great value in the era of moral indecentness. Morality is based on nature, so the moral principles of judging all virtues based on virtue, and the Tao follows nature. Some thinkers including Yin Haiguang criticized the moral principles of Confucianism as the disadvantage of Confucianism, but these criticisms are not only the product of modern concepts (especially unrestrained theory), and Confucian advocates are also “suffered by the concepts” and dare not admit the excellent characteristics of Confucianism. Although moral principles have certain limitations, they will not destroy them. The destruction of Orientals such as Voltaire and Hegel can just prove such facts from the back: classical civilizations are moral. The Chinese civilization is moving towards moral principles, one is historical reasons, the second is the merits of saints, and the third is the most basic meaning of virtue in the world. The moral principles based on “altruism” can just suppress modern atomic personalism, help rebuild the human world and society’s cooperation value, and thus lay the foundation for the future of the same world.
In recent years, the academic community has conducted a dramatic discussion on whether Confucianism and even Chinese civilization can learn the integration with “morality”. Since this vocabulary has obviously been “notorious”, theorists have rejected the unrestrained and do not see the positive value of “moralism” by Hong Kong’s unrestrained thesis. This is intended to justify the name of “morality”. The so-called “correction of name” is neither “protective” nor “criticism”, but rather abide by the name and responsibility, but not too proud and not meticulous. Specifically, we first need to briefly clarify the meaning of “moralism”, then discuss whether Confucianism can be regarded as “moralism”, and finally discuss the interests of moralism. The meaning of the word “moralism” is indeed particularly vague. It is both a compliment to a certain civilized sentiment and a criticism of this sentiment. Although the current usage is more about the Internet, from a different perspective, “moralism” happens to be a rare civilized quality, especially in an era of indecent morality, which can be said to be precious. In this way, we must discuss things, know their evils when we love them, and know their goodness when we hate them.
1. Concept Definition
The academic world defines “moralism” or “general moralism” from many perspectives, but most of them interpret this term broadly, just like Yin Haiguang believes that “general moralism is to place anything in a person under the moral point of view” to judge. Nothing in a person can escape from the judgment of morality. In this way, people cannot have morality. Free) things. Everything in humans is surrounded by an atmosphere of moral consciousness. “[1] (459) In fact, few people treat everything with virtue. Even in modern thinking, everything has souls, so there must be morality. However, this kind of virtue is not the standard for evaluating all things. Do not say that morality itself is the basis for the existence of things.
In the modern Chinese people’s conception, the movement of the sun, moon and stars is not the self-consciousness of “objective”, “unconscious” and “inner”, but has in-depth facts (i.e. “nature principles”), closely related to the world, and of course it also has clear moral consciousness. And in Bidagoras, even numbers (and mathematics) are moral. Later, the Oriental developed a scheming or strict “science”, but the final effectiveness of science still lies in moral instigation [2] (277-278). To put it simply, if the world was created by gods and was at most governed by gods (or “heaven”, then the universe will bring various qualities of gods, which of course includes virtue. Only in the modern era where God has passed away is “suffering a month’s priceGod is passed away” will people not trust the universe to have moral orientation.
The “morality” of the universe is different from the “morality” understood by the ancients. The final “virtue” does not mean “morality”, but has the meaning of universe, because “virtue” means more “passing” or “smooth”, that is, it moves smoothly. Whether it is the “natural law” of the East or the “natural law” of China, it is not only how we understand “natural” or “Tao”, from Tao, “get” is “virtue”. The virtue of a sage lies in its comprehensive “get” in mind, that is, “I am good at those who are good, and I am good at those who are not good. I am good at those who believe in them. I believe in them. Those who do not believe in them also believe in them. They are virtue and trust.” (Chapter 49 of “Quality”) In modern times, “Quality” is a repetition. “Tao” is the basis or internal basis of all things, while “De” is the automatic inheritance and faith in “Tao”. This “Tao” is obviously not a lifeless objective rule, but a source of birth with personality, personality and divine nature. It “born but does not exist, does not rely on it for it, and does not live in success” is the “mysterious virtue” of “Tao”. Confucius Haoma said that “becoming virtue in me” (“Shuer”), which means that God is entrusted with elegance, so “the will of heaven will be sages” (“Shuer”Zihan), all these species indicate that “heaven” and “heavenly way” are the heaven of will and the heaven of sacred.
Therefore, rather than saying that the modern general moral principle is to judge everything by virtue, it is better to judge everything based on nature (κατὰφυσίν), that is, based on the way of heaven or gods. “Yu Wenjiezi” describes “virtue” as “superior”. Only as long as one truly gains the superiors of the heavenly way can one rise up in a straightforward way, reaching the heavenly world, and being invisible without thinking. This is mysterious, so Lao Tzu said, “The Tao gives birth to it, virtue survives it, things form it, and accomplishes it. Therefore, all things do not respect the Tao and cherish virtue. The respect of the Tao, virtue is precious, and no one is always natural. Therefore, the Tao gives birth to it, virtue survives it; grows it; matures it; nourishes it. Born without having it, do not rely on it, grows it and does not slaughter it. This is a mysterious virtue” (Chapter 51 of “Quality”). Those who are born are gods, and those who are obtained are saints, so “virtue” means “sacred”.
In the eyes of predecessors, “virtue” can be divided into “good virtue” and “virtue”, and tomorrow we will all regard it as a beautiful “morality”, which is actually only the “good virtue” department. The word “arete” in ancient Greek did not have moral connotations in the end, but refers to the “excellent” nature of things, such as the iron of copper, the strength of horses, the fertility of animals, and the good fight of soldiers. Even from tomorrow’s standards, the “virtue” in the ancient times of the East is even “anti-ethics”: people seek to be the first in everything, and they can even “not be stubborn”, even if they do not say that there is no morality or rules, but they are also very simple. Merit, merit, effectiveness, engineering, ability, mission, career, rather than morality, are the objects of people’s attention.
Similarly, the “virtue” mentioned by the East later is nothing more than a compliment to the nature of all things. In other words, each existence has its own “nature” or “efficacy”, and the ability to develop such effectiveness and make it influence is called “virtue”, that is, “virtue means obtaining; virtue means obtaining its nature.” This “virtue” is fundamentally based on self-preservation. This concept is the basis of modern Eastern (political) thinking, but it was already obvious as early as the ancient Greek period. For example, Plata says that every activity has its own virtue (Meno 72a3-4), because “there is nothing” lies in the “use of things”.
Aristotle’s statement is the most representative: “All virtues, as long as something takes it as virtue, do not simply make the status of this thing appear, and give it excellent performance.” [3](34) (1106a15-17) The basis of the Eastern theory of virtue is “efficacy theory”, not in TC:
發佈留言