Chenyang Li

Joseph Chan’s Confucian Perfectionism: A Political Philosophy for Modern Times is a milestone in the contemporary study of Confucian political philosophy. In this remarkable work, Chan presents his version of Confucian perfectionism, aiming to balance liberalism and Confucianism as a solution to reconstructing a political philosophy in response to contemporary challenges. I am sympathetic to much of what Chan has to say in the book. I agree that, rather than merely being an ethical theory, Confucianism can and should have a place in political philosophy. I also agree that Confucianism can coexist with democracy1 and that human rights can and should be instituted as a fallback apparatus. This essay is not...

It is a great honor to have colleagues engaging in a meaningful discussion of my book. I appreciate my critics’ thoughtful and constructive criticisms as well as exceedingly generous praises. Due to space limitations, I will confine my response to some key issues raised here. I will begin with Yao Xinzhong’s criticism of my claim and argument on the centrality of harmony in Confucian philosophy. Yao reads my view as being that harmony is the central concept or ideal in Confucian philosophy, which I take to mean that harmony has been the central concept or ideal in Confucian philosophy up to this point. Understood this way, that is not my argument in the book. My claims in the book are more...

Harmony has become a major challenge for modern governance in the twenty-first century because of the multi-religious, multi-racial and multi-ethnic character of our increasingly globalized societies. Governments all over the world are facing growing pressure to integrate the many diverse elements and subcultures which make up modern pluralistic societies. This book examines the idea of harmony, and its place in politics and governance, both in theory and practice, in Asia, the West and elsewhere. It explores and analyses the meanings, mechanisms, dimensions and methodologies of harmony as a normative political ideal in both Western and Asian philosophical traditions. The book argues that in Western political thought - which sees politics as primarily concerned with resolving social conflicts and protecting individual rights - the concept of harmony has often been neglected. In contrast, since earliest times harmony or ‘he’ has been a profound theme in Confucian thought, and current leaders of many East Asian governments, and the Chinese government, have explicitly declared that the realisation of a harmonious society is their aim. The book also assesses how harmony is pursued, jeopardized or deformed in the real world of politics, based upon empirical analysis of a variety of different cultural, social and political contexts, including: China, Hong Kong, Singapore, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, Denmark, Latin America and the Scandinavian countries. It shows how harmony as an organizing concept can help to promote new thinking in governance, and overcome problems of modern-day governance like distrust, adversarial conflicts, hyper-individualism, coercive state intervention, and free-market alienation. It also discusses the potential problems posed by the pursuit of harmony, in particular in the grave threat of totalitarianism, and considers how these risks could best be mitigated

As both Chinese philosophy and Indian philosophy have been largely marginalized on the world stage of philosophy in contemporary times, there is a pressing need to bring these voices into the discourse of world philosophy. This essay explores the value of taking into account the Confucian idea of harmony for postcolonial solitary and for a more equitable polycentric global academy. I explicate the concept and the value of harmony as exemplified in Confucian philosophy. I examine reasons of the disappearance of harmony in dominant Western philosophical discourse by comparing various conceptions of harmony in the West. Greek philosophers Heraclitus, Pythagoras, and Plato presented competing conceptions of harmony; whereas Heraclitian processive harmony presupposes opposites, tension and conflict, Pythagorean harmony and Platonic harmony are founded on a pre-determined order. In the contemporary West, from Karl Popper to Martha Nussbaum, harmony has been treated with disdain while it is taken in a Platonic sense. In East Asia, both Confucianism and Daoism take harmony/harmonization as an effective way to accommodate diversity and difference. I will then focus on the Confucian dynamic notion of “harmony with difference” and argue that such a conception is far from naiveté and it has important implications if it is taken seriously in contemporary philosophical discourse.

Chenyang Li responds to Yat-hung Leung by pointing out Leung draws on three distinct notions of benevolence, or ren, none of which on its own is a serious contender against harmony as the concept of central importance to Confucian philosophy. Ren cannot be all three of these at once, and no particular conception of ren in fact has all these qualities. Li further clarifies that it is not his aim to establish that harmony is of exclusively highest importance among Confucian concepts and values, but rather merely to restore its place among the various central Confucian values. He elaborates on the essential role harmony plays when one properly values the virtue of benevolence, which itself requires or implies harmony, specifically harmonious coordination, in its practice and realization. Finally, Li argues that we cannot see the Confucian conceptions of benevolence Leung champions as possessing more practical value for contemporary life than the Confucian conception of harmony, and identifies the fundamental grounds and motivation of Leung’s criticisms to lie in allegiance to Song-Ming neo-Confucian orthodoxy, which grounds itself in philosophically empty postulates.

Responding to a deep and universal need of philosophizing in the context of intensive intercultural interaction among all philosophical traditions in the process of globalization, this timely book offers a unique collection of excellent papers on inter-translatability, art, and ethics; subjects which are most crucial for intercultural conversations today. Instead of opting for a "comparative philosophy" that suggests the superiority of philosophy in comparison with other forms of thought, this book explores "inter-translatability" between East and West, given that any dialogue between heterogeneous cultures and systems of thought has to start with translation, which constitutes the first part of this book. Art and ethics are the two areas that most obviously link philosophies of the past and the present and constitute a fundamental part of Chinese long-living and practical philosophy. The value of art and aesthetic appreciation, no less than ethics, is at the core of Chinese culture and, indeed, promises a great deal for the future world. Thus, they are dealt with here in the second and third parts. This book is also relevant to inter-culturalism in philosophy itself, as the contributors, firstly, come from several different continents and, secondly, though most of them are philosophers, all contributors are well-versed in other disciplines, such as anthropology, literature, religion, aesthetics, history of art, sinology, cognitive sciences, and social sciences.

In this volume, leading scholars in Asian and comparative philosophy take the work of Joel J. Kupperman as a point of departure to consider new perspectives on Confucian ethics. Kupperman is one of the few eminent Western philosophers to have integrated Asian philosophical traditions into his thought, developing a character-based ethics synthesizing Western, Chinese, and Indian philosophies. With their focus on Confucian ethics, contributors respond, expand, and engage in critical dialogue with Kupperman’s views. Kupperman joins the conversation with responses and comments that conclude the volume.

Jiyuan Yu 余纪元, professor of philosophy in the Department of Philosophy at the State University of New York at Buffalo, and Executive Director of the International Society for Chinese Philosophy since 2012, passed away on November 3, 2016, after a two-year battle with cancer. His passing is a major loss to many, especially to the international community of Chinese and comparative philosophy.Born in China, Jiyuan was among the first batches of students entering universities after the Cultural Revolution. One of the youngest of his university peers, he developed a keen interest in Greek philosophy and went overseas to study at the University of Guelph and earned his Ph.D. in philosophy in 1994. After a...

This book provides a set of introductions to each of the world's major non-European philosophical traditions. It offers the non-specialist a way into unfamiliar philosophical texts and methods and the opportunity to explore non-European philosophical terrain and to connect their work in one tradition to philosophical ideas or texts from another. Sections on Chinese philosophy, Indian philosophy, Buddhist philosophy, East Asian philosophy, African philosophy, and recent trends in global philosophy are each edited by an expert in the field. Each section includes a general introduction and a set of articles written by scholars, designed to provide a broad overview of a major topic or figure.

This book is a study of twelve major Confucian philosophical concepts and related issues. These are dynamic harmony (he和), care-centered virtue(ren仁), ritual propriety(li禮), filial care (xiao孝), differentiated gender equilibrium (bie别), friendship (you友), longevity (shou壽), sagehood (sheng聖), equality (qi齊), freedom (ziyou自由), politics (zheng政), and education (jiao教). Each chapter presents something new: a novel interpretation from a fresh angle, an insight that has been neglected in scholarship, or a reformed idea that connects tradition with modern sensibilities. Collectively they serve as a general introduction to progressive Confucian philosophy in the twenty-first century. To facilitate classroom use, each chapter concludes with a set of study questions to assist students to comprehend key points and to develop their own views.

The traditional ontology is a substance-ontology. It is the ontology that an object is primarily a substance, which has a definite being and properties. A lot of philosophical problems are tied to this ontology. I deconstruct the ontology of substance and propose a being-ontology. It is a way to see the world, instead of as a totality of substances, as a totality of ways of being. It has two theses. First, an object is not viewed as a substance which has properties, but as an entity that has various ways of being, among which one may be viewed as prominent in certain circumstances and another in other circumstances. For example, an object is a statue, it is also a piece of marble, and many more; it is itself no more a statue than a piece of marble, nor more a piece of marble than a statue, but can be viewed as prominently a statue or a piece of marble depending on circumstances. Second, the being of an object is contextually constituted. That is, while an object has a variety of being, each being is constituted in a context. Without a context, no being can be constituted. Thus, my ontology may be viewed at two levels. On the being level, each being is contextually constituted; on the entity level, each entity is a totality of its various ways of being. My ontology is feministic and democratic, in a very broad sense of these terms, in that it deconstructs the 'totalitarian' core of objects and allows a variety of being on their own right. My ontology has consequences for other branches of philosophy. For instance, it explains why in aesthetic critiques the same object may be subject to two or more equally well-grounded assessments. Without the conception of substance, my notion of identity is relative and context-dependent. Using this ontology I offer solutions to a number of metaphysical problems, such as individual identity, personal identity, and mind-body identity, etc