Shared Ends: Kant and Dai Zhen on the Ethical Value of Mutually Fulfilling Relationships
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper offers an account of an important type of human relationship: relationships based on shared ends. These are an indispensable part of most ethically worthy or valuable lives, and our successes or failures at participating in these relationships constitute a great number of our moral successes or failures overall. While many philosophers agree about their importance, few provide us with well-developed accounts of the nature and value of good shared-end relationships. This paper begins to develop a positive account of such relationships. In the interest of highlighting some strengths and weaknesses of competing approaches, it contrasts the theories that are proposed by the Confucian philosopher Dai Zhen (1724–1777) and the influential moral philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724–1804). Both philosophers share many of the same core ethical commitments, but as the author shows, Dai Zhen’s approach to thinking about the nature and value of good shared-end relationships is superior to Kant’s because it highlights the fact that such relationships must be motivated by ethically-shaped forms of other-concern and self-interest, whereas Kant does not picture self-interest as an important source of morality or ethically valuable relationships. The author considers clarifications and revisions to Kant’s theory that seem to make more room for the mixture of motives required for good shared-end relationships, but concludes that these ad hoc modifications do not succeed at providing a recognizably Kantian theory that can account for them as well as Dai Zhen’s.
Abstract
This paper offers an account of an important type of human relationship: relationships based on shared ends. These are an indispensable part of most ethically worthy or valuable lives, and our successes or failures at participating in these relationships constitute a great number of our moral successes or failures overall. While many philosophers agree about their importance, few provide us with well-developed accounts of the nature and value of good shared-end relationships. This paper begins to develop a positive account of such relationships. In the interest of highlighting some strengths and weaknesses of competing approaches, it contrasts the theories that are proposed by the Confucian philosopher Dai Zhen (1724–1777) and the influential moral philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724–1804). Both philosophers share many of the same core ethical commitments, but as the author shows, Dai Zhen’s approach to thinking about the nature and value of good shared-end relationships is superior to Kant’s because it highlights the fact that such relationships must be motivated by ethically-shaped forms of other-concern and self-interest, whereas Kant does not picture self-interest as an important source of morality or ethically valuable relationships. The author considers clarifications and revisions to Kant’s theory that seem to make more room for the mixture of motives required for good shared-end relationships, but concludes that these ad hoc modifications do not succeed at providing a recognizably Kantian theory that can account for them as well as Dai Zhen’s.
참고문헌 (19)
- Angle, Stephen C., "Neo-Confucianism: A Philosophical Introduction" (2017), Polity Press
- Aristotle, "Nicomachean Ethics" (2000), Cambridge University Press
- Baron, Marcia W., "Kantian Ethics Almost Without Apology" (1995), Cornell University Press
- Betzler, Monika, "Kant’s Ethics of Virtue" (2007), De Gruyter
- Dai, Zhen, "Daizhenji 戴震集 (The Collected Works of Dai Zhen)", pp.263~329 (2009), Shanghai guji chubanshe
- Ebels-Duggan, Kyla, "Kantian Freedom", Oxford University Press
- Elman, Benjamin, "From Philosophy to Philology: Intellectual and Social Aspects of Change in Late Imperial China" (2001), University of California Los Angeles Press
- Herman, Barbara, "Moral Literacy" (2007), Harvard University Press
- Hu, Minghui, "China’s Transition to Modernity: The New Classical Vision of Dai Zhen" (2015), University of Washington Press
- Hu, Shi, "Dongyuande zhexue 戴東原的哲學 (The Philosophy of Dai Zhen)" (1996), Taiwan shangwu yinshuguan
- Ivanhoe, Philip J., "Confucian Moral Self Cultivation" (2000), Hackett
- Ivanhoe, Philip J., "Three Streams: Confucian Reflections on Learnings andthe Moral Heart-Mind in China, Korea, and Japan" (2016), Oxford University Press
- Kant, Immanuel, "Practical Philosophy" (1996), Cambridge University Press
- Seneca, Lucius Annaeus, "Letters from a Stoic" (1969), Penguin
- Tiwald, Justin, "Dao Companion to Neo-Confucian Philosophy" (2010), Springer
- Tiwald, Justin, "Dai Zhen on Sympathetic Concern", Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 37(1), pp.76~89 (2010)
- Tiwald, Justin, "Dai Zhen’s Defense of Self-Interest", Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 38s, pp.29~45 (2012)
- Wu, Genyou, "Daizhen, ganjia wueshu yu zhongguo wenhua 戴震, 乾嘉學術與中國文化(Dai Zhen, Quanjia Scholarship, and Chinese Culture)" (2015)
- Zhu, Xi, "Zhu Xi: Selected Writings" (2019), Oxford University Press