Kierkegaard and Confucius: On Finding The Way

Kierkegaard and Confucius: On Finding the Way Author(s): Henry Rosemont, Jr.
Source: Philosophy East and West, Vol. 36, No. 3 (Jul., 1986), pp. 201-212 Published by: University of Hawai'i Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1398771 . Accessed: 09/01/2014 16:57
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
University of Hawai'i Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy East and West.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 158.194.129.154 on Thu, 9 Jan 2014 16:57:16 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
theWay Jr. Kierkegaard and Confucius: On finding HenryRosemont,
to compare two to attempt At first blush it mightappear silly,or perverse, The former thinkers so seemingly unlikeas S6renKierkegaard and Confucius. was a nineteenth-century livingin the cosmopolitan, European,a citydweller, oftheAmerican, Revolutions. and Industrial French, Philosphiearlyaftermath hand German he was influenced on the one the Romantic by cally, strongly and movement of the Schlegelbrothers, HolderlinNovalis, Schleiermacher, withByronin thebackground-and, on the otherhand,he was absorbedby, and in, thewritings his excoriations of Hegel. And he was a fervent Christian, in his of the contemporary of Lutheranism native Denmark expressions 1 notwithstanding. Confucius was none of thesethings. hundred Twenty-four yearsand overten theMasterlivedat thedawn of the thousandmilesdistantfromKierkegaard, iron age in China and inherited a millennium-old culturalhistory based on and That rich in was also custom,ritual,and hunting agriculture. history tradition based on earlierChineseexpressions of religiosity, even thoughthe tradition was beingthreatened whichaccompaniedthepolitiby thesecularism cal divisiveness and internecine warfareof his day.2 The contrasts could be but it should clear and be that B.C. China nineteenthextended, fifth-century in common. century Copenhagenhave little I believe,however,that it can be salutaryto juxtapose Kierkegaardand becauseintheir thrusts shareda common concern. Confucius, philosophical they Neitherdid much metaphysics; did less and they epistemology, theydid no formal of sciencewhatsoever. Ratherthey werebothpreoclogicor philosophy liveourlives.Moreover, cupiedwiththephilosophical questionofhowweshould bothendeavored intheir to addressthisquestion, as they publiclivesto getothers is clearlyseen in Kierkegaard's laterlifein his attackson theDanish Church,3 and in Confucius'woefully unsuccessful efforts to obtain public office.4 Both werethuspassionately devotedto outlining thehumancondition as they saw it and weretreaders oftheWay,concerned to provide forothers guidelines seeking thepath.The present is a smallattempt article to followin their tradition. at theoutset. Evento themostcasual observer itwill My focusshouldbe stated be obviousthattheanswers to thequestionof how we shouldlead our livesare forKierkegaardand Confucius, and thisis not verysurprising verydifferent
at St. Mary's College of Maryland, Jr.,is Professor and Visiting HenryRosemont, of Philosophy at theUniversity Professor ofPhilosophy ofHawaii at Manoa. AUTHOR'S NOTE: Thispaper-sansfootnotesandreferences-was readat the1985Annual Meeting of theAssociation of Asian Studies,Society for Asian and Comparative Philosophy panel; thePhiltheLinguistics Institute; osophyDepartment of RensselaerPolytechnic Groupof the University of Ulster(Belfast); and theReligion toall Department oftheUniversity ofHawaii. I am deeply grateful at these their comments andencouragement, with toJohn ofthe participants sessionsfor specialthanks SharonAnderson-Gold, andBillPuka ofRPI, andtoAlison andDavidArchard Koller, Henry ofUlster. Thismultiplicity and the to combined ofaudiences fact thatmanycopiesof thepaper havecirculated it as originally Additional suggest publishing given,changing onlygross infelicities of expression. discussion willbefoundin thenoteswhich follow.
East and West36, no. 3 (July1986). by University reserved. Press.All rights Philosophy
202 Rosemont
different livesthey themselves led in their different historical giventhevery very and cultural contexts. Whatis perhaps moreilluminating is thediffering concepts ofhumanconductand oftheself, theperson, which thetwothinkers presuppose inarriving I emphasize at their different answers to thequestion. very presuppose to distinguish itfrom believe: ofbelief orfalse, statements areeither true roughly, whereas a presupposition is whatmustbe truefortherelevant beliefs containing it to be trueor false.5For example, thisbeinga scholarly have journal,readers some beliefs about what the formof thisessay be like: thatI will not be too footloose with thefootnotes, thatthere willprobably be someacademic jargonbutwithout or obscenities intothenarrative-and so on. interjecting expletives willbe either or modified. And as you read on, thesebeliefs confirmed But now is to that considerthatpeople have rights. it Surely misleading say you believe is have for consistent with actions whatsoever any they rights, havingrights It is better in thefuture has rights). to say (evena criminal people mayperform is apresupposition foranybeliefs aboutthem that that rights having you everyone I in hold. And it is their want to that argue, Kierkegaard might presuppositions, for and Confucius arefarthest between them is instructive apart,and thedistance morals. in theconceptual realmofmodern us, especially is agreement first. there thatthetwoAmonghiscommentators Kierkegaard his is of primary and greatest for volumeEither/Or importance understanding In the which we lead our lives. first viewsofthediffering on planes volume, may inwhom-along with is simply Johannes thenarrator calledA. He is an aesthete of the the seducer-Kierkegaardembodiesthemost sophisticated perspective and ideal lifechampionedby the GermanRomanticsin theirnovels,poetry, criticism. literary withnature, This is a lifein whichhumanbeings, having"fallen"from unity It is withtheriseofself-consciousness. becomeawareoffreedom concomitantly in thisway,according to Kierkegaard, thatwe ceasedbeinganimalsand became result.To human;but thisis paradoxical,foralienationis an inevitable truly quote Mullen: couldneither natural to free The changefrom beingseemedto be a changewhich naturalevent(naturecould not createa non-natural be a purely being)nor a action(a naturalbeingcould notchoose to be non-natural).6 free purely to modern man in opposition The Romantics man,thechildto the put ancient as Holderlin and peace could notbe recaptured, adult.Lost innocence said, for, "Ah! forman's wildheartno homeis possible."7 Withredemption unachievable may lead a base, hedo(alone), the aesthete lifesoaked in voluptuary nistic pleasures-Kierkegaard'smodelis Nero-or a Thisis a passivelife led byone lifebased on irony. morerefined aesthetic higher, in it,rejecting all social thehumanscenebutdoes notparticipate who observes as normsand attachments corruptive, meaningless. Knowingthat oppressing, to humanlife,the ironicaestheteis amoral, thereis no ultimate significance
203
radicalonly.Individualist to theextreme, he or she rejects apolitical,a cultural vocationand commitment forartistry and detachment. In sharpcontrast to thisaesthetic life is theethical ormoral,defended at length in volume two of Either/Or the and William. by good properJudge Writing in perfectHegelianese,Kierkegaardhas JudgeWilliam defendthe upright and he does so in a highly nineteenth-century bourgeoisSittlichkeit, sophisticated manner, in his is letters to A that it in this maintaining only way thatour can be realized: humanity ... I am accustomed to appearin theroleofa married man. I havenotsacrificed whatI have sacrificed foris insignificant in mylifeforartand learning, myself I sacrifice formy profession, comparisonto thesethings; myself mywife,my I do not sacrifice forthem, but I children, or, moreproperly expressed, myself find inthem andjoy. Theseareinsignificant incomparison mysatisfaction things withwhatyou livefor;and yet,myyoungman.... 8 Here theessential to bytheaesthete is resolved: The selfparadoxsurrendered interest whichfollows from freedom and individuality is synthesized withsocial commitment and finding fulfillment to others. service by seeking through In makingthis case, Kierkegaardrelieson his centralnotion of choosing oneself. This is a difficult conceptto deal within brief compass,but it basically involves for one's own accepting responsibility history, accepting responsibility, notonlyforwho one was, butalso forwho one is,and forchoosingto therefore, live henceforth in the domain bounded by good and evil, ratherthan in the aesthetic domainin whichtheselatter terms have no significance.9 to this it should be in clear Conthat, Kierkegaard'sframework, Up point fuciuswould be of a piece with JudgeWilliam. The ironic aestheteis very different from thexiao rena ("mean" person)of theLun Yu,butitis surely a life of social commitment thattheMasterdemandsof us, a lifedevotedto family, 1 friends and community. Before with itis ofimportance to notethatfor Confucius, however, continuing the aesthetic nor the ethicallifewas fullyhuman. Many Kierkegaardneither commentators concurin maintaining thatKierkegaard theethicalor preferred moralto theaesthetic but all are for the life life, agreedthat, him,only religious was a truly humanlife.This is hinted at in theletter from a Jutland Priest at the close ofvolumetwoofEither/Or, and itis themajortheme oftheearlyFear and and of thesubsequent SicknessUntoDeath and otherwritings. Trembling of theethicallifethatKierkegaard makes are that(1) Amongthecriticisms moralchoiceswillbe demandedof us forwhichthere and can be, no clear are, to be is often to guidelines; (2) right go againsttruelove; (3) we can neverdo and to saythat"I do wantI can" is bothto enoughifwe are socially committed, obscure thispoint and to engage in self-deception; and (4) the ethicallifeis can offer us no clearpath to thesacred,to the secular,and therefore altogether and therefore, in turn, itcan notgiveus a telosforour individual transcendent, 1 lives.
204 Rosemont
For Kierkegaardthe religiouslifeis not based on beliefs-surelynot on in God or in thehope oflife beliefs thiswouldsimply simplistic everlasting-for be to make an investment and in the lifeto securea good works) (piety present in thenext(immortality). return insists thatone Rather, profitable Kierkegaard on thebasis ofresignation, existsreligiously, and to resign oneself and, further, is to transform to have faith or a moralpersonintoa oneself from an aesthete being. spiritual All of thisis ofcourseonlytheroughest sketch of Kierkegaard's viewson the of the which we on lead our and no mention at lives, may subject differing planes all has been made about his discussions, central to thistopic,ofdread,anxiety, and despairand differing levelsand typesof religiosity. But whenthisrough sketchis placed againstthe Lun Yu, it may,nevertheless, providea contrast whichcan be edifying. butingeneral he Confucius often speakswellofhumble peasantsand artisans, to three ofpersons: The shib(scholaror knight), the categories givesapprobation or sheng or ruler), and theshengd, rene (thesage or saint).12 jun zi" (gentleman There has been but littleworkdone thatattempts to describethe differing in of but these categories persons,13 thismuchseemsclear: qualitiesexemplified thatin the Lun Yu all sheng jen arejun zi, and all jun zi are shi,but thatthe withshi converse does not hold. These are, in otherwords,rankedcategories, far ren few and between. and numerous sheng (relatively speaking), fairly of these three features the following With some diffidence distinguishing The shihavewilledto followthedaof ofpersonsare proffered: (Way) categories as embodiedin the lig (rituals,propriety). theyknow some of the li and are withtheactions more,concomitant engagedin theongoingprocessof learning and actingconthis Much farther to station. their learning along appropriate itsspirit we havethe tinuum enoughto follow jun zi, whoknowtheli thoroughly and derive rolescompetently their evenin theabsenceofprecedent; they perform at least in a deep satisfaction-wewould have to call it aesthetic satisfaction, have which come to with and effortlessness the they grace,dignity, part-from In the are this continuum of end And the at themselves. conduct shengjen. upper feel rensee and all of thequalitiesof the additionto possessing jun zi, thesheng and as and future, thepast,present, and integrating as defining theii holistically, it entire human as well the and strength, society, giving integrating defining in our whichcan onlybe described and beauty:a seeingand feeling endurance, 14 as a unionof selfand other. terms-not Confucius'-as transcendence, theli are our road Clearlythisaccountrestson theviewthatforConfucius wantto argue on theWay. Even thosewho might and staying maps forfinding does speak onlyof a withthisview,however, will,I hope,agreethatConfucius there or freeways; or three two there are not ways, highways ways, singleWay: is onlytheWay-and theditch.15 farapartthe If thismuchbe agreed,thenit beginsto becomeclearhow very can be no is onlyone Way,thenthere forifthere Masteris from Kierkegaard,
205
in Kierkegaard'ssense,to chooseamong a multiplicity of ways.Nor freedom, we mustchoose woulditevenbe accurateto saythat, at leastfortheConfucians, betweenthe way and the ditch.16 I would ratherdescribethe matterfroma Confucianperspective as our resolving, our willing, our committing ourselves to follow our highesthuman instincts-reverence, affection, care, endeavor, the ii, in oppositionto our following our community-as channeledthrough morebase inclinations towardsloth,lust,envy, and so forthgluttony, greed, thelatter beingmarksof thexiao ren. I suspectthatmanypeople will wishto disputethisreadingof theLun Yu, becauseifthere is neither a concept offreedom nora conceptofchoiceinthetext, thenit follows thatConfucius could not have been a moralphilospher, forhow can one do moralphilosophy without of free choice? speaking In moder Western terms I wantto maintain thatit youcannot,and therefore is fundamentally to see Confuciusas a moral philosopher. On the misguided a different a highly contrary, readingof theLun Yu raisesa challenge, salutary to theentire realmofmodern Western moralphilosophy, challenge, along with itspresuppositions of an individual self. 7 Thatchallenge is notsimply with to moralprinciples butto themselves, respect thefoundations ofmoralprinciples as well.The text us, thatis,to see challenges afresh thepresupposition (not belief)thattheworldhas a sphereof morals,at leastroughly bounded-that there be a subject must matter formorals, however thatour moraltalkis about. decribed, differentially Of course,theexistence of a conceptualsphereofmoralsis not beingdenied; members of modernWestern societies have engagedin talkof moralprinciples foroverthree and that talk has been "about" something. But centuries, surely what we mightlearn fromthe Lun Yu is that this is not the only way of theworld,or better, a partof it,and itmaywellnot be thebest conceptualizing it is time to entertain newer-or way; perhaps older-patternsof thinking. Let me attempt to amplify theseremarks one of the major by considering concerns incontemporary moralphilosophy: thearguments formoralrelativism based on majoranthropological work.18 By no meansdo I wishto questionthe wealthof excellent data which show theregularity withwhichan ethnographic action is loathedby one people (usuallyourselves)and applauded, or at least thatthis tolerated, by another.I do wantto make as a logicalclaim,however, evidence willnot do whata moralrelativist wantsit to do. The farther we getfrom Western do Englishand related languagesthefarther we get fromlexical itemswhichcorrespond to term the All "moral." closely forthe approval and disapprovalof human languages,of course,have terms conductand also forcriteria and otherconceptsemployed in theevaluationof human conduct;but a greatmanyhave no wordswhichconnoteand denote uniquely the set of actions ostensiblycircumscribed by the pair "moralas againstthenonmoral. immoral," The simplicity of this linguistic fact should not obscure its philosophical
206 Rosemont
to significance: speakers of languages which have no term corresponding "moral" cannotlogicallyhave any moralprinciples from (or moral theories), whichit followsthattheycannothave any moralprinciples with incompatible other moralprinciples, ours or anyoneelse's. Put anotherway, we mightdisapproveof an action of whichmembers of another culture restson criteria coninvolving approve,but ifour disapproval and their their absentfrom culture, approvalrestson criteria ceptsabsentfrom itwouldbe simply ofthetwo a mistake to saythatthemembers ourculture, then in moral The were fundamental cultures argument disagreement. ethnographic formoralrelativism people(s) onlyifitcan shownthattwodifferent gainsforce criteria evaluateda humanactionin thesameway-invoking similar grounded the similar theactionwhile inthesameor very concepts-and thatone approved otherdisapproved.19 notjustfind a bigfussabout a single It mayseemthatI am making word;why and under theclosestanalogueto "moral"in thelanguage(culture) investigation a number is what of this from there? with the And, course, just analysis proceed have done. But I and comparative of linguists, philosophers anthropologists, now to theLun Yu) itis not we mustchangeourways,because(to return believe or "choice"); it "freedom" in for "moral" item is lexical that there no (or merely to "objective," the classical languagealso does not have itemscorresponding "auto"dilemma,""individualism," "utility," "duty,""subjective,""rights," no itemfor"ought"nomy,"and, perhapsmost eerieof all fora moralist, of thevastmajority that I a have or suspicion strong (And prudential obligatory. not have "moral" do for not have an do which otherlanguages equivalent be either-and thiscould hardly terms formostor all oftheseother equivalents coincidental.) whatI have called the No, it is notjust theconceptofmoralswhichdelimits all ofthe includes which is it the rather of modern concept-cluster sphere morals, Now ifwecannot(do not)talkabout terms plus someothers.20 just mentioned, terms noneofthese that and ifitis true moralswithout appears terms, usingthese it thatwhatever in theclassicalChineselanguageof theLun Yu,thenit follows it was notmorals, was thatwas beingtalkedabout in thatand in relatedtexts, haveto tellus ifweinsist misswhatthosediscussants and thatwewillsurely upon on their morals of framework themodern writings. conceptual imposing deal to sayto us, as do havea great Chinesethinkers And I believetheancient culture-who Western in all othercultures-including thethinkers premodern to the recourse without conduct human evaluated and described, analyzed, their own their had of of the vocabularies, sphere morals;they (have) vocabulary frameworks.21 their own concept-clusters constituting fora moment. to Kierkegaard To see thesepointsanother way,letus return from human freedom as of his leavingtheir beings arising concept Clearly of naturalstate(Edenic) stemsfromhis relatedconceptof self-consciousness
207
oneself as unique,separate, and distinct from all others, an individual essentially so. His viewsheremusthave been influenced evolutionof the by the historial and soul, but whatever their conceptsofpsyche, spiritus, genesis, theyare well in the of Yeats: lines encapsulated Thoughleaves are many,therootis one; Throughall thelying days of myyouth I swayedmyleaves and flowers in thesun; Now I maywither intothetruth. For Confucius, I would argue,thereis no similarconceptof an individual, ordefined autonomous self thatis presupposed, inhisphilosophy assumed, (with fortheseconcepts, no lexicalitems howcould they be foundin thetext?). He did, have a clearconceptof a person, each personbeingdefined however, essentially in thebodysocial.I am,to putthe oftheroleshe or sheperformed bythetotality mattersimply, son, my children's father, friend, my father's my friends' my I students' teachers' and so forth. am because no teacher, student, my unique, one else standsin exactly thesesame relations withthesepeople as I do. At the same time,when all of theserelationshave been specified, thenI have been defined and altogether, withno remainder withwhichto piece essentially, fully, an autonomousself.22 together All of thespecific in whichwe stand,to thedead as wellas to humanrelations theliving, are to be mediatedby li, and by fulfilling thedutiesand obligations defined we are treading theWay. This seemsto place us by theserelationships in Judge William'scamp,as simply subscribers to theflag, mom,apple squarely and the Protestant Ethic. But this is not because for so, pie, Kierkegaardthe theethical(moral),and thereligious lifeare verydifferent modes of aesthetic, different being,radically waysof beingin theworld. For Confucius, thethree life we however, planesare one. Bythewaysinwhich interact withothers our liveswillclearly have an ethicaldimension, all infusing of our conduct(the shi). By theways in whichthisinterdependent conductis withreciprocity, and governed effected, by civility, affection, custom, respect, and ritual,our lives will also have an aestheticdimensionfor ourselvesand as ourconduct confers on others, and as thoseothers others, personhood (thejun confer ourdefining ritualand zi) personhoodon us. And byspecifically meeting otherobligationsto our elders and ancestorson the one hand, and to our and descendants on theother, Confucius offers an unusualsense contemporaries of transcendence, a humancapacityto go beyondthe specific spatiotemporal concrete in whichwe exist,giving circumstances our personhoodthatsense of sharedincommon, and thereby a strong with whathas gone humanity continuity before and whatwillcome later(theshengren).23 Ifthisinterpretation has anymerit, thequestionthen arisesofwhatlessonsthe Lun Yu mightcontainforus today. Except forthose acquaintedwitha Bar
208 Rosemont
seems remote;few of us know today what Mitzvah,the capping ceremony ancient Shao musicsoundedlike;and ofwhatuse woulditbe to learnthecorrect libationfrom a ku? way to pour a sacrificial But hereagain theLun Yu can challenge of us, ifwe look beyondthespecifics The li to themoregeneral Confucius' of and tradition. ritual, custom, concepts a windowon theworldoflate ChunQiu China;itcan also Lun Yu is notmerely serveas a mirror of thecontemporary UnitedStates. The waythiscountry was settled, and thelater thewayitbecameindependent, industrial have made us look to not of our tomorrow, growth juggernaut always to yesterday; to wantalwayswhatis new,notwhatis old; to speakonlyEnglish, notthenativelanguagesofourimmigrant from whomwe mustbreak ancestors, cut away, it is small away; and so on. With so much of our past constantly wonderthat we tend to be suspiciousof it, feel forcedto relyon our own embracethe future, autonomous,resourcesand fervently seekingour true, autonomous,choosingselvesas we endeavorto shake offthe"heavyhand of tradition." us psychically; it has also This futuristic has not onlydiminished perspective on well. the elements served autoritarian By focusing only oppressive ideologies oftraditions, ithas beeneasyto lose sight ofthefactthat whatactually oppresses of politicaland economicpower-bureaupeople are the formalinstruments cracies,armies,large corporations-ratherthan social customs,rituals,and
traditions.24
to abandon communal can teachus, then, thatto attempt Confucius rituals, is madness, becausethey can onlybe replaced and traditions customs, altogether void intowhichfartoo many social,and spiritual psychological, by theethical, are Americans individual-oriented autonomous, alreadygazing. in thisarticle because of the withConfucius I chose Kierkegaard to contrast of the Dane's analysesof the modern power,depth,scope, and clairvoyance sensewe areall thatin an important humancondition.25 It is fair to say,I think, and the moral life, the aesthetic torn between existentially Kierkegaardians, lifenow seems because his thirdexistential inclinedsomewhatto the former are no hisviewthatthere formostof us and becausewe tendto endorse distant no firm to follow. moralabsolutes, guidelines thatit back to theearlierargument In thislightI willconcludeby harking be shown that it could moralrelativism where to endorse would be correct only that and criteria and similar the same or or twopeople groups concepts employed humanactionand theotherdisapproved. one approveda particular theclearest To thebestof myknowledge, examplesofjust suchfundamental I submit to be in American that are found society. disagreement contemporary of within theWestern framework of morals and the self the issue conceptual be for And the said the abortion willnotbe resolved. quiteprobably samemay of the not yetbornto a of animals,therights issues of euthanasia,the rights and muchmore;noneofthese environment, healthy appear genetic engineering,
209
within themodernconceptualframework of moralsand capable of resolution the self.More generally, wherethe moral and the politicalspheresoverlapitis also becoming clearthatthere is no justiceand fairness-I think increasingly theviewsofJohn Rawls inhisA Theory with Robert wayto reconcile ofJustice26 Nozick's Anarchy, and social justicemay State, & Utopia.27Individualrights wellnotbe compatible concepts.28 I believe,in otherwords,thattheconceptualframework of modernmorals, with its concomitant notions of duty,autonomy,rights, freedom, self,and rather thanan asset to our choice,has runits course,and is now a hindrance searchforhow better to getalongwithone another in theworld.We continuing need new,or older,presuppositions. Of course,the"What else?" questionnow whichis whereConfucius comesin again. intrudes, I do not wantto suggest thattheLun Yu is thebe-alland end-allforfinding to thehumansearch.I do maintain answers thatit is a highly usefulbeginning, forjust as no one could drop the Ptolemaicview of the universeuntil the so do I believethatwe cannotabandon our Copernicanhad been articulated, modern framework of morals and theselfuntilwe have alternatives. conceptual The Lun Yu is one suchalternative ifread in and on itsown terms, from which from learnmuchas we,2,400yearsand 10,000milesdistant it,maynevertheless we continue thequestforanswers to thequestionofhowwe shouldliveourlives.
NOTES 1. Kierkegaardian sources:Either/Or, 2 vols. (GardenCity,New York: Anchor,1959).Fear and and The SicknessUntoDeath (Garden City,New York: Anchor,1954); and Concluding Trembling trans.D. F. Swenson and W. Lowrie (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton Unscientific Postscript, see JamesCollins, The Mind of Kierkegaard Press, 1968). For commentary, University (Chicago, Illinois:HenryRegnery, to followas closelyas possibletheinterpretations 1965). I have attempted of Kierkegaardoffered by JohnDouglas Mullen in his splendidKierkegaard's SelfPhilosophy: and Cowardice in thePresent Deception Age (New York: Mentor,1981).To mymindMullenmakes the best case forKierkegaard'sconceptof the individualselfas beingof greatrelevanceforthe moraland other ofourtimes. forMullen'sefforts pressing the problems My regard notwithstanding, conclusion ofthepresent is thatwhatMullenseesas essential for thecureis actually thedisease. study 2. The bestEnglish-language of Confuciusremains H. G. Creel's Confucius and the biography ChineseWay(New York: HarperTorchbooks,1960).Additional Confucian sourcesarecitedbelow. 3. Collins,The MindofKierkegaard, pp. 15-18. 4. Creel,Confucius. 5. A distinction almost commonplacein Anglo-American made in P. F. philosophy,first Strawson's"On Referring," and now a basic feature of speech-act Strawson's classicarticle theory. editedbyAntony Flew (New York: appears,amongotherplaces,in Essays in Conceptual Analysis, St. Martin'sPress,1966). 6. Mullen,Kierkegaard's p. 15. Philosophy, 7. Quoted in ibid. 8. Kierkegaard, vol. 2, p. 174. Cf. Mullen,Kierkegaard's Either/Or, Philosophy, pp. 122 ff. 9. Kierkegaard, vol. 2, pp. 180-181, and succinctly statedon p. 255: "He ... who Either/Or, chooseshimself chooses himself as thisdefinite individual...." ethically concretely 10. I have followed theChinesetextof theLun Yu printed in JamesLegge's 1894editionof The
210 Rosemont
I am onlyreferring Chinese as embodied Classics.In thisarticle to theclassicalConfucian tradition intheMengZi, XunZi, and Li Jiin addition to theLun Yu.The post-Tang tradition Neo-Confucian mustbe treated separately. 11. For themostpartI followMullenhere.See especially Philosophy, pp. 128ff. Kierkegaard's to Confucius:The Analects(Harmondsworth, 12. In his Introduction Middlesex,England: the"good man" and and thecheng to theshanrenh ren', Books, 1979),D. C. Lau also refers Penguin the "completeman" (p. 13). The contextof the relevant passages shows,however,that these notkindsof persons.See, forexample,Lun Yu 13:28 and refer to qualitiesof persons, expressions 14:13; and note 14 in thisarticle. in The Analects 13. In his Lun Yu translation of Confucius (New York: Vintage,1938),Arthur thanherein, and he does nottakeup thesheng ren shifromjun zi, butdifferently Waleydistinguishes at all (see pp. 33-38). An incisiveanalysisof the latterconceptis in Roger Ames,"The Sage as a paper read at the 1985 Annual Meetingof the Associationof Asian Studies.For Performer," and sheng renas equivalent. sheng present purposesI am taking with textual see account.For fuller 14. This is,ofcourse,a highly condensed discussion, analyses, Ethics, forthcoming. myConfucian in honorof 15. I first edition, arguedthispointin "State & Societyin theHsiinTzu," Festschrift in thatworkI said thattheyoungscholar of Monumenta Serica29 (1970-1971). However, Wihelm, meismistaken. a description has convinced See his Herbert must chooseto be li-governed, Fingarette ofthe seminalConfucius-TheSecularas Sacred(New York: Harper& Row, 1972);also myreview to thereview and my book in Philosophy East and West26, no.4 (October 1976); and his response detaila in Philosophy East and West28, no. 4 (October1978);all ofwhichtakeup in greater reply, oftheissuestreated here. See also Fingarette's number "Followingthe'One Thread'oftheAnalects," editors(Thematic H. Rosemont, in Studiesin Classical ChineseThought, Jr.and B. I. Schwartz, StudiesSeriesoftheJAAR,1979). A Crossroads."See also JoelKupperman, 16. Fingarette, Confucius, chap. 2: "A Way Without East and West and theNatureofReligiousEthics,"in Philosophy "Confucius 21,no. 2 (April1971). here. use of"morals"suchthattheterm modifier Thereis a general 17. "Modern" is an important to sets of conceptsand criteriafor describing, analyzing,and evaluatinghuman simplyrefers conduct. But "ethics" is a more appropriatetermfor this generalmeaning,I believe,because with theprinciples based on with"moralprinciples," "morals"has cometo be virtually synonymous ofthis modern choose.The bankruptcy selvesmustrationally which autonomous a conceptofduties at Alasdair been is more morals" morals"-"self-centered length by argued apt-has "duty-based of Notre Dame Press, 1981). (Notre Dame, Indiana: University Maclntyrein his AfterVirtue the "virtues"of an to an ethicsbased on qualitiesof character, would have us return MacIntyre frameAristotelian thata revised I am less sanguine thanMacIntyre conceptual updatedAristotle. because Aristotle in AfterVirtue, workcan solve the problemshe well describes keptcentralthe definable seenpersonhood self.Had thePhilosopher notionofan individual onlyinterdependently, or the Poeticsseparate the Politics, from the Ethicsseparately have written he would not,I think, from both.See also notes21, 23, and 28 in thisarticle. is taken frommy "Against Relativism,"in Gerald J. Larson and Eliot 18. This argument of Hawaii Press, AcrossBoundaries (Honolulu, Hawaii: University Deutsch,editors, Interpreting forthcoming). ofFingarette are madein myreview thesearguments and expandedform, different 19. In slightly beenadvanced has morerecently Foot, and reply to him(see note15).A similar byPhillippa argument in her"Moral Relativism": code a moralcode,and to go on to talkabout a to call a certain is inclined Evenifan anthropologist fromour own, it does not followthatwe should accept thisway of radicallydifferent morality as anyoneelse in or prejudiced An anthropologist thephenomena. maybe as confused describing of an alienculture. to theteachings wordssuchas 'morality' applying See Relativism: & Moral,editedby MichaelKrausz and JackW. Meiland(NotreDame, Congnitive has to thisissue,JoelKupperman ofNotreDame Press,1982),p. 162.Pursuant Indiana: University the term"moral" here, well surrender thata relativist noted (in a privatecommunication) might is certainly hisorherposition. inorder to maintain Kupperman needing onlythenotionofevaluation
211
is the more on thisissue (as Foot's articlealso goes on to maintain).My claim,however, correct untiland modest one thatethnographic evidence cannotbe citedto bolster claimsofmoralrelativism unlessthatevidence is reevaluated inthelight ofthepointsmadeherein. For other against arguments see my"AgainstRelativism" relativism, (citedin note 18). to showthatdao, or 20. Hence arguments li, oryij,or whatever endeavoring might appropriately be translated as "morals"in thecontext ofclassicalChinesecannotsucceed, unlessone is also willing to offer Chineselexicalcandidates for"rights," "freedom," "duties,"and so forth-an "subjective," endeavor.Especiallyis thisso withrespect to the Lun Yu, altogether question-begging philological which does notevencontaintheinner/outer See also the distinction ofneik/wai'madein theMencius. sourcescitedin note 15. 21. Although work(After citedin note 17) is themostsustained Virtue, MacIntyre's philosophical attackon themodem conceptof morals-and rights-he is not altogether alone in his revisionist views.Christina HoffSommers, forinstance, has gathered a number ofreadings in herVice together and Virtue inEveryday HarcourtBraceJovanovich, Life(San Diego, California: 1985)withsalutary thereto. see thecritique and others introductions ofMacIntyre in AmyGutman, (on rights) Further, "Communitarian Critics ofLiberalism," contains further & PublicAffairs 14,no. 3, which Philosophy citations. to thisissue of (I am indebtedto mycolleagueJoanMcGregorforcallingmyattention & PublicAffairs.) See also note28. Philosophy 22. A first to thisclaimwillundoubtedly be thatwhatever merit itmayhave had in late response Zhou China and whatever ethicalimplications forethics thenand there, theConfucian conceptof a cannotbe takenseriously of reasons, person(and attendant ethics) todayfora number amongthem whereas must constrained, beingthatConfucius' personseemsgreatly anymodern conceptoftheself involvenot onlynotionsof freedom, but creativity and imagination as well.Creativity and imagican only be seen and appreciatedwhen domains fortheirfreeplay have been nation,however, there is onlychance,randomness. otherwise are manywaysto be a good specified; Obviouslythere and so forth, and just as obviously all of us do play some of these teacher, friend, parent, neighbor, rolesand/or others. Thereis muchfree and imagination within thelimits drawnby playforcreativity these roles, but intelligible and only withinthese limits, just as thereis fullplay for creativity inchess, butonlywithin therules(limits) ofthegame.It can thusalso be maintained that imagination there is a good deal of freedom fortheConfucianperson,withtheprovisothat"freedom" is not a butan achievement EliotDeutsch.See hisPersonhood, andFreedom state, term, following Creativity of Hawaii Press,1982).For additionaldiscussion see note 23. (Honolulu, Hawaii: University 23. Classical Chinese societywas certainly and thus to a significant extentmipatriarchal, extendedfarbeyondwhat Confuciusand his followers sogynous.Arguably, patriarchal privilege would have condoned, but it cannot be denied that the classical textssee women in basically subordinate roles.It is thusall themoreparadoxicalthatwhatI am attempting to describe as the Confucianinterdependent what some contemporary researchers personverynearlyapproximates describe as a femaleconceptofpersons.For example, Carol Gilliganhas said: and particularly issuesof dependency, are experienced Consequently, relationships, differently by womenand men.For boysand men,separation and individuation arecritically tiedto gender identity since separationfromthe motheris essentialforthe development of masculinity. For girlsand or feminine do not depend on theachievement of separation women,issues of femininity identity from themother or on theprogress ofindividuation. Sincemasculinity is defined through separation whilefemininity is defined malegender is threatened while attachment, through identity byintimacy female is threatened Thus malestendto have difficulty withrelationgender identity by separation. while females tend to have with individuation. In A Voice ships, problems Different (Cambridge, Massachusetts: HarvardUniversity Press,1982),p. 8) in "Feminism& Epistemology: RecentWork on the ConnectionBetweenGenderand Relatedly, Held writes: Knowledge,"Virginia ... [N]on-Western [epistemological] approacheshave oftenbeen based farmore than the AngloAmerican viewswithwhichwe are mostfamiliar on a relational and moreholistic viewof reality. Such continental and non-Western viewshave usuallybeen more misogynous than have AngloAmericanviews,yettheyseem epistemologically closerto whatis now beingsuggested as a more & PublicAffairs feminine characteristically approach.(Philosophy 14,no. 3, p. 300) If thesefeminist can be sustained, thecase fora Confucian-like of ethics arguments conceptcluster
212 Rosemont
and in note22 and theli-governed thanis suggested in thebodyofthisarticle personis evenstronger For further see myConfucian Ethics(forthcoming). discussion, preceding. of Fingarette 24. Taken from myreview (citedin note 15). in highesteem:"Kierkegaard was by farthemostprofound held Kierkegaard 25. Wittgenstein was a saint"(Rush Rhees,ed.,Recollections thinker ofthelastcentury. Kierkegaard of Wittgeinstein Press,1984),p. 87). (New York: OxfordUniversity 26. JohnRawls. A Theoryof Justice(Cambridge,Massachusetts:Harvard University Press, 1971). 27. RobertNozick,Anarchy, State,& Utopia(New York: Basic Books, 1974). ofhis conceptof "justiceas Rawls has beennarrowing theapplicability 28. In his recent writing thereis a distinctively relativistic flavorin these to the modernindustrial fairness" democracies; of It is doubtful, that is absent in A Theoryof Justice. however,that this narrowing writings in Moral Theory," willconvince Nozickians.See "Kantian Constructivism convinced applicability as Fairness:Politicalnot in "Justice in The Journal 77, no. 9. Even morerecently, of Philosophy thathisconceptof a selfis & PublicAffairs 14,no. 3), Rawls maintains (Philosophy Metaphysical" of modernindustrial boundaries thenarrowed dubiousevenwithin politicalonly.This is, I think, Whencontrasted withthe as thequotes from democracies, Gilliganand Held (see note23) suggest. Rawls is doing it becomestransparent Confucianperson,however, just how much metaphysics in theHsiinTzu" and Fingarette's In my"State& Society with simultaneously philosophy. political thatprovideall the Confucius-TheSecularas Sacred(citedin note 15) cases are made forsocieties thanNozickwould with lessgovernment to provide for and morethatRawlswishes citizens, benefits, allow.
a
b d
-kA
g
h
h j
k 7

Kierkegaard and Confucius: On Finding The Way

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Kierkegaard and Confucius: On Finding The Way

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Kierkegaard and Confucius: On Finding the Way Author(s): Henry Rosemont, Jr.

theWay Jr. Kierkegaard and Confucius: On finding HenryRosemont,

Anda mungkin juga menyukai