Review Asian 104 Essay
I. Review inquiries for short-answer inquiries 1. Briefly characterize the undermentioned footings: a. Hexagram-The I Ching book consists of 64 hexagrams. [ 2 ] [ 3 ] A hexagram is a figure composed of six stacked horizontal lines ( ? yao ) . where each line is either Yang ( an unbroken. or solid line ) . or Yin ( broken. an unfastened line with a spread in the centre ) . The hexagram lines are traditionally counted from the underside up. so the lowest line is considered line one while the top line is line six. Hexagrams are formed by uniting the original eight trigrams in different combinations.
Each hexagram is accompanied with a description. frequently deep. kindred to fables. Each line in every hexagram is besides given a similar description. b. yin-yang-In its wide sense. the term ‘yin-yang’ means the integrity of two mutually-opposed but correlate and complementary forces bing within anything in the existence: the yang is considered to be the positive. active. and ( obviously ) strong force. while the yin the negative. inactive. giving force. In a narrow sense. it means two complementary fluid-force elements within chis whose mix determines the being of all things in the existence.
The yin and yang are inter-dependent. inter-penetrating. inter-transformational. and harmoniously balanced ; these characteristics are represented by the point at the bosom of each half of the fluxing circle in the yin-yang diagram: ? . In some conventional histories. the yang is depicted in footings of the Sun. light male. summer. dry. dominant. upper. active. etc. . while the yin in footings of the Moon. dark. female. winter. moist. receptive. submissive. lower. inactive. etc. c. yin-yang metaphysical vision-The yin-yang metaphysical vision refering the relation between changing/becoming and unchanging/being. as delivered in the Yi-Jing ( I Ching ) text
takes neither precedence of changing/becoming over unchanging/being nor precedence of unchanging/being over changing/becoming. but respects changing/becoming and unchanging/being as complementary yin-yang antonyms in an organic integrity. The yin-yang metaphysical vision has a strong methodological deduction and suggests the yin-yang manner of thought or. in more theoretical footings. the yin-yang theoretical account of interaction and transmutation. which reflects the corporate wisdom of ancient Chinese people on how to understand the cardinal manner of the universe and how to look at occurrences around us.
It has deeply influenced the orientation of outlook. and methodological schemes. of subsequent Chinese minds in assorted schools or motions. Harmonizing to the yin-yang manner of thought. anything in the universe per se contains two reciprocally opposed but correlate and complementary forces. yin and yang.
The fundamental law and interaction between yin and yang is considered to hold the undermentioned features: ( 1 ) universal: yin and yang co-exist within everything in the existence ; ( 2 ) fundamental: their interaction within is the ultimate beginning or forcing force for everything’s becoming-process ( organizing. developing. changing. and altering ) ; ( 3 ) complementary: they are mutualist. reciprocally supportive. and auxiliary ; ( 4 ) holistic: they are united into one thing within instead than divide without ;
( 5 ) moral force: they are non in a inactive province but in altering procedure and transform into each other ; and ( 6 ) harmonious equilibrium: they seek balance through cooperation and in agreement. d. jun-zi ( in the Analects ) Behind Confucius’ chase of the ideal moral character lies the mute presupposition that the ultimate concern a individual should hold and besides the primary worthwhile thing a individual should make is to endeavor to go a jun-zi/ ? ? morally superior person–gentlemen with the ideal moral character.
One’s morality or moral cultivation has to be pursued for its ain interest and for its intrinsic value. with complete indifference to one’s secular success or failure and to one’s wagess after decease or in this life ; it is more of import than one’s biological life. ( Cf. . 4. 8 ; 14:38 ; 18:7 ) e. ren ( in the Analects ) – The construct of ren occupies the cardinal place in Confucius’ doctrine. ‘Ren’ has been rendered into English in assorted ways such as: benevolence. adult male to manness. perfect virtuousness. human heartedness. and. as in our text edition. humanity.
It has been regarded as the specifying virtuousness of a junzi/gentlemen and the ultimate committedness in Confucius’ idea.
However. Confucius ne’er intends to offer a formal definition of ren ; alternatively. he gives merely assorted replies to inquiries about ren in different fortunes for pupils with different dispositions and with changing grades of understanding. f. Lolo ( in the Analects ) – Lolo is another of import virtuousness through which ren is cultivated. Confucius stresses yi as necessary for developing ren. Unlike Li as external rites and regulations of properness. Lolo is internal virtuousness. a moral temperament to make what is right and an ability to acknowledge what is right ; yi maps like a sort of moral sense or intuition sing action.
Like Kant’s construct of good will and duty. what is harmonizing to yi unconditioned and absolute ; some actions must be performed merely because they are right. and non because of what they produce. On the other manus. unlike Kant. Lolo is non something that has nil to make with disposition. temperament or intuition. Equally far as the relation between Lolo and Li is concerned. cultivating Lolo is carried out through detecting Li. “The superior individual respects righteousness ( Lolo ) as the substance of everything.
He/she patterns it harmonizing to the rule of properness ( Li ) . He/she brings it forth in modestness. And he/she carries it to its decision in faithfulness” ( 15. 17 ) . One manner of cultivating ren is through caltivating Lolo by agencies of practising equal Li. g. Li ( in the Analects ) – Although ren is the most cardinal virtuousness. the footing of humanity. and the ultimate usher to human action. Confucius recognizes that more concrete. peculiar and immediate ushers to action are needed in mundane life.
Those concrete ushers Confucius found in the regulations of properness ( Li ) which cover assorted socially established regulations regulating societal. moral. and spiritual patterns ( runing from rites. customary codifications. ceremonial ordinances to moral regulations ) . Confucius thinks that practising Li is one of import or even indispensable manner to cultivate and recognize the potency of humanity. ( I )
The virtue possible demands to be revealed. strengthened. and cultivated through human existent actions which per se need those ready-made. socially established concrete ushers to modulate. [ The demand for action-implementation counsel ] ( two ) Li has its societal and public character and emphasizes the openness of the participants to each other ;
this sort of unfastened. shared engagement in life with other individuals would arouse and further the development of ren. [ The demand for social-participation cultivation. ] h. shu ( in the Analects ) – Zi-gong asked. “Is there one individual stating which one can set into pattern through one’s whole life? ” Confucius replied. “Perhaps it is the stating of shu: ‘Never do to others what one would non want [ others or oneself ] to make to oneself’ . ” First. one portion of Confucius’ construct of shu lies in its methodological preparation “do to others what one would non want [ others or oneself ] to make to oneself” .
Note that these words in the bracket parentheses are non Confucius’ ain but be added at that place by me – I mean Confucius’ stating there is unfastened to ( should be given if we look at the whole context of them in the Analects ) two readings ; that is: i. zhong ( in the Analects ) – Zhong: One’s sincere and devoted committedness to those culturally and historically established social-constitutions like the Li ( rites and regulations ) . Zhong is the external starting-point for introspection of one’s ain desires and one’s intervention of others by virtuousness of those external ritual regulations in concrete state of affairss. Zhong is finally
regulated by the internal starting-point dimension ( the significant facet of shu ) but is a manner to pattern ren. j. the rules of reversibility and extensibility ( of Confucius’s version of the Golden Rule ) The Principle of Reversibility: ( Do non ) Do unto others what you would ( non ) desire others to make unto yourself. The Principle of Extensibility: ( Do non ) Do unto others what you would ( non ) want yourself to make unto yourself. k. four cardinal virtuousnesss. ren. Lolo. Li. and zhi in Mencius’s doctrine The four “beginnings”—Ren* . Lolo. Li. and zhi. Not “original goodness” but potencies inclined to the good ( Mencius 6a1 ) . Note: for Mencius “potential” must intend something already on the manner to realization.
The existent Chinese character is the 1 for “sprout” non “seed. ” •Ren? as an ethical property is a temperament in heart-and-mind ; it emphasizes an affectional concern for others. both non desiring to harm others ( 7B:31 ) and non being able to bear the agony of others ( 7B:31 ) . Ren is taken as that in which one resides ( 4A:10 ) . •Yi? as an moral property emphasizes a stringency with oneself. a committedness to stay by certain ethical criterions that involves both non geting things by im proper agencies and non accepting others’ improper intervention of oneself.
Yi as a quality of actions ( properness ) consists in those ethical criterions ; it refers to what is suiting or proper to make. and it is frequently related to a way ( 4A:10 ) or manner ( dao ) ( 2A:2 ) . •Li? as the rite is identified with assorted socially established regulations of behaviors. Li as an ethical property involves a general temperament to follow Li as rites and a command of the inside informations of Li. enabling one to follow Li with easiness. •Zhi? as an ethical property means an ability to state what is proper in conformity with fortunes. cubic decimeter.
Mo Zi’s three trials of arguments- Mo. Zi ( MoTzu ) ? ? ( given name ‘Di’ ? : 470- 391 BCE ) was the laminitis of Mohism ( Mo-Jia? ? ) . His instructions are presented in the Mo-Z? ? ? . His work is the first 1 that is presented in argumentative signifier in classical Chinese doctrine and develops serious unfavorable judgments of classical Confucianism. ( 1 ) Mo Zi’s Three Trials for Any Doctrine Mo Zi ( Mo Tzu ) was concerned with bian ( reasoning out options by distinguish ) and the criterions by which to separate shi-fei ( right and incorrect options ) [ californium. . Course Package. Part I. 3. 1. p. 222 ] .
He put frontward his history of Three Tests for Any Doctrine or his ‘three-standard’ methodological scheme ( san-biao- fa? ? ? ) : ( a ) Ancient Authority Test: It must hold its footing ( to analyze whether it would hold understanding with the pattern of the sage male monarchs above ) ; ( B ) Direct Experience Test: There must be grounds for it ( to analyze it by enquiries into the existent experience of the ordinary people below ) ; ( degree Celsius ) Utilitatian Trial: It must hold practical application ( to analyze whether it coincides with the benefit of the ordinary people of the province ) m. ( Mo Zi’s ) utilitarianism Utilitarianism:
Maximize goodness ( public-service corporation ) of effects of our actions for all people affected. • For the Mohists: . the Utilitarian Test provides a rule by which to judge all traditional morality and outweigh any ancient authorization. [ Cf. . CP. Part I. 3. 1. p. 214. ] • Both Confucius and Mo Zi talked about ren ( humanity ) and yi ( righteousness ) . However. to Confucius. Lolo is regulated by ren ; a chief difference between Jun-zi ( the superior individual ) and Xiao-ren ( the inferior individual ) is this: the former is after Lolo while the latter after fifty-one 4 ( benefits/profits ) . In contrast. to Mo Zi. renand Lolo are finally to be understood in footings of good consequences. N.
( Yang Zhu’s ) ethical egoism Ethical egoism: One ought ever to maximise one’s ain personal good as an terminal. Egotism: Being selfish with no respect to others’ good existences and involvements. 2. What are major focal points and characteristic characteristics of philosophical enquiry? In what sense is philosophy considered as the most extremist subject? In what sense is philosophy considered as the most conservative subject? • Philosophical Inquiry:
A certain sort of reflective activity which has its major focal points and characteristic characteristics to be mentioned. • Philosophic Ideas: Consequences of philosophical enquiry which are frequently systematic and theoretical in character. ( 2 )
Major focal points of Philosophical Inquiry & lt ; 1 & gt ; Inquiry into the most cardinal and general issues refering the human being and the universe portion of which the homo being is ( ultimate concerns ) . such as “What is the significance of human life? ” “What is the cardinal value of human behavior and character? ” “What is being? ” “How can we genuinely know anything? ” With this focal point. a philosopher is like an ultimate/global-concern chaser who is concerned with the most cardinal issues about the human being and universe. which no other subjects are supposed to manage.
& lt ; 2 & gt ; Inquiry into those presupposed basic constructs or underlying premises in assorted Fieldss of survey. including doctrine itself. With this focal point. a philosopher is like a pushing-forward pest who pushes frontward a ( local ) filed of survey through disputing. and invariably re-examining. those undue presuppositions and patterns of this field of study. ) & lt ; 3 & gt ; Inquiry into all those rational jobs or original foundational work with which other subjects can non get by. With this focal point. a philosopher is like an rational stepmother who welcomes those rational orphans rejected by other subjects.
& lt ; 4 & gt ; Inquiry into the significance and construction of those of import constructs and cardinal footings involved in the above enquiries through conceptual. logical and lingual analysis and meaning- elucidation. With this focal point. a philosopher is like a thought janitor who cleans up mussy footings and constructs. 3. What are common concerns and important differences between doctrine and faith? Although doctrine and faith portion some cardinal concerns. and although a historical motion of idea can incorporate both elements. doctrine is distinguished from faith in two closely related connexions.
( 1 ) Philosophical enquiry is critical in nature in the sense that philosophical enquiry does non blindly claim or accept anything and that nil is perfectly safe from a philosophical inquirer’s regard. [ This includes a philosopher’s attitude towards her ain claims. Though she can really steadfastly keep her current place ( non blindly but on the footing of debate. understood loosely ) . a philosopher is expected to be open-minded and hold his or her place unfastened to unfavorable judgment and possible betterment or alteration. instead than rendering it perfectly immune from criticism. ] ( 2 )
Philosophical enquiry establishes its decisions per se and chiefly through debate. justification and account instead than being based on faith 4. What do yin and yang mean? What are the dual significances of yin-yao and yang-yao as ideographic symbols? First. when used entirely. the yin-ya O or the term “the YIN-yang universal” denotes the yin force as characterized before ; in this instance. the term yang in the name “the YIN-yang universal” is used to foreground the interactive and permeating relation between the yin force and the yang force.
Second. in the context of the hexagram. the yin-yao or the term & gt ; the YIN-yang universal” denotes the yin-dominant phase of a altering procedure at which yang force is besides an indispensable subscriber to the altering or development in a certain form and is denoted by the term yang in the phrase ; in this instance. the term yang in the name “the YIN-yang universal” is used to denote the complementary yang-component in the yin-dominant province. The same holds for the yang-yao or the term “the YANG-yin universal” .
The ideographic simplexes yin-yao and yang-yao. i. e. . the ideographic symbols and. are used in the Yijing text to mention severally to what might be characteristically called “the YIN-yang universal” and “the YANG-yin universal” for the ground to be explained.
The yin-yao and yang- yao entirely point severally to the two most basic mutually-opposed but mutualist and interpenetrating forces that exist in the existence. or in everything of the existence. in their assorted and distinguishable ways in so far as each of wan-wu ( ten-thousand- things ) has its ain distinguishable individuality. One might every bit good place them. in more or less metaphorical footings. severally as the negative. inactive. weak and deconstructive Yin force and as the positive. active. strong and constructive Yang force.
They constitute the two most cardinal constituents of the existence: they present themselves as the unchanging in altering and the being in going. The ideographic symbols and. as a affair of fact. present one of the earliest efforts of human existences to generalise and abstract the being- facet of the existence ( in this instance. what are shared by everything in the existence ) into the cardinal metaphysical classs through ideographic symbolisation. In so making. the Yijing doctrine reveals a certain being- concerned metaphysical position. 5. Give a brief account of the relation among ren. Li. and Lolo in Confucius’ philosophy.
The rule of Ren is related to the constructs of Li and Lolo. Li is frequently translated as “ritual” while Lolo is frequently translated as “righteousness” . These three interrelated footings trade with bureau as Confucians conceive it. Li is the action which has been deemed appropriate by society. Lolo is the action that is so right. while Ren trades with the relationship between the agent and object of the action. Often fifty-one and Lolos are the same ; nevertheless. that is non ever the instance. Li is the outward look of Confucian ideals. while Ren is both the inward and outward looks of those same ideals.
Li. harmonizing to Hopfe and Woodward: “Basically. Li seems to intend ‘the class of life as it is intended to go’ . Li besides has spiritual and societal intensions. When a society lives by Li. it moves swimmingly: work forces and adult females respect their seniors and higher-ups ; the proper rites and ceremonials are performed ; everything and everyone is in its proper topographic point. ” 6. What are the major points of Mencius’s and Xun Zi’s distinguishable positions on homo ( moral ) nature? What are their major statements for their positions on the issue?
Like Mencius. Xunzi claims to construe Confucius’ thought genuinely. but leavens it with his ain parts. While neither Gaozi nor Mencius is willing to entertain the impression that human existences might originally be evil. this is the basis of Xunzi’s place on human nature.
Against Mencius. Xunzi defines human nature as what is congenital and unconditioned. and so asks why instruction and ritual are necessary for Mencius if people truly are good by nature. Whereas Mencius claims that human existences are originally good but argues for the necessity of self- cultivation. Xunzi claims that human existences are originally bad but argues that they can be reformed. even perfected. through self-education.
Besides like Mencius. Xunzi sees li as the key to the cultivation of renxing. 7. What are Mencius’s and Xun Zi’s distinguishable theoretical accounts of moral self-education? How are their distinguishable theoretical accounts related to their several positions on homo ( moral ) nature? For Mencius. the venue of philosophical activity and self-education is the xin ( hsin ) . a term that denotes both the main organ of the circulatory system and the organ of idea. and hence is translated here and in many other beginnings as “heart-mind. “
Mencius’ positions of the Godhead. political organisation. human nature. and the way toward personal development all start and terminal in the heart-mind. The end of Mencian self-education is to convey one’s chi. xin. and yan ( words ) together in a seamless blend of rightness ( Lolo ) and ritual properness ( Li ) . Mencius goes on to depict what he means by “flood-like qi” : It is the kind of chi that is utmost in enormousness. uttermost in soundness.
If. by uprightness. you nourish it and make non interfere with it. it fills the infinite between Heaven and Earth. It is the kind of chi that matches the right [ Lolo ] with the Way [ Dao ] ; without these. it starves. It is generated by the accretion of right [ yi ] – one can non achieve it by sporadic righteousness. If anything one does neglect to run into the criterions of one’s heart-mind. it starves. ( 2A2 )
To sum up. both biological science and civilization are of import for Mencian self-education. and so is Tian. Schwartz. p. 296: Another contrast with Hobbes and the Confucians. There is non a intimation in Hobbes’ description of the absolute sovereign about his moral cultivation or the necessity of his being virtuous at all. His is a regulation of jurisprudence non personal virtuousness. Xunzi of class disagrees: “The jurisprudence can non stand entirely. The assorted classs [ of Li? ] can non implement themselves. It is merely when 1 obtains the [ right ] adult male that they can be actualized. Without the right adult male. they are lost.
The jurisprudence is the rule of good order. The baronial adult male is the beginning of the law” ( quoted in ibid. ) Xunzi’s unfavorable judgment of the legalist Shendao would suit Hobbes’ king really good: “He despises self- cultivation and has a preference for making [ new ] Torahs. . . . He exalts jurisprudence and is without law” ( quoted in ibid. . p. 319 ) . 8. Give a briefly account of the relation between Mo Zi’s two basic places against Confucius’s philosophy. It is of import to observe that both Confucius and Mo Zi talked abour ren ( humanity / whose traditional actual sense is “inter-personal love or care” ) and yi ( righteousness ) .
However. to Confucius. Lolo is regulated by ren ; a chief difference between Jun-zi ( the superior individual ) and Xiao-ren ( the inferior individual ) is this: the former is after Lolo while the latter after li4 ( benefits/profits ) . In contrast. to Mo Zi. ren and Lolo are finally to be understood in footings of good consequences. Another related major thesis of Mohism is its thought of cosmopolitan attention for each ( jian-ai / chien-ai? ? ) .
In contrast to Confucian accent on one’s love with differentiation in position of dealingss of affinity with oneself ( that is. demo more love/care to your parents. household members than distant aliens ) . Mohists emphasized that one needs to demo impartial concern for each irrespective of dealingss of affinity with oneself.
Besides in contrast to Confucian attack. Mohists advocated cosmopolitan attention because of its good consequence instead than based upon some built-in goodness of human existences or of the act. Confucius maintains love with differentiation while Mo Zi insists on universal attention for each “Those who love others will be loved by others. Those who benefit others will be benefited by others.
Those who hate others will be hated by others” . See – “loving” or care/benefiting other is to be justified by its ( external ) good effects. alternatively of its ( internal ) intrinsic value [ in contrast. for Confucius. one’s morality or moral cultivation has to be pursued for its ain interest and for its intrinsic value. with complete indifference to one’s secular success or failure and to one’s wagess after decease or in this life ; it is more of import than one’s biological life. ( Cf. . the Analects 4. 8 ; 14:38 ; 18:7 ) ] . 9. What is the difference between Yangzhu ( Yang Zi ) as a anchorite and the Unabomber ( Theodore Kaczynski ) as a anchorite?
10. What is the rationale implicit in Gong-sun Long’s several statements for the thesis that the white Equus caballus is non the Equus caballus ( utilizing one of the three statements in Handout 9 to exemplify the point ) ? Normally. in Chinese and English. it is clear from context which sense is intended. so we do non detect the ambiguity. So the sentence “White Equus caballuss are non horses” would usually be taken to asseverate the evidently false claim that white Equus caballuss are non portion of the group of Equus caballuss.
However. the “sophist” in the duologue defends the statement under the reading. “White Equus caballuss are non indistinguishable with Equus caballuss. ” The latter statement is really true. since — as the “sophist” explains — “horses” includes Equus caballuss that are white. yellow. brown. etc. . while “white horses” includes merely white Equus caballuss. and excludes the others. ‘Distinct-Necessary-Identity-Contributor’ Argument in B ( 4 ) [ 1 ] Pr.
1 [ The necessary individuality subscribers of ] A white Equus caballus includes white colour [ as its necessary individuality subscriber ] ; [ 2 ] Pr. 2 A Equus caballus does non hold white colour [ as its necessary individuality subscriber ] ; [ 3 ] So. a white Equus caballus and a Equus caballus do non hold the same necessary individuality subscriber ; [ 4 ] [ Pr.
3 If two things are the same. so they must hold the same necessary individuality subscriber ; that is. if they do non hold the same necessary individuality subscriber. so they are non the same ; ] [ 5 ] So. the white Equus caballus is non indistinguishable to ( or differs from ) the Equus caballus ; that is. the white Equus caballus is non the Equus caballus. 11. What is the point of Hui Shi’s proposition that “the minute the Sun reaches the zenith at midday. it is worsening ; the minute the animal is born. it is dying” ( Proposition 4 ) ? What is the point of Hui Shi’s proposition that “Connected rings can be in separation” ( Proposition 8 ) ?
“The minute the Sun reaches the zenith at midday. it is worsening ; the minute the animal is born. it is deceasing. ” [ This characterizes the two characteristics of changing/becoming procedure in the nature: things will develop in the opposite way when they become utmost ; being and non-being interpenetrate each other. ] “Connected rings can be in separation. ” [ Connected rings themselves are separated from each other in respect to the individuality of each ring ; each ring is at the same in connexion with and separation from the other rings. The point is that apparently opposed and unrelated provinces or procedures can be possessed by the same thing and therefore be permeating and complementary. ] 12.
Harmonizing the Later Mohist’ text Xiao-Qu. why does the undermentioned application of the “linguistic-parallel” illation go incorrect: Alleged premiss: The robber is ( indistinguishable to ) the human being. Decision: Killing robber is ( indistinguishable to ) killing the human being. “I’m believing that it is non “killing the person” because though it is said that “the robber is the person” . robbers aren’t the lone distinguishable individual. There are many people who can be considered a “person” and hence generalising that killing the robber is killing the individual would be incorrect” ] is right. I think you are on the right path.
When stating that “killing the robber is non killing the person” . what is focused on is non the common facet shared by all human existences but some distinguishable facet that is possessed by the robber ( they therefore got the penalty for that ) but non by any member of the human being aggregation ; with this focal point in topographic point. the due premiss that leads to this decision is expected to be “the robber is non indistinguishable to the individual [ with respect to that distinguishable facet possessed by the robber but non by any member of the human being ] ” . alternatively of “the robber is ( indistinguishable to ) the person” . 13.
What are differences and connexions between three methodological things ( i. e. . a methodological position. its related methodological instrument and its related methodological steering rule ) involved in how to near an object of survey? What are two ethical motives we can pull about their relation? How can we keep an equal methodological steering rule to look at the relation between distinguishable methodological positions?
“The same-object-recognizing condition… and both can cognize they are speaking about the same issue of? lial piousness and the same ( type of ) the object ( a sort of regard feeling ) that both groups of cats are truly sing in their existent lives towards their parents ( if they do hold parents ) .
By looking at the the Euthyphro and Confucius’ 2. 5-2. 8 of the Analects. both talk about what constitute the sons/daughters’ “reverence” feeling. emotion and attitude towards their parents ; in this manner. though this emotion/attituds is label “ ? lial piety” in English and ‘ ‘ ? in Chinese. clearly they are speaking about the same object in the human society on this same Earth.
“So from what I am understanding is that this is stating that because we can understand the same “object” based on personal cognition and are able to speak about it because we can see the similarities even though di0erent words are used to depict the same “object” II. Review inquiries for essay inquiries Notes: The standards for measuring your reply to an essay inquiry are these: ( I ) whether or non the needed stairss are taken ( two ) whether or non the cardinal constructs used are clearly given ; ( three ) whether or non your line of idea are consistent or consistent ; ( four ) whether or non you provide your statement / justification for your point.
1. Explain how the Yin-Yang and Hegelian theoretical accounts of interaction/transformation could be complementary. Stairss: ( I ) Briefly qualify the Ying-Yang theoretical account of interaction/transformation ( yin-yang manner of thought ) ; ( two ) Briefly characterize the Hegelian manner of interaction/transformation ; ( three ) Explain how the two theoretical accounts of interaction/transformation can be complementary ( can we keep both at the same time? why? )
2. Give a comparative scrutiny of Confucius’s and Christian versions of the Golden Rule. Stairss: ( I ) Present the basic points of Confucius’s version of the Golden Rule ; ( two ) Briefly explain the common and distinguishable points between Confucius’s and Christian versions of the Golden Rule ; ( three ) Measure them in comparing: how they can do joint part to our apprehension and equal application of the Golden Rule.
“What you do non wish for yourself. make non make to others. ” Confucius “Whatever you wish that others would make to you. make besides to them. for this is the Law and the Prophets. ” Christian The Aureate Rule does non recommend reciprocality. but generousness besides toward individuals who behave egoistically without restraint. 3. Confucius maintains love with differentiation while Mo Zi insists on universal attention for each ; would you believe Confucius can react to Mo Zi’s challenge by keeping both cosmopolitan love/care and love with differentiation in a consistent manner?
Stairss: ( I ) explain Confucius’ thesis of love with differentiation ; ( two ) explain Mo Zi’s thesis of cosmopolitan attention for each ; ( three ) imagine you were Confucius. could you react to Mo Zi’s challenge by fall backing to some relevant resources in the Analects and keep both cosmopolitan love/care and love with differentiation in a consistent manner? Confucius how to love everyone and everything in a manner most appropriate to the individual or thing. Love depends on the object or thing you are loving for the degree in which you love it.
Love same people in the same ways and different people in different ways. if we loved different people in the same ways and same people in different ways the love would be incorrect. Another related major thesis of Mohism is its thought of cosmopolitan attention for each ( jian-ai / chien-ai? ? ) . In contrast to Confucian accent on one’s love with differentiation in position of dealingss of affinity with oneself ( that is. demo more love/care to your parents. household members than distant aliens ) . Mohists emphasized that one needs to demo impartial concern for each irrespective of dealingss of affinity with oneself.
Besides in contrast to Confucian attack. Mohists advocated cosmopolitan attention because of its good consequence instead than based upon some built-in goodness of human existences or of the act. “Those who love others will be loved by others. Those who benefit others will be benefited by others.
Those who hate others will be hated by others” . See – “loving” or care/benefiting other is to be justified by its ( external ) good effects. alternatively of its ( internal ) intrinsic value [ in contrast. for Confucius. one’s morality or moral cultivation has to be pursued for its ain interest and for its intrinsic value. with complete indifference to one’s secular success or failure and to one’s wagess after decease or in this life ; it is more of import than one’s biological life. ( Cf. . the Analects 4. 8 ; 14:38 ; 18:7 ) ] .
4. How Gongshun Long’s and Hui Shi’s different accents can jointly lend to your understanding and intervention of an object of survey. Stairss: ( I ) what is Gongsun Long’s accent via his statement for the white-horse-is-not-horse ; ( two ) what is Hui Shi’s accent via his Ten Propositions ; ( three ) how their different accents can jointly lend to your understanding and intervention of an object of survey. ( GSL 1 ) The white hor.