Please wait a minute...

Frontiers of Philosophy in China

Front. Philos. China    2018, Vol. 13 Issue (2) : 217-231     https://doi.org/10.3868/s030-007-018-0017-1
Orginal Article |
Confucian Ethics: Altruistic? Egoistic? Both? Neither?
HUANG Yong()
Department of Philosophy, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, NT, Hong Kong, China
Download: PDF(327 KB)  
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

Is Confucian ethics primarily egoistic or altruistic? There is textual support for both answers. For the former, for example, Confucius claims that one learns for the sake of oneself; for the latter, we can find Confucius saying that one ought to not impose upon others as one would not like to be imposed upon. This essay aims to explain in what sense Confucian ethics is egoistic (the highest goal one aims to reach is to become a virtuous person oneself) and in what sense it is altruistic (a virtuous person is necessarily concerned with the well-being, both external and internal, of others). The conclusion to be drawn, however, is not that Confucian ethics is both egoistic and altruistic, but that it is neither, since the Confucian ideal of a virtuous person is to be in one body with others so that there are really no others (since all others become part of myself), and since there are no others, there is no self either.

Keywords Confucius      Analects      Egoism      Altruism      Ethics     
Issue Date: 28 June 2018
 Cite this article:   
HUANG Yong. Confucian Ethics: Altruistic? Egoistic? Both? Neither?[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(2): 217-231.
 URL:  
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fpc/EN/10.3868/s030-007-018-0017-1
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fpc/EN/Y2018/V13/I2/217
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
HUANG Yong
Related articles from Frontiers Journals
[1] WANG Qingjie. The “Gongfu Finger” and Learning in the Analects [J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(2): 232-239.
[2] NI Peimin. Toward a Gongfu Reconstruction of Confucianism —Responses to Comments by Huang Yong, Fan Ruiping, and Wang Qingjie[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(2): 240-253.
[3] Selusi Ambrogio. Mou Zongsan and Martin Heidegger: Reopening a Debate on Ontology and Ethics[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(1): 55-71.
[4] Ellen Y. Zhang. The Face/Facelessness of the Other—A Levinasian Reading of the Ethical of the Zhuangzi [J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(4): 533-553.
[5] Bo R. Meinertsen. Towards Gratitude to Nature: Global Environmental Ethics for China and the World[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(2): 207-223.
[6] YANG Tongjin. Is There an Identity Crisis in Environmental Ethics?[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(2): 195-206.
[7] Timothy O’Leary. Critique, Ethics, and the Apparatus of Experience: A Foucauldian Framework[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(1): 120-136.
[8] Alicia Hennig. Three Different Approaches to Virtue in Business- Aristotle, Confucius, and Lao Zi[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2016, 11(4): 556-586.
[9] Tara Kennedy. The Ethics of Treating Animals as Resources: A Post-Heideggerian Approach[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2016, 11(3): 463-482.
[10] Teun Tieleman. The Early Stoics and Aristotelian Ethics[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2016, 11(1): 104-121.
[11] Michael Slote. From Virtue to Freedom through Emotion[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2015, 10(3): 430-443.
[12] GUO Yi. The Origin and Differentiation of the Theories of Human Nature in Pre-Qin China[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2015, 10(2): 212-238.
[13] Leah Kalmanson,Sarah Mattice. The De of Levinas: Cultivating the Heart-Mind of Radical Passivity[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2015, 10(1): 113-129.
[14] YAO Xinzhong. An Eco-Ethical Interpretation of Confucian Tianren Heyi[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2014, 9(4): 570-585.
[15] Evangelos D. Protopapadakis. Environmental Ethics and Linkola’s Ecofascism: An Ethics Beyond Humanism[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2014, 9(4): 586-601.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed