requestId:684c3e2c49d6c6.80084544.
Modern China emphasizes public morality and individual virtues
———A discussion with the response to the two teachers, Mr. Chen and Cai Xiangyuan
Author: Xiao Qunzhong
Source: Author Authorization Confucian Network Published
2020 Issue 04
Time: Confucius was the 2570th year of Gengzi June 23rd Dinghai
� The private morality that separates private morality and emphasizes the national group’s consciousness under the historical landscape at that time. This thinking was first proposed by Teacher Liang Qishao’s “New Mystery” and has continued discussion and practice for more than a hundred years. Mr. Chen believes that the inclusion of the “public ethics” in the need to strengthen the “public ethics” of social private morality, not only is it accurate in academic knowledge, but also has the main meaning of practical explanation. Teacher Cai Xiangyuan believes that the family-wide thinking, which is based on the foundation of the family and the country, has encountered difficulties in modern times. Therefore, modern moral construction should focus on rules rather than relying on private morality or personal confidants. This also has certain authenticity, but it is not as good as it is. Confucianism emphasizes the moral body energy of self-cultivation, inner sage or private morality as the foundation of morality, and still has its own unique and main value in the modern society that regains the complex, secular and universalization.
Keywords: Private morality; private morality; analysis; meaning
Recently, Teacher Chen, Chief Teacher Chen published “The Chinese people value private morality and light private morality in modern times in the 1st issue of “Literature, History and Philosophy” 2020 The article “Trends and Disadvantages” caused academic discussions on related issues. Cai Xiangyuan later published an article “The ideological dilemma of Confucianism and the modern future of the Confucian ‘family’” and discussed the academic discussions. The author, as a professional ethics student, also expressed some of his own opinions.
1. Traditional morality is a combination of “Tao”, “morality”, “public” and “private”
The author’s discussion desire begins with the concept of morality, and believes that in traditional China, the problems of private morality and private morality emphasize their connection rather than separation. Because the subjects of both are humans, and Confucianism has the theory of internal sages and external kings that integrate the internal and external ways, and cultivates the theory of governance and peace. Also, because the modern public and private sectors in China are only ideological rather than physical sectors.
Before the decomposition of character appeared, itOriginally, they are two independent words, even if they have connections, as a decomposition word, first appeared in texts such as “Zangzi”, “Xunzi”, and “Quotation”. We do not analyze the philosophical meaning of Tao and morality. Only from the meaning of ethics, “Tao” refers to the norm. The problem to be solved in ethics is that “how to act correctly?” in people’s or groups, this is called standard ethics in Oriental ethics彩彩, and “virtue” refers to “virtue”, “quality” and “personality”. This moral subject must be implemented as a certain entity. The problem of “virtue” is to solve “what are we going to be?” This is called “in Eastern Ethics” in the study of ” Virtue Ethics,” a scholar once invited the author to analyze from the perspective of Chinese ideological resources to analyze whether Chinese traditional Confucian ethics is a kind of virtue or standard ethics. The author wrote an article for this and gave a speech at relevant meetings: The author’s view is that Chinese Confucian ethics is a combination of the two, but based on virtue ethics [①]. Confucian ethics has both virtue and personality qualities, such as self-cultivation and self-cultivation, but at the same time, there are social orders and pursuits, and they are more friendly and good. However, the external kings take the inner sage as the basis, the strong family, govern the country, and the peace of the whole country are based on self-cultivation, and the world is based on human hearts. Therefore, the distinction between virtue and Tao is indeed relative, and the two are in touch. What kind of people are like and how to act correctly both include the commanding nature of actions. This makes it difficult to divide the two sometimes, such as taking the “Five Constant Virtues” as an example. We often say that “benevolence” is the human heart, emotion, and “meaning” is the feeling. The right nature and action are in favor of inner behavior, but in Mencius’s view, it is based on a kind of respectful heart and a reciprocity heart. Wisdom is knowledge of the mind, but it must be more practical wisdom. Although faith must be trusted externally from others, it is based on the inner self as its basis, etc. As long as we do this, there are also moral principles and principles that can be clearly distinguished in the traditional Chinese ethics model or virtue. For example, Mencius said the “five ethics” that “father and son have morals, monarch and minister have morals, husband and wife are different, old and young are orderly, and accompany with faith.” It is important to talk about the ethics principle of treating each other internationally. It can be “Tao”. In the “Doing of the Mean”, Zisi clearly called it “five The three virtues that correspond to this are “knowing benevolence and courage”, which is obviously “virtue”. With “five qualities”, there must be “ten meanings”: The ten meanings in the “Traditional Notes: Gifts” are expressed as: “Father is kind, son is filial, brother is good, brother is brother is brother, husband is righteous, wife is listened to, long-term, young, benevolent, and loyal to the minister.” Although they do not match the five virtues one by one, what they express is the basisBrain the Internet’s experienceThe moral meaning of the subjective body in different relationships is obviously the virtue of the specific subject, not the Tao. In addition, the most important three virtues of officials expressed by later generations, “clean, cautious, and diligent” are obviously a kind of official attitude and virtue of officials for wealth and political affairs, rather than Tao. Therefore,In Chinese traditional ethics, there is a situation where morality and Tao or private morality are inseparable from private morality. Since morality is the unity of “morality” (personal virtue, sentiment, personality, quality) and “Tao” (personality, self-group, group standards, principles, standards), and since ancient times, China has strong value concepts of “public” and “private” concepts, but poor regional separation, and the internal and external expansion methods of Confucianism’s internal and external sages and kings, it can be said that since ancient times, the concepts and practical divisions of public and private morality are not very clear, and it can even be said that they are inseparable or may be integrated. China’s traditional thinking method is 博官网 reconciled the unity and analyzed it lightly, but this does not seem to mean that the concept of Chinese traditional morality lacks accurate meaning and boundaries. However, sometimes this analysis is not so clear and clear, so it is Baobao.com Experience Like Chinese diet, there are various information and flavors combined together, while Eastern sandwiches and other foods are divided into different places.
So, in my opinion, traditional morality does not pay much attention to the separation between private morality and private morality, but just focuses on the connection between the two, the internal and external ways, and the benevolent and home-home path. Even the “meaning” based on emotional energy and public political reality, in Mencius’s view, is based on the benevolent heart of loving people. Benevolence is the home for people to live in peace and prosperity, while morality is only the path that people need to take. Do you have to go back if you go out? From this meaning, the author believes that traditional morality emphasizes the connection between private morality rather than the distinction. This kind of separation should be something that happened in modern times.
So, why not very different? Morality is always born from the basis of certain social relations. The objective social relations are not separated. Morality generated from its foundation is naturally difficult to make such obvious separations. The public domain in modern strict meaning is not