What do you think?
Concept of Man in Early China
Hailed at its first release as "exceptional among studies of Chinese philosophy," a work "combining philosophical acumen with sinological competence that raises the study of early Chinese thought to a new level of sophistication," The Concept of Man in Early China remains a staple in the study of early Chinese civilization. Addressing the very roots of Chinese culture and thought, this path-breaking work frequently compares concepts from the Confucian and Taoist traditions with those from Western classical philosophy. Donald J. Munro clearly identifies key ideas about human nature and links these ideas within the intellectual universe of classical China.
- GenresPhilosophyChina
272 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1969
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
February 7, 2022
Dua tradisi filosofis utama yang dibahas dalam buku, Konfusianisme dan Taoisme.
Begitulah, sebuah buku yang penuh dengan banyak ulasan. Mereka yang mengambil prodi Sastra China atau tertarik dengan kebudayaan serta kehidupan masyarakat di sana, perlu membaca buku ini.
Begitulah, sebuah buku yang penuh dengan banyak ulasan. Mereka yang mengambil prodi Sastra China atau tertarik dengan kebudayaan serta kehidupan masyarakat di sana, perlu membaca buku ini.
April 12, 2010
Munro's focus is on two primary philosophical traditions, Confucianism and Taoism,in early China (550-250 BCE). Thinkers in the Confucian tradition believe that the individual was capable of moderating his behavior to fit what the social order required. Education, self-cultivation and worthy models were emphasized. Munro stresses that this tradition advocated the idea of individual advancement that was based on merit rather than heredity. In contrast, the Taoists were internally oriented on the self's development, with little attention given to the broader social environment. This tradition is not based on self-interest as this term is usually understood. Rather, its inward focus was designed to blend the individual into the rhythms of nature. Balance was its goal, not control. Behavior that upsets one's equilibrium such as ambition and excessive desire was its hallmark.
In the extreme, both traditions end up opposed to each other. Thus, the Confucians move toward social conformity and preoccupation with rules, rituals and authority, and the Taoists retreat from social life in their efforts to merge with the unifying life principle. Yet, between these extremes, there may be more similarity than is readily apparent for both emphasize self regulation of individualistic tendencies in deference to something (tradition, social order, Tao) that lies outside the self. This common element, perhaps, explains why so much of Chinese philosophy seems to blend into each other in their essence,despite all the differences in detail.
This, however, is not the author's point, although it's not clear exactly what he is attempting to do with this book. His theme is on "natural equality" and the "evaluating mind" and how each tradition dealt with each. His theme is weak and it's too easy to lose his train of thought. The value of this book lies in his extensive discussion of both traditions that remind the reader of the richness of Chinese thought that existed contemporaneously with the origins of the Western philosophical tradition. This includes a comfortable understanding of a common human nature that avoids the agonies surrounding the nature versus nurture debate seen in contemporary philosophy. For instance, whether human nature is viewed as largely good (Mo Tzu) or bad (Hsun Tze) regarding their natural tendencies, these early Chnese thinkers saw that there was ample room for free choice and self-cultivation. For the Confucians, that meant moderating behavior to fit what the social order required. For the Taoists, that meant moderating behavior to fit what nature required.
In the extreme, both traditions end up opposed to each other. Thus, the Confucians move toward social conformity and preoccupation with rules, rituals and authority, and the Taoists retreat from social life in their efforts to merge with the unifying life principle. Yet, between these extremes, there may be more similarity than is readily apparent for both emphasize self regulation of individualistic tendencies in deference to something (tradition, social order, Tao) that lies outside the self. This common element, perhaps, explains why so much of Chinese philosophy seems to blend into each other in their essence,despite all the differences in detail.
This, however, is not the author's point, although it's not clear exactly what he is attempting to do with this book. His theme is on "natural equality" and the "evaluating mind" and how each tradition dealt with each. His theme is weak and it's too easy to lose his train of thought. The value of this book lies in his extensive discussion of both traditions that remind the reader of the richness of Chinese thought that existed contemporaneously with the origins of the Western philosophical tradition. This includes a comfortable understanding of a common human nature that avoids the agonies surrounding the nature versus nurture debate seen in contemporary philosophy. For instance, whether human nature is viewed as largely good (Mo Tzu) or bad (Hsun Tze) regarding their natural tendencies, these early Chnese thinkers saw that there was ample room for free choice and self-cultivation. For the Confucians, that meant moderating behavior to fit what the social order required. For the Taoists, that meant moderating behavior to fit what nature required.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews