2. What is Confucius 's argument for virtue? They want to have a good leader and have faith on people and want people that follow rules. Ji said," What is killing good for?" Master knows that people will learn from that and will remember what they did wrong and you will be smart to not do the same mistake. People will not follow any rules if their is no goverment that is giving out orders.
The different schools of thoughts have seen to prosper during the Warring State Period. The Warring State period witnessed intensive warfare. Some of the ambitious king fought with the aim of gaining more territory and power, while some were fighting to survive and retain their power. Consequently, many states were not only competing with their military power but also with the philosophy they adapted in court and the state. Some of the notable schools of thought included Confucianism, Daoism, Legalism and Mohism. However, in this paper, I will be highlighting on Confucianism and Legalism as these two philosophies differ vastly in their perception on whether human nature is kind or evil.
Buddhism has been and still is important to the Chinese culture, affecting many traditions and ways of life. Many scholars and political figures have reacted differently to the affect of Buddhism and how it has spread through the 6 chinese dynasties, by believing its effect, disagreeing, and have no say.
When considering how a person should act in order to gain the most honor or respect, there are varying opinions. Some may say that you simply must be a good person, but how does one constitute what a good person looks like? The Greek word arete represents what the ideal person in Greek society was. Sometimes arete is loosely translated to mean virtue, however this can be misconstrued in the English language. “Virtue, at least in modern english, is almost entirely a moral word; arete on the other hand is used indifferently in all the categories and means simply ‘excellence’” (H.D.F Kitto, The Greeks, 1952). Because arete is explained by different languages as different things, it makes sense that arete would then be viewed at variance by contrasting
In ancient china there were two widely different philosophes being so excepted within the same culture. The two philosophes were Confucianism and Legalism. Confucianism was during 55 B, in China. Legalism was during 475-221 BC, also in China. Confucianism is a belief or an idea. The purpose of this was to show people how to be in harmony with their place in life. Legalism is a ruling made by Shi Huangdi, who was a strict ruler in china. The purpose of this ruling was to get the people of china to follow the rule, and if they didn’t there was a very harsh punishment. Although confucianism and legalism have some similarities, but the differences between the two are amazingly clear.
Political activists and philosophers alike have a challenging task of determining the conditions under which citizens are morally entitled to go against the law. Socrates and Martin Luther King, Jr. had different opinions on the obligation of the citizens in a society to obey the law. Although they were willing to accept the legal punishment, King believed that there are clear and definable circumstances where it would be appropriate, and sometimes mandatory, to purposely disobey unjust laws. Socrates did not.
The Iliad was a really good representation of the chaotic war-torn times of the area surrounding the Mediterranean Sea; this includes the countries Rome and Greece. It was a time where nations were trying to expand their power and influence and warriors were claiming their spoils of war. I mean the beginning of book I of The Iliad, Achilles and Agamemnon are arguing over the rewards and the spoils of war. Agamemnon didn’t want to give up his prize girl Chryses in order to please the God Apollo and stop the plague and the rain of arrow falling from Olympus. However, in the end Agamemnon took Achilles’ girl, Briseis, which really hurt Achilles in the end. These warriors took a lot of pride in the things or people that they
Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics begins by exploring ‘the good’. Book I argues that, unlike other goods, “happiness appears to be something complete and self-sufficient, and is, therefore, the end of actions” (10:1097b20-21). In other words, happiness is the ultimate good. But how does one achieve happiness? Aristotle formulates this in the context of work, since for all things, from artists to horses, “the good and the doing it well seem to be in the work” (10:1097b27-28). Much like the work of a harpist is to play the harp, “the work of a human being is a being-at-work of the soul in accordance with reason” (11:1098a7-8). Moreover, in order to achieve the good, it is important that each being performs his work excellently. While all harpists’
Aristotle and John Locke both believe humans were not created to live alone but instead among other people of the same community. Humans are not independent beings, and those who live in isolation lack the purpose of life: becoming a citizen and exercising one 's full potential of human flourishing. According to Aristotle, the collective community or multitude of citizens coexisting with one another is happiness, whereas Locke believes that the collective community is protecting autonomy and property. Both philosophers believe that to become a citizen, one must contribute to politics with the intent of creating a better society for all. Aristotle and Locke however, have differing views on how a person accomplishes this. For Aristotle, citizens accomplish this by leaving the state of nature to pursue the chief goods in life. Whereas, for Locke, this is accomplished by creating and watching over a government to ensure protection.
In the discussion on the methods of governing and administration of a state, one cannot leave out the models proposed by Confucius as well as Mencius. Both advocated that the ruler or the government has to rule by virtue and strengthen moral education among its people. Political leaders have to set moral examples for the people to follow, and to be benevolent towards their subordinates and citizens. By doing so, that would bring about social stability and population growth within the state, also creating conditions that would lead to an improvement in the welfare of the people. By fulfilling his duties to the people, a just and benevolent ruler would then be justified to rule by the Mandate of Heaven. Although both Confucius and Mencius have a lot in common with regards to governance, the two do have varying opinions on certain matters such as the legitimacy when rulers are overthrown, and the relationship between the ruler and his people.
This quote essentially asserts that humans are born with various selfish desires, such as the desire for beautiful sounds, sights, and wealth. When brought together with the second quote, it implies that no human being is free from these desires, and one has to be guided by a teacher and rituals to eventually eliminate these selfish desires and transform one’s human nature from bad to good, wholly transformed when one attains sagehood, in order to act for the good of others.
Scholars Aristotle and Confucius are both well-known people in history. Aristotle was an incredible Greek rationalist and researcher while Confucius was a Chinese government official, a savant, and an instructor. They both made huge commitments to ideals and morals. Their thoughtful works were comparable in nature, yet with some unique perspectives, thoughts, and points of view toward temperance. Their rationalities are still being used today. They were incredible masterminds with awesome impact in the antiquated society. Confucianism imparts to Aristotle mindfulness that for people to be great, they require moral astuteness and in addition different demeanors of character, yet Confucianism places more prominent accentuation on the part of reflection and concentrate in the improvement of good insight (Provis, 2017). Over the next several paragraphs, it is my goal to address the following: 1)
By following these theories, it is clear that both are in direct conflict with one another. In regard to the nature of man, this is obvious, with Confucius writing on inherent goodness and Han Feizi writing and agreeing on the opposite. This leads to some interesting situations, particularly for the societies which would aim to adopt each philosophy. However, both did agree that order was necessary and through the state order can be achieved. Confucius thought emphasized this in The Doctrine of Learning by stating that “the ancients who wished to manifest their clear character to the world would first bring order to their states” (Chan p. 86). While this order is brought through personal rectification and inward reflection beginning with the
There are two giants in the Axial Age of human history, Confucius and Plato, who are considered as the landmark in the oriental and western world. They are great philosophers, ideologists as well as excellent educators, whose thought have profound influence to the oriental and western world. Confucius’s ideas maintain authority for more than two thousand years, which have intimate connections with development of Chinese federal society. Even to this day, it still remains practical significance and reflects the glorious radiant. Plato’s doctrine is a source of Western political thought. The political elites of the west today can still see the shadow of his influence. Confucius and Plato share the similar life experience and the life pursuit. Both of them lived in the period when the slavery system declined and both of them had the ambition to create an ideal society. Therefore, through compare with Confucius and Plato’s idea, we can see there are some similarities in their concepts of philosophy and education. But contribute to the diversity of historical background and culture tradition, we can also see many differences of their thought, among which there are many sparkling points that is worth exploring. In this paper, we’ll study some of their famous pedagogy thought to explore what influences they have brought to the Chinese and westerners’ cognition and behavior and why the two civilizations developed in same period would diverge in such a degree. Furthermore, I