Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
agiventextualtraditionstatinghow,andpossiblywhy,oneshouldperformsuchand suchpractices.Inotherwords,practiceneverstandsinavacuumbutpresupposes theorytosomeextent.Inthisview,boththeoryandpracticalknowledgewouldthen participate in the "reality" constituting the phenomenon of renunciation. Though Rukmani'saimwascertainlynottoengageindetailwithsuchissues,acloserlook at these could perhaps have benefitted readers interested in understanding how sanysins relate,notonlytothesocialworldingeneral,butalsotothetheoretical underpinningsoftheirowntradition. Despitethecomplexityofthesubject,thebookstillsucceedsingivingthereader asenseofthefundamentalissuesunderlyingHindurenunciation,pastandpresent. Thereaderwillappreciatetheglossary,thedetailedindex,andtheinterviewquestionaireintheappendix,butespeciallytherarequalityofinformationprovidedin theinterviews.Sanysin in the Hindu TraditionisinmyviewaverywelcomeadditiontocurrentscholarshiponHinducultureandreligion,especiallyifyouhavea particularinterestinthehistoryofrenunciationinmoderntimes. Humes Moralphilosophie unter chinesischem Einfluss (Hume's moral philosophy nder Chinese influence). By Reinhard May. Stuttgart: Franz SteinerVerlag, 2012. u Pp.122.Paper26.00,isbn978-3-515-10044-1. ReviewedbyAsher Jiang UniversityofHeidelberg In Humes Moralphilosophie unter chinesischem Einfluss, author Reinhard May is mainlyconcernedwithacomparisonbetweenDavidHume'smoralphilosophyand Mencius'theoryofhumannature,orratherwiththehistoricalinfluenceofthelatter upontheformer.DavidHumebelongstothosephilosopherswhosenamesarementionedineventhesketchiesthistoriesofWesternphilosophy.Thesamealsoapplies toMencius:anyhistorianwhodoesnotassignanirreplaceablepositiontoMencius (asagreatmastersecondonlytoConfucius)inChineseintellectualhistorywillbe regardedaseithercarelessorhopelesslyignorant.Especiallyinviewoftheimmense spatialandtemporaldistancebetweenthetwoverydifferentculturalsettings,acomparisonofthesetwofigureswill,primafacie,beconfrontedwiththeaccusationof being superficial as long as we are ready to think imprecisely enough, we can --" discoverallegedconnectionseverywhere."However,suchanaccusation,ifdirected againstthisbook,wouldbeunfair.Onthecontrary,Mayhasprovidedamostprofound analysis, excellent in terms of both its solid historicism and its systematic precision. May'sstudyisdividedintofivechapters.Thefirstdealswiththegeneralbackground concerning the reception of ancient Chinese political and philosophical ideas(withemphasisonMencius'texts)inEuropeancountriesduringtheearlyeighteenthcentury.Basedonnumerouswell-chosenpassagesinHume'swritingsfrom thatperiod,theauthorarguesthatHume,asawell-educatedscholar,wasnottotally unfamiliarwithChinesecultureandthoughtingeneral.Inthesecondchapter,May PhilosophyEast&WestVolume63,Number4October2013673676 ©2013byUniversityofHawai`iPress concentratesonareconstructionofcertaincentralthesesofHume'smoralphilosophy.ThecenterofattentionisHume'sstatementthatsympathyistheoriginofmoral sentiments.Chapter3consistsofahistoricalstudyoftwoinfluentialtranslationsof Mencius'worksinEuropeintheearlyeighteenthcentury,whichMayassumeswere probablyknowntoHume.ForthepurposeofacomparisonofHume'scentralmoral philosophicalpositionswiththecontentofMencius'writings,certainrelevantpassagesarecarefullyselectedfromthesetwotranslations. Afterthepreparationpresentedinthefirstthreechapters,theauthorfinallycarries outhis main program in chapters4 and5.Henotices remarkable similarities between Hume and Mencius concerning their fundamental views on moral sentiments.Bothtreatsympathyastheoriginofbenevolence.Basedonempiricalobservations,bothweretryingtojustifythethesisthatwehaveanaturaltendencytopity evenstrangers.InviewofHume'scurriculumvitae,Mayfeelsthatitisaplausible assumptionthatHumewasfamiliarwithMencius'ideas.Basedontheirsimilarities, MaydrawstheconclusionthatHume'smoralphilosophywasstronglyinfluencedby Mencius,althoughHumehimselfwasperhapsnotawareofthat.Mayconfessesthat heisnotabletoprovideanyproofinthestrictsenseforhisconclusion(afterall,no singlereferenceonMenciuscanbefoundinHume'sownwritings).Hehimselftends toconsiderhisconclusionsasonlyabestguess.Inmyopinion,theguessisnotabad one.Theauthorhashandledallrelevantresourcescompetently,andnothingmore canbedonewiththehistoricalevidenceinthiscase. It is a well-known and provable fact that Hume's moral philosophy had two sources of inspiration: Isaac Newton's success in natural science and Francis Hutcheson'sviewofmoraljudgment.Newton'sinfluenceonHumewasessentially methodological:impressedbyNewton'sworks,Humeattemptedtoapplythescientificmethodsofobservationandformulatinghypothesestohisstudyofhuman ature, n andthisincludednotonlyhisstudiesinmoralphilosophy,buthisepistemological andmetaphysicalprojectsaswell.1Hutcheson'stheorywasthatanyattempttofind rational justification for our moral statements would be in vain, because they
Philosophy East and West – University of Hawai'I Press
Published: Oct 23, 2013
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.