Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Humes Moralphilosophie unter chinesischem Einfluss by Reinhard May (review)

Humes Moralphilosophie unter chinesischem Einfluss by Reinhard May (review) 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 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Philosophy East and West University of Hawai'I Press

Humes Moralphilosophie unter chinesischem Einfluss by Reinhard May (review)

Philosophy East and West , Volume 63 (4) – Oct 23, 2013

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-hawai-i-press/humes-moralphilosophie-unter-chinesischem-einfluss-by-reinhard-may-zK3TD6w0dA

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
University of Hawai'I Press
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 University of Hawai'i Press.
ISSN
1529-1898
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

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

Journal

Philosophy East and WestUniversity of Hawai'I Press

Published: Oct 23, 2013

There are no references for this article.