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

Learn More →

Rumi’s Spiritual Shi'ism (review)

Rumi’s Spiritual Shi'ism (review) exclusively role-bearing person, and many otherwise friendly supporters of Confu- cianism would be wary of the extreme position Rosemont apparently adopts. For example, Mary Bockover, while critical of the Western idea that we are exclusively individualistic, maintains that “personhood does not just amount to a nexus of roles” (p. 142). There might be tactical reasons for Rosemont’s approach. As Peimin Ni ar- gues with regard to Rosemont’s contribution to discussions about Confucianism and democracy — comparing ideal Confucianism not realized in practice with the dys- functional or distorted practice of liberal ideas — “the asymmetry is itself a counter balance for correcting an opposite asymmetry” (p. 95). As Rosemont himself empha- sizes, his intended primary audience is not just fellow philosophers but, more impor- tantly, his fellow Americans (p. 394). Rosemont clearly believes that the United States is so pathologically individualistic that an extreme opposite is needed as antidote, and therefore what Americans could learn from Confucianism is “that we are the sum of the roles we live in community with others, with little of ontological significance left over” (p. 393). I wonder if he would concede that other societies burdened with too many dysfunctional and oppressive communal roles http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Philosophy East and West University of Hawai'I Press

Rumi’s Spiritual Shi'ism (review)

Bockmier, James.
Philosophy East and West , Volume 61 (1) – Jan 16, 2011
Download PDF
4 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-hawai-i-press/rumi-s-spiritual-shi-apos-ism-review-0XyKA3yAOs

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 © 2011 University of Hawai'i Press.
ISSN
1529-1898

Abstract

exclusively role-bearing person, and many otherwise friendly supporters of Confu- cianism would be wary of the extreme position Rosemont apparently adopts. For example, Mary Bockover, while critical of the Western idea that we are exclusively individualistic, maintains that “personhood does not just amount to a nexus of roles” (p. 142). There might be tactical reasons for Rosemont’s approach. As Peimin Ni ar- gues with regard to Rosemont’s contribution to discussions about Confucianism and democracy — comparing ideal Confucianism not realized in practice with the dys- functional or distorted practice of liberal ideas — “the asymmetry is itself a counter balance for correcting an opposite asymmetry” (p. 95). As Rosemont himself empha- sizes, his intended primary audience is not just fellow philosophers but, more impor- tantly, his fellow Americans (p. 394). Rosemont clearly believes that the United States is so pathologically individualistic that an extreme opposite is needed as antidote, and therefore what Americans could learn from Confucianism is “that we are the sum of the roles we live in community with others, with little of ontological significance left over” (p. 393). I wonder if he would concede that other societies burdened with too many dysfunctional and oppressive communal roles

Journal

Philosophy East and West – University of Hawai'I Press

Published: Jan 16, 2011

There are no references for this article.