requestId:6851862e843e95.29837258.

The source of the rational structure and “goodness” of Xunzi’s humanitarian theory

Author: Mao Chaoxie (Specialized Research and Researcher of the School of Philosophy and Social Development)

Source: Author Author Authorized Confucian NetworkLong-term maintenanceSpecialized researcher at the School of Philosophy and Social Development)

Source: Author Author Authorized Confucian NetworkBraining the meaning is published, original “Philosophy and Civilization”, Volume 49, Issue 4 (April 2022)

 

Content Summary: Xunzi’s “nature evil” needs face a paradox: If humans do not have good causes, how can “good” be misled? This paradox touches on the source of “goodness” in Xunzi’s “nature evil” discussion. Regarding this problem, the academic community has proposed three interpretation plans: “good heart”, “good nature”, and “good nature” (people are good), which are respectively related to the three interpretations of Xunzi’s humanitarian theory: “good nature”, “good nature平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平台平� This article is based on the analysis of the basic model and theoretical structure of Xunzi’s humanitarian theory. It believes that the three comprehensive combinations of “nature evil”, “nature good” and “nature style” are inconsistent with the logical structure of Xunzi’s humanitarian theory. The three interpretations of “good heart”, “nature good” and “satisfactory good” cannot be explained alone. “Good” comes from the positive side, from the prenatal virtue, from the absolute side, from the acquired enhancement of talent. Desire explains why “good” is necessary, and nature and virtue explains how “good” can be achieved.

 

Keywords: Xunzi, goodness, source, humanitarian theory, and rational structure

 

1. The source of “goodness” in Xunzi’s “nature evil” discussion

 

Although Xunzi advocated the “nature evil”, like Mencius, he also believed that “goodness” was necessary and able to be sufficient. Otherwise, moral cultivation will become unnecessary and incapable. This view reflects in his “good desperation” discussion. Xunzi believed that: “A man’s nature is evil, and his goodness is slut.” (Xunzi. Nature is evil. The following is only the title of the article.) This clarification shows that “goodness” can be “slutty”. However, if there is no good cause in Xunzi’s “nature evil” discussion, then “nature evil” and “good evil” will obviously form such a paradox: humanity does not have good cause, so how can good be ignored?

Baobao.com ppt

 

This paradox touches on the source of “goodness” in Xunzi’s “nature evil” discussion. For a clear answerIn this problem, the academic community put forward three plans: the first plan is to say “kindness”. This plan maintains the traditional conditions of “nature evil” theory, but completely separates the mind and nature, believing that “nature evil” comes from nature and “goodness” comes from the mind. According to this interpretation of the dualism of mind and nature, the source of “goodness” is because people have a cognitive mind, and the moral norms are based on the cognitive mind “controls nature with the mind”. This is an orthodox statement of Chinese philosophical history. Rong Youlan, Mou Zongsan, Xu Yaoguan, A. C. Graham, Liang Bin and others all adopted this plan. [1] The second plan is “good nature”. This plan believes that although Xunzi called “good nature”, he, like Mencius, also admitted that humans have a precedence of moral emotions and moral sensibility, so it implies the other side of “good nature”. Since the Qing Dynasty, scholars such as Dai Zhen and Chen Li have put forward similar opinions. [2] Contemporary scholars Fu Peirong, Huang Baixuan (DFemale College Students’ Care Clubavid B. Wong), Liu Youyan, Rong Yaoming, Lu Debin, Wang Kai, etc. all reiterate this statement. [3] The third plan is “serious and kind”. This plan changed the old saying, simply denying Xunzi’s “nature evil” argument, and arguing that the focus of Xunzi’s humanitarian theory is “original style”, so Xunzi’s real idea is “nature style”. The first person to propose this is the japan (Japanese) student Tsukiroro. In recent years, Zhou Cheng insisted on this statement and believed that “the nature of the sacred is the basis of the sacred, so ‘no nature, no added if it is added’. In order to make the nature of the sacred, it only needs to process it, and there is no need to abandon all its waste.” [4] This plan believes that human nature is free from goodness and evil, and goodness comes from inner “sickness” and is determined by acquired humans for processing. In addition, in recent years, the academic community has proposed some other new plans, but carefully examining its most basic standpoint can be included in the scope of the above three plans. [5]

 

So, which plan better explains the source problem of “goodness” in Xunzi’s nature evil?

 

This article aims to answer this question. To this end, we need to conduct a head-on review of the above three explanation plans. This touches on the rational structure and its basic model of Xunzi’s humanitarian theory: nature, heart, and material. Only in this way can we clearly define the “nature” in Xunzi’s evil or good nature, the “heart” in the “heart” in the “heart” and the “material” in the “peace of nature”. In addition, Xunzi often used emotions and desire to define the concept of “nature”, for example: “Nature is the origin of heaven; emotion is the quality of nature; desire is the response of emotion.” (〈Record Name〉) It can be seen that “nature” also involves two basic models of emotion and desire. Therefore, if we want to make a comprehensive judgment on Xunzi’s humanitarian theory, we must first clarify the five basic models of Xunzi’s humanitarian theory, namely nature, emotion, desire, heart and material.

 

The people of XunziThe five basic models of Taoism

 

The above article has pointed out that there are five basic models of Xunzi’s humanitarian theory: nature, emotion, desire, heart, and material. Above, our mission is to define the connotation of these five models. Since we are going to explore humanitarianism, the first basic paradigm we need to define is naturally “sex”. Let us first read Xunzi’s four aspects of “nature”:

Baobao.com experience

 

Any nature is the result of heaven; if you don’t learn, you won’t succeed. (〈Nature Abnormal〉)

 

The reason why life is like this is the nature. The harmony of nature isto nourish the website’s life, and the nature is natural. (〈Real Name〉)

 

Nature is what I cannot overcome, but it can be transformed. (〈〈国六〉)

 

Nature is the result of heaven; emotion is the quality of nature; desire is the response of emotion. (〈Real Name〉)

 

The first and second realms are divided into acquired and acquired. The so-called “acquired heaven” refers to natural and natural, which is what Xunzi calls “nature”; on the contrary, “acquired heaven” refers to the model that can be learned and done, and is human-like. Xunzi does not regard it as “nature”, but calls it “swallow”. However, from the third perspective, Xunzi’s “nature” is different from Plata’s “reasonal type” or Aristotle’s “emotion”, and does not have a constant and unchanging nature, but is “transformable”. This means that Xunzi’s distinction between “nature” and “savage” does not have a completely separate dung. As an activity, the reason why “sex” can be achieved is precisely because of its reassible “nature”; as a result, “sex” is actually exactly what “nature” is transformed. To the extent that there are advances, the main difference between humans and animals is that humans have the potential to “transform nature and cause savage”, while animals do not have this potential. Then, according to the first and second aspects, the “savage” mentioned by Xunzi is also “the result of heaven” and “nature is natural without doing anything”. As Lu Debin said: “In the aspect of existence of ‘the reason for life’ or ‘the result of heaven’, ‘nature’ and ‘savage’ are the same.” [6] According to Xunzi’s definition, “savage” is actually “nature”.

 

For this help, the “swer” that Xunzi s