MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

MOU ZONGSAN ON CONFUCIAN AND KANT'S ETHICS: A CRITICAL REFLECTION

2011· article· en· W1534931772 on OpenAlex
Wing–Cheuk Chan

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chinese Philosophy · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChinese history and philosophy
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyReflection (computer programming)EpistemologyConfucian ethicsCritical reflectionNeo-ConfucianismChinese philosophyChinaSociologyLawPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a major figure in contemporary Neo-Confucianism, Mou Zongsan (1909-1995) is unique in attempting to reconstruct Confucian ethics with the help of Kant's moral philosophy.In attaining his goal, Mou Zongsan argues for an identity between Kant's ethics and that of the School of Mind as represented by Lu Xiangshan and Wang Yangming.But at the same time, he develops a critique of Kant's ethics from a Confucian standpoint. 1 Given the complexity of Mou's critique, in this article, I will mainly concentrate on two topics: (i) the limitation of Kant's theory of moral feeling and (ii) the extension of Kant's theory of the typic.I will argue that in the first place, like Kant, Mou suffers from a lack of the conception of pure feeling as the determining ground of morality; in the second place, Mou's introduction of the concept of noumenal action in effect eliminates Kant's theory of the typic.This might jeopardize his attempt to synthesize Confucian and Kant's ethics.In particular, Mou's claim about the autonomy of Confucian ethics can hardly be justified.Historically, in opposition to Hume's approach in grounding ethics upon human emotion, Kant seeks to found the possibility of morality exclusively upon reason.As Kant points out in Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals, it is mainly because "feelings, which naturally differ infinitely in degree, cannot furnish a uniform standard of good and evil, nor has anyone a right to form judgments for others by his own feelings." 2For Kant, all feelings, including moral feeling, are sensuous. 3In general, the rise of sensuous feeling is due to the external effect.The possibility of moral feeling is finally grounded in the "particular constitution of human nature." 4 Methodologically, as an empirical, a posteriori concept, "moral feeling" cannot be a ground for the possibility of general laws.To found the possibility of morals upon human feelings would therefore fail to account for the universality and necessity of moral laws.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.462
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.122
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it