In Eirik Lang Harris & Henrique Schneider (eds.), Adventures in Chinese Realism: Classic Philosophy Applied to Contemporary Issues. Albany, NY, USA: SUNY Press. pp. 171–193 (2022)
AbstractHan Feizi’s criticisms of Confucian and Mohist political recommendations are often thought to involve materialist or historicist arguments, independently of their epistemological features. Drawing largely on Amia Srinivasan’s recent taxonomy of genealogical arguments, this paper proposes a genealogical reading of passages in “The Five Vermin [五蠹 wudu]” and “Eminence in Learning [顯學 xianxue].” This reveals Han Feizi’s arguments to be more comprehensively appreciated as problematizing Confucian and Mohist political judgments as arising from undermining contingencies, rendering them irrelevant, if not detrimental, to any lasting excellence of a state. In doing this, it is also suggested that there is a ‘master argument’ underlying Han Feizi’s criticisms, according to which the epistemology of the Confucians and Mohists are fundamentally unreliable.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing.Miranda Fricker - 2007 - Oxford University Press.
Lack of Character: Personality and Moral Behavior.John M. Doris - 2002 - Cambridge University Press.
Truth and Truthfulness: An Essay in Genealogy.Bernard Williams - 2002 - Princeton: Princeton University Press.
The End of Progress: Decolonizing the Normative Foundations of Critical Theory.Amy Allen - 2016 - Cambridge University Press.
Citations of this work
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Han Feizi's Criticism of Confucianism and its Implications for Virtue Ethics.Eric Hutton - 2008 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 5 (3):423-453.
Being Worthy of Persuasion: Political Communication in the Han Feizi.Kevin DeLapp - 2014 - China Media Research 10 (4):29-38.
Han Feizi’s Thought and Republicanism.David Elstein - 2011 - Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 10 (2):167-185.
Xunzi’s Ritual Program as a Response to Han Feizi’s Criticism of Confucianism.Colin J. Lewis - 2020 - Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture 34 (August):129-153.
The Court as a Battlefield: The Art of War and the Art of Politics in the "Han Feizi".Albert Galvany - 2017 - Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies:1-24.
Han Feizi and the Old Master: A Comparative Analysis and Translation of Han Feizi Chapter 20,“Jie Lao,” and Chapter 21,“Yu Lao”. [REVIEW]Sarah A. Queen - 2013 - In Paul R. Goldin (ed.), Dao Companion to the Philosophy of Han Fei. Springer. pp. 197--256.
Fortune and the Dao: A Comparative Study of Machiavelli, the Daodejing, and the Han Feizi.Jason P. Blahuta - 2015 - Lexington Books.
Political Theory and Linguistic Criteria in Han Feizi’s Philosophy.Aloysius P. Martinich - 2014 - Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 13 (3):379-393.
Han Feizi's Legalism Versus Kautilya's Arthashastra.Roger Boesche - 2005 - Asian Philosophy 15 (2):157 – 172.
Rational Choice Analysis in Classical Chinese Political Thought: The Han Feizi.Peter R. Moody - 2008 - Polity 40 (1):95-119.
The Internal Morality of Chinese Legalism.Kenneth Winston - 2005 - Singapore Journal of Legal Studies:313-347.
Virtue and Virtuosity: Xunzi and Aristotle on the Role of Art in Ethical Cultivation.Lee Wilson - 2018 - Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture 30:75–103.
The Role of Mohism in K ang Youwei’s Arguments for His New-Text Theory of Confucianism.Ting-Mien Lee - 2020 - Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 19 (3):461-477.