Advertisement

The Common Good and Filial Piety: A Confucian Perspective

  • Jue Wang
Chapter
Part of the Philosophical Studies in Contemporary Culture book series (PSCC, volume 23)

Abstract

Support for the elderly in Mainland China is now undergoing a severe crisis. According to a representative report on private life in a typical Chinese village, by the end of the 1990s the living conditions of some elderly parents had worsened and the family status of elders had continued to decline: “Elders trembled to speak of their fate, the middle-aged were worried about their immediate future, and young couples were confused by the storm of complaints from [their] parents and grandparents” (Yan 2003, p. 163). Given that 99 % of the Chinese elderly choose family care for one reason or another, the indifference of the younger generation to the needs of their parents’ generation has greatly harmed the welfare of the elderly. A shocking fact is that in rural areas of Mainland China, the elderly suicide rate is four and five times higher than the world average. Why does such a high suicide rate occur in a society that used to commit itself to filial piety as a fundamental virtue?

Keywords

Moral Agent Virtue Ethic Common Good Filial Piety Elderly Support 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Ames, R.T. 1994. The focus-field self in classical Confucianism. In Self as person in Asian theory and practice, ed. R.T. Ames, W. Dissanayake, and T.P. Kasulis, Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  2. Confucius. 1930. The Analects, in the four books with English translation and notes. Trans. J. Legge. Beijing: The Commercial Press.Google Scholar
  3. Confucius. 1967. Li Chi: Books of rites. Trans. J. Legge. New York: University Books.Google Scholar
  4. Engelhardt, H.T. 2013. Beyond the common good: The priority of persons. In The common good: Chinese and American perspectives, ed. P.C. Lo and D. Solomon, 21–43. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Fan, R. 2013. A Confucian notion of the common good for contemporary China. In The common good: Chinese and American perspectives, ed. P.C. Lo and D. Solomon, 193–218. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  6. Fingarette, H. 1972. Confucius: The secular as sacred. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  7. Fingarette, H. 1979. The problem of the self in the Analects. Philosophy East and West 29(2): 129–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fingarette, H. 1983. The music of humanity in the conversations of Confucius. Journal of Chinese Philosophy 10(4): 331–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Groenhout, R.E. 2004. Connected lives: Human nature and an ethics of care. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  10. Hao, C. 1963. A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy, ed. W. Chan. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Keys, M.M. 2006. Aquinas, Aristotle, and the promise of the common good. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Keys, M.M. 2013. Why justice is not enough: Mercy, love-caritas, and the common good. In The common good: Chinese and American perspectives, ed. P.C. Lo and D. Solomon, 243–259. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. MacIntyre, A. 1981. After virtue. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  14. MacIntyre, Alasdair. 1998. A short history of ethics, 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. MacIntyre, A. 1999. Rational dependent animals: Why human beings need the virtues. Chicago: Open Court Press.Google Scholar
  16. Maritain, J. 1946. The person and the common good. Review of Politics 8: 419–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McCann, D.P. 2013. Who is responsible for the common good? Catholic social teaching and the praxis of subsidiarity. In The common good: Chinese and American perspectives, ed. P.C. Lo and D. Solomon, 261–289. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  18. Mencius. 1930. The four books with English translation and notes. Trans. J. Legge. Beijing: The Commercial Press.Google Scholar
  19. Nivison, D.S. 1996. The ways of Confucianism: Investigations in Chinese philosophy. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
  20. Noddings, N. 2003. Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education, 2nd ed. London: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  21. Ricoeur, P. 1966. Freedom and nature: The voluntary and the involuntary. Trans. E. V. Kohák. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Schutz, A. 1962. Collected papers: The problem of social reality. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  23. Solomon, D. 1997. Internal objections to virtue ethics. In Virtue ethics, ed. D. Statman, 165–179. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Solomon, D. 2013. Why modern ethics rejects the common good: Some suggestions. In The common good: Chinese and American perspectives, ed. P.C. Lo and D. Solomon, 65–82. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  25. Tong, R. 1998. The ethics of care: A feminist virtue ethics of care for healthcare practitioners. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 23(2): 131–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tu, W.-M. 2008. The insight of Chung-yung. Beijing: Renmin Press.Google Scholar
  27. von Hildebrand, D. 2007. The heart: An analysis of human and divine affectivity. South Bend: St. Augustine’s Press.Google Scholar
  28. Wong, D.B. 1991. Is there a distinction between reason and emotion in Mencius? Philosophy East and West 41(1): 31–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yan, Y. 2003. Private life under socialism: Love, intimacy and family change in a Chinese village, 1949–1999. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Yang, C.K. 1965. Chinese communist society: The family and the village. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  31. Zahavi, D. 2005. Subjectivity and selfhood: Investigating the first-person perspective. MIT press.Google Scholar
  32. Zhang, E. 2013. The common good in Moism: A reconstruction of Mozi’s ethics of “inclusive care” and “reciprocal well-being”. In The common good: Chinese and American perspectives, ed. P.C. Lo and D. Solomon, 103–128. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations