“… Han Fei 29 (1939, p. 279). W. K. Liao originally translated the terms in italic as “safety” and “security.” Following Goldin (2013, p. 80) and Levi in Han Fei (1999, p. 265), I prefer to translate “安” as “peace”. …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Many of Han Fei's lessons and cautionary tales are explicit on this point. See, for instance, Han Fei 14 (1939, p. 128), 15 (1939, p. 140), 46 (1939, p. 242), 47 (1939, p. 254), 49 (1939, p. 281), and 50 (1939, p. 309). …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Han Fei 42 (1939, p. 211). I wish to thank an anonymous reviewer for drawing my attention to this passage. …”
This article surveys three possible ways to assess morality in the Hanfeizi. The first is the “traditional” outlook, according to which Han Fei disregards all moral considerations in politics. The second acknowledges the presence of moral questions in the text but maintains that it ultimately promotes amoralism as an essential feature of the Legalist state. A (less common) third way is to say that there is a moral core to Han Fei's political philosophy. I will defend the third way, which shifts the perception of the Hanfeizi from a mere manual of political manipulation to a comprehensive ideal vision for the world. This interpretation necessitates a recognition of how political morality can coherently exist alongside an apparent divide between private ethics and political action. This is something that those seeking more systematic forms of ethics in the Hanfeizi might overlook.
“… Han Fei 29 (1939, p. 279). W. K. Liao originally translated the terms in italic as “safety” and “security.” Following Goldin (2013, p. 80) and Levi in Han Fei (1999, p. 265), I prefer to translate “安” as “peace”. …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Many of Han Fei's lessons and cautionary tales are explicit on this point. See, for instance, Han Fei 14 (1939, p. 128), 15 (1939, p. 140), 46 (1939, p. 242), 47 (1939, p. 254), 49 (1939, p. 281), and 50 (1939, p. 309). …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Han Fei 42 (1939, p. 211). I wish to thank an anonymous reviewer for drawing my attention to this passage. …”
This article surveys three possible ways to assess morality in the Hanfeizi. The first is the “traditional” outlook, according to which Han Fei disregards all moral considerations in politics. The second acknowledges the presence of moral questions in the text but maintains that it ultimately promotes amoralism as an essential feature of the Legalist state. A (less common) third way is to say that there is a moral core to Han Fei's political philosophy. I will defend the third way, which shifts the perception of the Hanfeizi from a mere manual of political manipulation to a comprehensive ideal vision for the world. This interpretation necessitates a recognition of how political morality can coherently exist alongside an apparent divide between private ethics and political action. This is something that those seeking more systematic forms of ethics in the Hanfeizi might overlook.
“…Accordingly they have no proper laws nor magistrates, and are not even capable of controlling their family affairs." 6 Here, I would like to point attention to the phrasing that Vitoria employs: "standard required by human and civil claims." In writing this, Vitoria arrives at concluding there exists a deficient order within Amerindian affairs by establishing a distinction between the Spanish and the Amerindians.…”
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.