Cosmopolitan Confucianism

Context

by Ruihan Wu:

"In the Western philosophical tradition, “cosmopolitanism” is a multifaceted and richly nuanced topic with roots in various historical sources. From Diogenes’ concept of “kosmopolitēs” to the Stoic idea of a “world city-state” and Kant’s vision of a “league of nations”, each of these intellectual origins sheds light on different issues. In contemporary philosophical discussions, the exploration of cosmopolitanism has also diversified, giving rise to varied perspectives. For many philosophers, cosmopolitanism is regarded as an ethical matter, sparking debates about whether individuals should extend their care and assistance to all human beings without distinction or if they have specific duties primarily to their fellow compatriots. On the other hand, a significant number of thinkers view cosmopolitanism as a pressing political philosophical issue, grappling with questions about the most just and equitable form of global political organization (see Scheffler 1999; Kleingeld and Brown 2019).

Meanwhile, the issue of “Confucian cosmopolitanism” seems to be confined within the domain of ethics and moral philosophy. After the publication of Martha Nussbaum’s essay “Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism” (Nussbaum 1994), Confucian scholars, whether explicitly or implicitly, have engaged with Nussbaum’s ideas and focused on defining the characteristics of a Confucian cosmopolitan and how they can be cultivated. They argue that Confucianism, with its morally centered philosophy of Ren 仁 (humanity) and its metaphysical emphasis on the Dao 道 (the way) and Tian 天 (heaven), provides a solid philosophical foundation for cosmopolitanism. These scholars perceive the ideal Confucian cosmopolitan as someone who embodies moral excellence and virtue, exemplified by the junzi 君子 (noble person) or sage (Neville 2012). Furthermore, they contend that Confucianism offers a distinctive form of “rooted cosmopolitanism” that addresses Nussbaum’s concerns about global homogeneity (Peng 2023). They primarily view cosmopolitanism as an ethical or moral issue rather than a purely political one (see Ivanhoe 2014).

However, the situation is precisely the opposite in the Chinese-speaking academic community, particularly after Chinese leaders proposed the concept of a “community of shared future for mankind”. The focus shifts towards studying a Chinese version of a world system that transcends the nation-state framework. Cosmopolitanism, as the translation of “shijie zhuyi” 世界主义, becomes closely associated with international political issues. Chinese philosophers, especially those studying Confucianism, feel the responsibility to seek the roots of a Chinese conception of the world in ancient philosophical resources. Therefore, concepts such as Datong 大同 (great harmony) from pre-Qin texts and the cosmological worldview of the unity of all things developed during the Song and Ming dynasties, along with the idealized view of Tianxia 天下 (all under heaven) and the tributary system in reality, are repeatedly mentioned and compared to the current global situation1. To some extent, Confucian cosmopolitanism now becomes the modern expression of the concept of “Tianxia”."

(https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/14/8/1036)

Related Concepts

Datong

by Ruihan Wu:

"In his work A History of Pre-Qin Political Thought, Liang Qichao elaborated on the concept of Datong:

“Datong” represents the ultimate realization of a complete and harmonious human personality within the universe. However, the universe is never completely perfect; if it were, it would no longer be a universe. Confucians deeply hold this principle, as reflected in the sixty-four hexagrams of Yi 易 (the Book of Changes), starting with “Qian 乾” and ending with “Weiji 未济”. In this imperfect universe, our task is to continuously progress based on our capabilities, inching closer to the realization of the ideal personality and the harmonious universe we aspire to. How can we achieve this? By expanding our kinship consciousness to its utmost extent."

(https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/14/8/1036)

Ren

by Ruihan Wu:

"Zheng Xuan 郑玄 (127–200), a renowned classical scholar from the Han Dynasty, interpreted “Ren” as “xiang ren ou”, which implies reciprocal relations with others. Building on this interpretation, Liang Qichao proposed that kinship consciousness is the conscious recognition of one’s shared existence and mutual interdependence with others, which is essential for the formation of personhood. In this context, both kinship consciousness and Ren lead to a unity of self and the other. Liang Qichao further claimed that Ren is synonymous with the awakening of kinship consciousness, presenting a fresh reinterpretation of Ren through the lens of kinship consciousness, emphasizing the concept of mankind.

He contended that the formation of the concept of mankind manifests as kinship consciousness on the cognitive dimension and as empathy on the emotional dimension—a representation of love and care for one’s own kind. The negative expression of this emotion is captured in the principle of “Shu 恕”, which urges individuals not to do unto others what they do not wish for themselves (己所不欲勿施于人). Conversely, its positive manifestation is described as “aspire to establish people when you wish to establish yourself, aspire to succeed people when you wish to succeed yourself” (己欲立而立人, 己欲达而达人), which characterizes Ren. Intriguingly, Liang Qichao emphasized that the word “ren 人” one aspires to assist is not another individual but humanity as a whole."

(https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/14/8/1036)

More information

• Ivanhoe, Philip J. 2014. Confucian Cosmopolitanism. Journal of Religious Ethics 42: 22–44

• Liu, Qing 刘擎. 2015. Reimagining the Global: From ‘Tianxia’ to New Cosmopolitanism 重建全球想象: 从“天下”理想走向新世界主义. Academic Monthly 学术月刊 47: 5–15.

• Liu, Yuedi 刘悦笛. 2016. The Cosmopolitanism and the Cosmopolitism: Concurrently on the Relevance between Nationalism and Cosmopolitanism 大同世界与世界主义：兼论民族主义与世界主义的关系. International Tribune of Confucian Studies 国际儒学论丛 2: 47–61.

• Ma, Kefeng 马克锋, and Qinmei Sun 孙钦梅. 2014. The Ideological Course of Cosmopolitanism in Modern China 近代中国世界主义的思想历程. Teaching and Research 教学与研究 3: 31–37.

Neville, Robert Cummings. 2012. Dimensions of Contemporary Confucian Cosmopolitanism. Journal of Chinese Philosophy 39: 594–613.

See also:

• on Hindu Cosmpopolitanism: Hatcher, Brian A. 1994. “The Cosmos is One Family” (Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam): Problematic Mantra of Hindu Humanism. Contributions to Indian Sociology 28: 149–62.

Source

* Article: Confucian Cosmopolitanism: The Modern Predicament and the Way Forward. by Ruihan Wu. Religions 2023, 14(8), 1036; doi

URL = https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/14/8/1036

"In the Chinese-speaking academic community, the topic of Confucian cosmopolitanism is intricately linked to the concepts of “Tianxia” and “Datong”, carrying significant political implications. This context arises from the tension between the Confucian vision of a borderless world order and the reality of the bounded nation-state system since the late 19th century. This modern situation constitutes the dual predicaments for Confucian cosmopolitanism: the contradiction between the logic of Datong and the logic of national empowerment, as well as the conflict between the specific Confucian identity and the universal concern for the world. Represented by notable figures like Liang Qichao, modern scholars have devoted themselves to resolving these predicaments. "