Abstract
This chapter concerns the contemporary debate on the intersectionality of Confucianism with feminism in general and its compatibility with care ethics in particular. My intent here is to propose a hybrid feminist care ethics that is grounded in Confucianism by, on the one hand, integrating specifically the concepts of xiao 孝 and ren 仁 into existing care ethics so as to strengthen and broaden its theoretical horizon and, on the other, revising Confucian gender requirements in light of feminist demands for gender equity. It is my take that Confucian xiao 孝, as the root of ren 仁, is a moral vision that sees human inter-dependency as a strength in, and not a distraction from, human flourishing. In the same way, care ethics also starts with meeting the caring needs of one’s intimate loved ones, and caring relations in the personal realm for care ethicists have an ontological primacy. Morality for Confucius as well as for care ethicists, unlike the Kantian, liberal model that emphasizes detachment and personal autonomy, simply cannot bypass one’s affective ties in the familial realm. In the following, I will provide a hybrid account of care ethics and Confucianism – Confucian care – in which caring for the socially dependent and vulnerable starting with one’s loved ones is viewed as constitutive of the substance of one’s sense of the self; it forms part of one’s life’s journey to self-realization, not only in the realm of morality, but also in the realm of feminism as well.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This chapter employs the Ames and Rosemont 1998 translation of the Analects.
- 2.
Unless otherwise noted, all quotations from the Xiaojing are from the Rosemont and Ames 2009 translation.
- 3.
Unless otherwise noted, all quotations from the Mengzi are from the Lau 1970 translation.
- 4.
Unless otherwise noted, all quotations from the Zhongyong are from the Ames and Hall 2001 translation.
References
Ames, Roger T., and David L. Hall (trans.). 2001. Focusing the familiar: A translation and philosophical interpretation of the Zhongyong. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Ames, Roger T., and David L. Hall (trans.). 2003. Daodejing: A philosophical translation. New York: Ballantine Books. (For the concept of xiao, see especially Ch. 18 and 19.)
Ames, Roger T., and Henry Rosemont Jr. (trans.). 1998. The Analects of Confucius: A philosophical translation. New York: Ballantine Books.
Arneson, Richard. 1997. Feminism and family justice. Public Affairs Quarterly 11(4): 345–363.
Baier, Annette C. 2000. Hume: The reflective women’s epistemologist? In Feminist interpretations of David Hume, ed. Anne Jaap Jacobson. University Park: The Penn State University Press.
Chan, Alan K.L., and Tan Sor-Hoon (eds.). 2004. Filial piety in Chinese thought and history. London: Routledge Cruzon. (Anthology on various historical studies and applications of xiao.)
Daxue 大學. 1994. In Zhu Xi 朱熹, The four books 四書. Tainan: Dayou Chubanshe.
Dixon, Nicholas. 1995. The friendship model of filial obligations. Journal of Applied Philosophy 12(1): 77–87. (A revision of Jane English’s “friendship model” of filial duty.)
English, Jane. 1989. What do grown children own their parents? In Vice and virtue in everyday life: Introductory readings in ethics, ed. Christina Sommers and Fred Sommers. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers. (The pioneering piece on the “friendship model” of filial duty.)
Gilligan, Carol. 1993. In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hall, David L., and Roger T. Ames. 1987. Thinking through Confucius. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Held, Virginia. 2006. The ethics of care: Personal, political and global. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Herr, Ranjoo Seodu. 2003. Is Confucianism compatible with care ethics? A critique. Philosophy East & West 53(4): 471–489.
Holzman, Donald. 1998. The place of filial piety in ancient China. Journal of the American Oriental Society 118(2): 185–199. (A textual study of the origins of xiao.)
Ivanhoe, Philip J. 2007. Filial piety as a virtue. In Working virtue: Virtue ethics and contemporary moral problems, ed. Rebecca L. Walker and Philip J. Ivanhoe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Johnston, Ian (trans.). 2010. The Mozi: A complete translation. New York: Columbia University Press. (For Mozi’s discussion of xiao, see especially Ch. 14–16: Universal Love I-III.)
Journal of Chinese Philosophy. 2009. Special edition. Femininity and feminism: Chinese and contemporary. 36(2).
Keller, Simon. 2006. Four theories of filial duty. Philosophical Quarterly 56: 254–274. (Rejects all three existing theories of filial duty: debt, gratitude and friendship and instead proposes the “special goods” theory.)
Kittay, Eva Feder. 1999. Love’s labor: Essays on women, equality, and dependency. New York: Routledge. (A study of care ethics and the theory of disability.)
Kittay, Eva Feder. 2002. Love’s labor revisited. Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy 17(3): 237–250. (A response to a collection of essays commenting on Kittay’s Love’s Labor.)
Knapp, Keith N. 1995. The Ru reinterpretation of Xiao. Early China 20: 195–222.
Knoblock, John. 1999. Trans. Xunzi, 2 vols. Hunan: Hunan People’s Publishing House. (All the translations of the Xunzi are Knoblock’s translation, unless noted otherwise.)
Kristeva, Julia. 1977. About Chinese women. Trans. Anita Barrows. New York: Urizen.
Lai Tao, Julia Po-Wah. 2000. Two perspectives of care: Confucian Ren and feminist care. Journal of Chinese Philosophy 27(2): 215–240.
Langton, Rae. 2000. Maria von Herbert’s challenge to Kant. In Ethics: Classical Western texts in feminist and multicultural perspectives, ed. James P. Sterba. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Include the translation of the correspondences between Maria von Herbert and Kant.)
Lau, D.C. 1970. Mencius. Harmondsworth/New York: Penguin Books.
Legge, James (trans.). 1885. Li Chi (Liji): Book of rituals, 2 vols. Whitefish: Kessinger Publishing.
Li, Chenyang. 1994. The Confucian concept of Jen and the feminist ethics of care: A comparative study. Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy 9(1): 70–89. (The pioneering piece on the comparative studies of Confucian ren and care ethics.)
Lin, Yutang. 1989. On growing old gracefully. In Vice and virtue in everyday life: Introductory readings in ethics, ed. Christina Sommers and Fred Sommers. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers.
Okin, Susan Moller. 1989. Justice, gender, and the family. New York: Basic Books.
Okin, Susan Moller. 1999. Is multiculturalism bad for women? In Is multiculturalism bad for women?, ed. Joshua Cohen, Matthew Howard, and Martha C. Nussbaum. Princeton: Princeton University Press. (A collection of short essays responding to Okin’s original essay and Okin’s concluding remarks on the essays.)
Phillips, Anne. 2007. Multiculturalism without culture. Princeton: Princeton University Press. (The latest attempt to provide a solution to the tension between multiculturalism and feminism.)
Raphals, Lisa. 2004. Reflections on filiality, nature and nurture. In Filial piety in Chinese thought and history, ed. Alan K.L. Chan and Sor-hoon Tan. London: Routledge Press.
Rosemont Jr., Henry. 1996. Classical Confucian and contemporary feminist perspectives on the self: Some parallels, and their implications. In Culture and self: Philosophical and religious perspectives, East and West, ed. Douglas Allen. Boulder: Westview Press.
Rosemont, Henry Jr., and Roger T. Ames (trans.). 2009. The Chinese classic of family reverence: A philosophical translation of the Xiaojing. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Ruddick, Sarah. 1980. Maternal thinking. Feminist Studies 6: 342–367. (The pioneering piece on care ethics.)
Russell, Bertrand. 1922. The problem of China. London: Allen & Unwin.
Schott, Robin May (Ed.). 1997. Feminist interpretations of Immanuel Kant. University Park: Penn State University Pres. (A collection of original and translated essays on the study of Kant as pertaining to feminism.)
Shun, Kwong-loi. 2003. Xiao (Hsiao): Filial piety. In Encyclopedia of Chinese philosophy, ed. Antonio S. Cua. New York: Routledge. (A useful summary of the concept of xiao in Confucianism.)
Slote, Walter H. 1998. Psychocultural dynamics within the Confucian family. In Confucianism and the family, ed. Walter H. Slote and George A. Devos. Albany: State University of New York Press. (A collection of essays on the study of Chinese family.)
Sommers, Christina. 1989. Philosophers against the family. In Vice and virtue in everyday life: Introductory readings in ethics, ed. Christina Sommers and Fred Sommers. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers.
Tu, Wei-ming. 1985. Confucian thought: Selfhood as creative transformation. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Tu, Wei-ming. 2001. Tasan lecture #3: A Confucian response to the feminist critique. The Tasan Lectures, Korea, November. http://tuweiming.com/lecture.7.html. Accessed 17 June 2011.
Wang, Su 王肅. 1996. The school sayings of Confucius 孔子家語. Taipei: Sanming Shuju. (For the textual origins, see Michael Loewe’s Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide, The Society for the Study of Early China, 1993.)
Watson, Burton (trans.). 1968. The complete works of Chuang Tzu (Zhuangzi). New York: Columbia University Press. (For the concept of xiao, see especially Ch. 4, 14, 29 and 31.)
Williams, Bernard. 1981. Moral luck: Philosophical papers 1973–1980. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wolf, Eric R. 1982/1997. Europe and the people without history. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Wolf, Margery. 1994. Beyond the patrilineal self: Constructing gender in China. In Self as person in Asian theory and practice, ed. Roger T. Ames, Wimal Disanayake, and Thomas P. Kasulis. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Woo, Terry. 1999. Confucianism and feminism. In Feminism and world religions, ed. Arvind Sharma and Katherine K. Young. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rosenlee, LH.L. (2014). Why Care? A Feminist Re-appropriation of Confucian Xiao 孝. In: Olberding, A. (eds) Dao Companion to the Analects. Dao Companions to Chinese Philosophy, vol 4. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7113-0_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7113-0_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-7112-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-7113-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)