Yang Zhu – Enfant terrible of Philosophical Daoism and His Concept of Privatism

Jana S. ROŠKER

Abstract


Yang Zhu, a Chinese philosopher from the fourth Century BCE, has been in the history of Chinese philosophy regarded as a selfish hedonist, unable of virtuous life in community, structured in accordance with rigid Confucian philosophy. As such, the official Confucian historiography has always marked him as a heretic thinker, unworthy of being a real philosopher. The present article tries to reject such an interpretation of Yang Zhu’s philosophy and to expose the fact, that his opus should be regarded as an extraordinarily egalitarian philosophy, striking for freedom, dignity and personal integrity of every individual in society. The article follows the presumption, according to which Yang Zhu is the very representative of classical Daoism, who tried in his work to consistently realize the principle of social tolerance, autonomy and individual freedom in the sense of “to live and to let live”. Yang Zhu is often denoted as an advocate of anarchism or individualism. Instead, the author of the present article proposes to apply the term “privatism” to his philosophy, because her contextual analysis has shown that it is a more appropriate and less Eurocentric term.

Keywords


Yang Zhu, philosophical Daoism, classical Daoism, hedonism, personal integrity, autonomy, individualism, privatism

Full Text:

PDF (Slovenščina)

References


Emerson, John. 1996. “Yang Chu’s Discovery of the Body.” Philosophy East & West 46 (4): 533–66.

Forke, Alfred. 1934. Geschichte der alten chinesischen Philosophie (I.). Hamburg: R. Oldenbourg Verlag.

Fung, Yu-lan. 1953. A History of Chinese Philosophy, prevedel Derk Bodde. New Jersey: Princenton University Press.

Harbsmeier, Christoph. 1989. “Marginalia Sino-logica.” V Understanding the Chinese Mind – The Philosophical Roots, uredil Robert E. Allinson, 125–66. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.

Hu, Shi. 1984. Zhongguo zhexue shi da gang 中国哲学史大纲 (Oris zgodovine kitajske filozofije). Beijing: Shangwu yinshuguan.

Liezi. 1998. Liezi 列子 (Mojster Lie), uredil in komentiral Yang Hong. Lanzhou: Gansu minzu chuban she.

Liu, Xiaogan. 1988. “On the Concept of Naturalness (Tzu-Jan) in Lao Tzu’s Philosophy.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 25 (4): 422–45.

Mengzi. 1997. Mengzi 孟子 (Mojster Meng /Mencij/), uredil in komentiral Liang Haiming. Shenyang: Liaoning minzu chuban she.

Rošker, Jana. 2006. Iskanje poti – spoznavna teorija v kitajski tradiciji, 1. del: Od protokonfucijanskih klasikov do neokonfucijanizma dinastije Song. Ljubljana: Znanstveni inštitut filozofske fakultete (zbirka Razprave).

Villaver, Ranie. 2015. “Does Guiji Mean Egoism?: Yang Zhu’s Conception of Self.” Asian Philosophy 25 (2): 216–23.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4312/as.2017.5.1.289-299

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2017 Jana S. ROŠKER

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Ljubljana University Press, Faculty of Arts
(Znanstvena založba Filozofske fakultete Univerze v Ljubljani) 

Print ISSN: 2232-5131
Online ISSN: 2350-4226