"FOCUS-FIELD" AS A PATTERN OF HUMAN MODEL FORMATION IN TAOIST AND CONFUCIAN CULTURE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32461/2226-0285.2.2015.146962Keywords:
focus-field, personality, harmony, civilization, being, Daoism, ConfucianismAbstract
The article deals with an interpretation of the pattern ‘focus-field’ as an original conception of anthropological model in Chinese religious and philosophical schoolings.
The comparative analysis of theoretic and methodological features of anthropological pattern in the main Chinese philosophical schoolings has been given. After the example of original interpretation (focus-field) the human features in Chinese culture are grounded. The social determination of subject in Chinese society has been proved.
Despite of collectivism ideology, China is famous by its despotism, where ordinary personality’s interests are dissolved among the society needs. The self in traditional Chinese culture are oriented on own society’s interests and traditions. It takes care of its own inner world more that of material means of human being.
At the same time we can assert that such notions are stereotypic and they are affirmed by the works of Arabic thinker E.Said. He proves, that unilaterality of Western understanding of the antipole of culture is a result of the research within the framework ‘we – they’. Due to this understanding, the self-identification of Western world has been arisen. It also matters much in the establishment of Europe in psychological meaning.
The formation of Ancient Chinese philosophy took place in the Golden Age (6–3 thousands years B.C.). In this period the main schoolings, such as Daoism and Confucianism were arisen. The ideas of macrocosm and microcosm and unity of human and world were reflected in them.
In the center of Chinese philosophy is ch’i as a uninterrupted medium of dynamic vibrations, which determine the opposite forces – yin and yan. The harmony of the world in China depends on the interaction between the great triad Heaven – Human – Earth. Contrary from Indian philosophy, Chinese one is focused on the practical area and it is a base for collectivism as a state system.
The main role in the formation of Daoism played Lao-tse’s works ‘The Book of Road and Bliss’ and ‘Zhuangzi’ by the author of the same name. The basic notion in Daoism philosophy is Dao, which means the road, universal nature of all things and it is identical with the western category of objective reality (being).
Combining the meaning of Indian principle of ahimsa, Daoism claims the sympathy with every living being. The ideal of human in Daoism is ch’I, gin means naturalness. In China the main task for human was not release from the world but an adaptability to it by means of achieving of corporal immortality in way of Dao.
Confucius, the founder of one of the principal Chinese philosophical schooling, supposed, that to be a human is to love all of people. Just reciprocal feeling and love for other persons distinguish the human from other living beings in the Celestial Empire. Following the rules of moral law of Dao, human has to achieve a level of junzi, i.e. noble man, or gentleman. Anthropological ideas of Confucius philosophy is based on the moral canons of human behaviour. Among the problems of human being the Master K'ung marked out zhongyong – the rule of the golden mean.
Contrary from Lao-tse, Confucius pointed out not natural but social Cosmos, raised political and moral range of problems. He thought, that harmonization in society was the main factor of state development, which had been based on family relations.
Famous American sinologist Roger T. Ames made an interpretation of anthropological pattern of the Celestial Empire after the example of its socio-political system. His pattern named ‘focus-field’ enabled to get to know a human image in China in detail, crashed previous stereotypes about the absence of subject in it.
It was traditional for China to consider a structure of certain personality in the context of its political system. From the times of Sia dynasty, the Celestial Empire was divided into five hierarchical zones, or regions. This structure represented the level of taxes in favour of the center. This sun-form system of circle, which has detached by central focus, has spread with time in Chinese society.
Positively appreciating of R.Ames’s pattern, researcher A.King proves convincing that in Chinese world all relationship are based on family principles. In his judgment, relations between leaders and directed persons are interpreted as relations between father and son, and relations between friends as relations between senior and junior brothers. Family as a cohesive similar ‘group’ is identified and focused in the center.
According to scientist P.Arnheim, this focus determines the world order. Family, society, state and even tradition as an extended ‘group’ or ‘field’ remains as indefinite notions. This uncertainty of abstract connection focuses and becomes direct one during the representation of idea in certain father, civil activist, lord and historical model.
References
Більченко Є.В. Категорія структури і ІІ деконструкція як жести традиційної культури: на прикладі китайського постмодерну / Є.В. Більченко [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу: http://www.stattionline.org.ua/kultura/112/20959-kategoriya-strukturi-ta-ii.
Васильев В.П. Конфуцианство / В.П. Васильев // Конфуций. Я верю в древность. – М: Республика, 1995. – 384 с.
Маслов А. А. Загадки, тайны и коды "Дао дэ цзина" / А.А. Маслов. – Ростов-на-Дону: Феникс, 2005. – 272 с.
Мороз Ю.А. Философский анализ этических аспектов учения Конфуция / Ю.А. Мороз // Вісник СевНТУ: зб. наук. пр. – Вип. 126/2012. Серія: Філософія. — Севастополь, 2012. – С.209–213.
Роджер Т. Эймс. Индивид как "фокус-поле" в классическом конфуцианстве / Эймс Р.Т. // Это человек. Антология. - М., 1995. – С. 295–317.
Социльная философия. Курс лекций. – Ставрополь: Изд-во СГУ, 2005. – 151 с.
Степанянц М.Т. Бог—человек—общество в традиционных культурах Востока.— М.: Наука; Издательская фирма: Восточная литература, 1993.— 224 с.
Торчинов Е.О. Пути философии Востока и Запада: познание запредельного / Е.О. Торчинов. – СПб.: Азбука-классика, Петербургское Востоковедение, 2007. − 480 с.
Усик А.В. Діалог культур: західна та китайська традиційна філософія / А.В. Усик // Мультиверсум. Філософський альманах. – К.: Центр духовної культури, 2005. – № 45 [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу: http://www.filosof.com.ua/Jornel/M_45/Usyk.htm.
Феоктистов В. Ф. Модель личности в традиционной китайской философии: дискуссия в западной синологии / В.Ф. Феоктистов // Восток–Россия–Запад: Исторические и культурологические исследования. – М.: Памятники исторической мысли, 2001. –779 c. – С.413–421.
Ян Хин Шун. Древнекитайский философ Лао-цзы и его учение. – М.-Л., 1950 [Електронний ресурс] / Ян Хин Шун. – Режим доступу: http://www.lib.ru/POECHIN/lao1.txt.
Bilchenko, Ye.V. (2013). Category of structure and II deconstruction as gestures of traditional culture: after the example of Chinese postmodern. Retrieved from: http://www.stattionline.org.ua/kultura/112/20959-kategoriyastrukturi-ta-ii-dekonstrukciya-yak-zhesti-tradicijnoї-kulturi-na-prikladi-kitajskogo-postmodernu.html [in Ukrainian].
Vasiliev, V.P. (1995) Confucianism In: Confucius. I believe in Antiquity. Moscow: Respublika [in Russian].
Maslov, A.A. (2005). Riddles, mysteries and codes of ‘Dao de zin’. Rosrtov-on-Don: Fenix [in Russian].
Moroz, Yu.A. (2012). Philosophical analysis of ethical aspects in Confucian studies.Visnyk SevNTU, 126/2012, 209-213 [in Russian].
Roger T. Ames (1995). The Focus-Field Self in Classical Confucianism. In: This is Human. Anthology. Moscow: Nauka [in Russian].
Social philosophy. Lektion book (2005). Stavropol: Izd-vo SGU [in Russian].
Stepaniants, M.T. (1993). God – Human – Society in traditional cultures of the Orient. Moscow: Nauka; Publishing house ‘Orient literature’ [in Russian].
Torchinov, Ye.A. (2007). The ways of Eastern and Western philosophy: a cognition of transcendental things. St.-Petersburg: Azbuka-klassika, Peterburgs Oriental Studies [in Russian].
Usyk, A.V. (2005). Dialog of cultures: Western and Chinese tradition. Multiversum, 45. Retrieved from http://www.filosof.com.ua/Jornel/M_45/Usyk.htm in Ukrainian].
Feoklistov, V.F. (2001). Personality model in traditional Chinese philosophy: discussion in Western sinology. In: East – Russia – West: Historical and cultural studies researches. Moscow: Monuments of historical thought [in Russian].
Jan Chin Schun. An (1950). Ancient Chinese philosopher Lao-tse and his study. Retrieved from http://www.lib.ru/POECHIN/lao1.txt [in Russian]
Downloads
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2018 Almanac "Culture and Contemporaneity"
![Creative Commons License](http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by/4.0/88x31.png)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).