什么是儒家精英政治?

IF 0.1 0 ASIAN STUDIES
Ouyang Xiao 欧阳霄
{"title":"什么是儒家精英政治?","authors":"Ouyang Xiao 欧阳霄","doi":"10.1080/02549948.2021.1910174","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Daniel A. Bell’s searching for possible alternatives to liberal democracy in light of the political progress in the Asian countries spans two decades, culminating in his proposal of the so-called Chinese political meritocracy or xianneng zhengzhi. This article indicates the conceptual asymmetry between xianneng zhengzhi and “meritocracy” in three aspects. Firstly, in their respective cultural traditions, xianneng zhengzhi remains at the brighter end of the spectrum of political ideas while “meritocracy” is bogged down in a highly polarized reception. Secondly, “meritocracy” lacks the quintessence of xianneng zhengzhi, namely, an explicit stress on priority of moral worthiness. Thirdly, “meritocracy” is built upon foundational individualism and focuses on the individual performance and achievement. Although Confucian political tradition and the Western conception of meritocracy share some functional similarities, using the synthesized term “Confucian meritocracy” to introduce the Confucian political tradition may commit a cross-cultural hermeneutic fallacy.","PeriodicalId":41653,"journal":{"name":"Monumenta Serica-Journal of Oriental Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":"243 - 255"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What is Confucian Meritocracy?\",\"authors\":\"Ouyang Xiao 欧阳霄\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02549948.2021.1910174\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Daniel A. Bell’s searching for possible alternatives to liberal democracy in light of the political progress in the Asian countries spans two decades, culminating in his proposal of the so-called Chinese political meritocracy or xianneng zhengzhi. This article indicates the conceptual asymmetry between xianneng zhengzhi and “meritocracy” in three aspects. Firstly, in their respective cultural traditions, xianneng zhengzhi remains at the brighter end of the spectrum of political ideas while “meritocracy” is bogged down in a highly polarized reception. Secondly, “meritocracy” lacks the quintessence of xianneng zhengzhi, namely, an explicit stress on priority of moral worthiness. Thirdly, “meritocracy” is built upon foundational individualism and focuses on the individual performance and achievement. Although Confucian political tradition and the Western conception of meritocracy share some functional similarities, using the synthesized term “Confucian meritocracy” to introduce the Confucian political tradition may commit a cross-cultural hermeneutic fallacy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41653,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Monumenta Serica-Journal of Oriental Studies\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"243 - 255\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Monumenta Serica-Journal of Oriental Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02549948.2021.1910174\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ASIAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Monumenta Serica-Journal of Oriental Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02549948.2021.1910174","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ASIAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

丹尼尔·贝尔(Daniel A. Bell)根据亚洲国家的政治进步,历时二十年寻找自由民主的可能替代方案,最终提出了所谓的中国贤能政治或贤能政治。本文从三个方面说明贤能政制与“贤能政治”概念上的不对称。首先,在他们各自的文化传统中,贤能正治仍然处于政治思想光谱的光明一端,而“精英政治”则陷入高度两极分化的接受中。其次,“贤能政治”缺乏贤能政制的精髓,即明确强调道德价值的优先性。第三,“精英主义”建立在基本的个人主义基础上,注重个人的表现和成就。虽然儒家的政治传统与西方的贤能政治概念在功能上有一些相似之处,但用“儒家贤能”这一综合名词来介绍儒家的政治传统可能会犯跨文化解释学谬误。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What is Confucian Meritocracy?
Daniel A. Bell’s searching for possible alternatives to liberal democracy in light of the political progress in the Asian countries spans two decades, culminating in his proposal of the so-called Chinese political meritocracy or xianneng zhengzhi. This article indicates the conceptual asymmetry between xianneng zhengzhi and “meritocracy” in three aspects. Firstly, in their respective cultural traditions, xianneng zhengzhi remains at the brighter end of the spectrum of political ideas while “meritocracy” is bogged down in a highly polarized reception. Secondly, “meritocracy” lacks the quintessence of xianneng zhengzhi, namely, an explicit stress on priority of moral worthiness. Thirdly, “meritocracy” is built upon foundational individualism and focuses on the individual performance and achievement. Although Confucian political tradition and the Western conception of meritocracy share some functional similarities, using the synthesized term “Confucian meritocracy” to introduce the Confucian political tradition may commit a cross-cultural hermeneutic fallacy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信