requestId:685186280d1484.92780825.
Confucianism’s topic of responsibility: Three-fold vocabulary
Author: Li Linjie (Student of Sichuan Major Political Department)
Source: Author’s Commentary Confucianism Network, originally published by Taiwan’s “Science and Technology Integration Monthly” 2022 July (8) issue
Abstract: Confucianism has been deeply rooted in the bad reputation of “specialized academic speech” for a long time, and has been in a strong position under the advantages of Western vocabulary. This article uses the three connotations of the verbal topic as the paradigm, and uses the “difference” of the value topic between China and the West to propose “responsibility topics” that correspond to the “rights topic” of Western learning, and describes the completeness, true nature of this topic and the chance of encountering the current paradigm conversion in the three connotations of the verbal topic. We hope to use this framework to focus on “responsibility” to present a cognitive framework for Confucianism, and use the “reality” and “opportunities” that manipulate life topics to describe Confucianism’s own “reality” and “opportunities”.
Keywords: Triple verbs Responsibility Confucianism
1. The three connotations of the destiny
A civilization or verb is used to solve real problems that are related to the common people; a political civilization or verb is used to solve the real problems that are related to the common people’s political career. A political vocabulary materially constitutes the action guide and behavioral compliance of political activities, and always serves political activities consistently, serving as a verbal package for the political audience and political management concepts. Political verbal logic is always to serve the logic of political activities. Political activities, as highly perceptual behaviors that drive political benefits, have strong political goals and are now equipped with significant problem-based logic: one is why, two is why we can do this, and three is how to do it. The former is relevant. Value, the middle one is a problem analysis mechanism that involves logic, while the latter involves the method; the former is a problem driving mechanism in which the problem itself is regarded as a problem and is raised, abstracted or even defined, while the middle one is a problem analysis mechanism that targets the subject-oriented problem-oriented interaction, and the latter is a problem-solving mechanism that targets the subject-object interaction.
A huge political vocabulary also has problematic logic, and this problematic logic serves abstract overall problems: that is, in terms of the most basic settings of the social political process, why is this setting, what can this setting be built on, and how to implement the most basic settings. For the former, the concept of problem related to the most basic value can be formulated and defined within the ethnic group, and it leads to the purpose of politically setting its most basic value tag; for the middle, the respective sub-questions and their backgrounds that are consistent with the purpose of the problem and the target are thus transported and accumulated, and form a paradigm or system that is related to the most basic problem and the setting of civilization self-consistent, so that the purpose of the most basic problem and the solution of the target is logically self-consistent.The verbal system, otherwise it lacks the most basic nature of using jade to become a problem or a tag; for the latter, it is to set and advocate its own changes and implementation, enter the domain of the interaction between the subject and the guest, and from the concept of the method of linking the realm layer to the reality itself. Therefore, a huge political vocabulary has a total problem consciousness logic, including the connotation of the three subjects: one is the value life question, define the most basic value-related points of the political subject, and answer the general setting of the political process (due to the driving force of a certain value); the other is to explain the life question, explain the most basic The most basic purpose of the self-consistent civilization logic is to answer why the political process can be set in this way (constructed into a certain kind of rationalization paradigm), and the third is to manipulate life issues and provide value tags with practical intermediary locations that have been implemented in the real field, and to answer how the political process and its settings are achieved (constructed in a way).
The huge political words of any kind of civilization include the connotation of three subjects: value for life, explanation of life and manipulation of life. The profoundness of a certain huge vocabulary and the comparison analysis between multiple vocabulary can be used to refer to the level of the connotation of the triple subject: the level of value-relatedness, logical paradigm, and practical methods can help to understand the civilized mechanism of the political vocabulary; and the corresponding comparison between the value level, logic level and mode level can help to better understand the convention and difference levels between different vocabulary. Confucian political verbs can also be analyzed using the levels of this triple connotation to understand the political topics that Confucianism is based on its most basic values, the logical and self-consistent mechanism paradigm related to this political topic, and the actual way in which the topic can be manipulated and implemented.
2. Focus on responsibility and differences – as a value life topic
The difference presented by Confucianism and Westernology begins with the difference in value fate. In the dream of the value topic, every question of the heroine has achieved good results, and when the Ye Qiu, who has the lowest results, the explanation of life topics and manipulation of life topics that serve the value topics, will also have a special path, forming a complete and divergent self-consistent mechanism paradigm and conceptual change paths, and cultivating the differences in the overall nature of the entire verbal topic. As far as value topics are concerned, the topic is recognized by people as a collective experience of civilization through career logic, through the words shared by each in the specific society, thereby realizing its usefulness and authenticity within the social context. In the most basic sense, the value elements between different words are equal rights and inconsistent, which cultivate the difference in value awareness in the environment of divergence, and seek empathetic understanding of the uniqueness of the civilizations of different societies. As far as understanding the value proposition is concerned, the problem is often in the difference: the divergence body is the respective focus formed by the most basic concerns of their respective values, which constitutes the difference in the difference in the viewing side. Differences in the measurement may make the equal rights between the differences and the inconsistency of agreements neglected, and the pride of civilization or civilization is incomplete.
In the field of social civilization,When people define a problem, they often lead to understanding and understanding of the nature of the problem, and are accompanied by the corresponding problem understanding; and if there is an error in the perspective of defining the problem, then the subsequent nature recognition and understanding of the way will also occur; for example, behind the common word, the perspective of the dichotomy between moral and non-morality is established, and the civil director’s mission is avoided that generalizes this moral pursuit. The definition angle is a definition that opens from a certain perspective, which is often rooted in the connection of a particular civilization. The concept of focus in a specific civilization structure constitutes a focus point from a defined angle, thereby understanding, scrutinizing and even meaning additional points, supporting the interpretation framework for the overall social civilization; while the tree stands on the focus of the focus point, willing to recognize the nature behind it and understand the way of understanding, and constructs the logic self-consistent and mechanism differences within the framework. But the problem is that this focus concept is always a product rooted in the history of a specific social civilization field. Using a certain focus concept as a focus point, the perspective formed by striking the overall appearance of another different social civilization field will bring differences. The so-called difference refers to the wrong perception formed by inappropriate perspectives, and uses the wrong focus to support the overall nature of the abnormal social civilization field to support the path of recognition and understanding of the overall nature of the abnormal social civilization.
The point of “disagreement” between China and the West lies in the differences in the most basic value preset. It is a basic and determined positional treatment power and even the authority to serve the authorities, or a basic perspective of denial. Confucianism’s treatment of the authorities and even power is based on the positive and positive conditions, and it starts to make political statements about management issues based on the conditions of actual existence of political traditions and even power; Westernism’s treatment of the authorities and even power is basically eliminated, and those with a slightly positive definition ar
發佈留言