Exploring Criticality in Chinese Philosophy: Refuting Generalisations and Supporting Critical Thinking

Author:

Normile Ian H.ORCID

Abstract

AbstractMuch of the literature exploring Chinese international student engagement with critical thinking in Western universities draws on reductive essentialisations of ‘Confucianism’ in efforts to explain cross-cultural differences. In this paper I review literature problematising these tendencies. I then shift focus from inferences about how philosophy shapes culture and individual students, toward drawing on philosophy as a ‘living’ resource for understanding and shaping the ideal of critical thinking. A cross disciplinary approach employs historical overview and philosophical interpretation within and beyond the Confucian tradition to exemplify three types of criticality common in Chinese philosophy. These are criticality within tradition, criticality of tradition, and critical integration of traditions. The result is a refutation of claims or inferences (intentional or implicit) that Chinese philosophy is not conducive to criticality. While this paper focuses on types of criticality, it also reveals a common method of criticality within Chinese philosophy, in the form of ‘creation through transmission’. This resonates with recent research calling for less confrontational and more dialogical engagement with critical processes. However, I also draw attention to examples of confrontational argumentation within Chinese philosophy, which may provide valuable resources for educators and students. Finally, I conclude careful and explicit consideration is needed regarding the types of criticality sought within Western universities to prevent educators and students from ‘speaking past’ one and other instead of ‘speaking with’ one and other in critical dialogue.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Philosophy,Education

Reference80 articles.

1. Ames, Roger T. and Hall, David L. 2003. Introduction. In Dao De Jing: A Philosophical Translation, ed. New York, USA: Ballantine Books.

2. Ames, Roger T., Henry Rosemont, S. Fraser, D. Robins, and T. O'Leary. "Were the early Confucians virtuous." Confucian role ethics: A vocabulary (2011): 109-130.

3. Analects. 1979. Confucius: The Analects. Trans. Lau, D. C. London, UK: Penguin Books.

4. Angle, Stepnen C., and Justin Tiwald. 2017. Neo-confucianism: A philosophical introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press.

5. Atkinson, Dwight. 1997. A critical approach to critical thinking in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly 31: 71–94.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3