chinese philosophy (feb. 23)

[clay dube]

On Feb. 23, we'll spend time talking about early Chinese history and pay particular attention to Chinese philosophy. We'll have a four sided debate over the big questions listed on pages 46-47 in your philosophy unit (see your binder).

Please remember that an effective ideology is powerful when it:

1. Describes the current situation (ca. 500 ce China) and how we got here.
2. Compellingly describes the ideal situation, including how power is wielded and how people relate to one another.
3. Explains in an action-plan how we can get from where we are to where we ought to be.

Please keep these elements in mind as you research answers to the central debate issues.

For 2/23 the reading assignment is the early East Asian civilizations and Chinese philosophy sections of the binder. If you have a copy of the East Asia textbook by Ebrey, Walthall, and Palais, please read the sections listed in the reading schedule (which is in your binder). You can prepare effectively, however, just with the materials in the binder.

*****

Chinese philosophy in the Warring States period (403-321 BCE)

Through the primary source documents in the curriculum guide of the "Chinese Philosophy" section, you will be able to gain a sense of the richness of these schools of thought - how they are intertwined, how their advocates sought to address the problems they identified and realize, in some cases, shared aims.

Use the three Focus Questions below to prepare for the debate, during which you will have to defend the ideology of your school of thought while pointing out the flaws of the other three. You may find the chart on pages 46-47 useful as you prepare. You will have to provide for three essential elements:

1. A description of how we arrived at the present situation (China during the Warring States period, 403-321 BCE) – what are the major problems we face?

2. A description (proscription) of what should be – how things ought to be.

3. A description of what should be done to move from 1 to 2 – an action plan.

In the debate, the moderator will ask questions of each school and you may ask questions of each other. In general, accent the positive in your doctrine, but it may be occasionally helpful to draw contrasts with the way other schools deal with issues you consider critical.

We’ll definitely explore the following:

EDUCATION:
Is education necessary? Define a "well-educated" person. What would such a person know and be able to do? Who should provide this training?

LOYALTY:
To which people/institutions should a person owe his/her loyalty? What is the nature and what are the limits (if any) of these obligations?

SOCIETY/GOVERNMENT:
Describe the ideal society and government's role (if any) in that society. Be sure to address issues such as stratification, relations between people, and qualifications/responsibilities of leaders.

****************************

Please feel free to use the forum to discuss and share ideas with your colleagues. You may want to reply to this post for general questions, or start new threads for each school of thought.

We will post a list of debate assignments on Tuesday, 2/12 -- you need to know each school of thought, though, in order to effectively prepare. So please get busy with the reading.

[Anonymous]

I'm really confused about what sections to read from the book. I've looked at the reading shedule in my binder, but I didn't notice specific pages or chapters from the book assigned for 02/23/08. Are we just supposed to read the entire book? Will we know what side we are supposed to be debating before we arrive for class? I'll check the reading schedule again. I have read the material from the binder. I just want to make sure I am completely preared for class on the 23.

[Anonymous]

Some confusion here as well. There are no pages specified as to read from the book, and a portion of text from the folder which should be called Early Imperial China does not appear to be included...though late imperial china is there.

[Anonymous]

Hi everyone,

I have just posted the "Early East Asian Civilizations" and "Chinese Philosophy" readings here on the forum. Everyone should already have those in their binders, but if you do not, then please download them, as they are the required readings for our meeting this Saturday, February 23. You are not required to read anything in the textbook, but if you have time, you may want to review the section on the Warring States period.

We will be having a four-sided debate at the session, during which you will have to defend the school of thought to which you are assigned below. Through the primary source documents in the curriculum guide of the "Chinese Philosophy" section, you will be able to gain a sense of the richness of these schools of thought - how they are intertwined, how their advocates sought to address the problems they identified and realize, in some cases, shared aims.

For more detailed directions, please see the attached assignment guidelines.

Debate "teams" are assigned as follows:

CONFUCIANISM
1. Isabel Aguirre
2. Marco Ceballos
3. Jazmin Chavez
4. Daniel Diaz
5. Valerie Felix
6. Hiawatha Givens III

MOHISM
1. Alfons Greber
2. Joshua Henness
3. Rodolfo Hernandez
4. Jing Hu
5. Mathew Hudnall
6. Pamela King

DAOISM
1. Jeremy Lalas
2. Laura Lowe
3. Hector Martinez
4. Sheila Reid
5. Lynne Sherman
6. Griselda Solis

LEGALISM
1. Sabrina Sullivan
2. Stephanie Suntwanuparp
3. Pamela Swearingen
4. Michael Whittemore
5. Loren Wortinger

[Anonymous]

Thanks so much for the information Ms. Ko. I feel like I can prepare a little better now.

[Author]

Posts