Justice

Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of systems of thought. A theory however elegant and economical must be rejected or revised if it is untrue. Likewise laws and institutions no matter how efficient and well arranged must be reformed or abolished if they are unjust. Each person possesses an inviolability founded on justice that even the welfare of society as a whole cannot override. For this reason justice denies that the loss of freedom for some is not made right by greater goods shared by others. It does not allow that the sacrifices imposed on a few are outweighed by a larger sum of advantages enjoyed by many. Therefore in just society liberties of equal citizenship are taken A's settled; rights secured by justice are not subject to political bargaining, or to calculus of social interests. The only thing that permit us to acquiesce an erroneous theory is the lack of a better one. Analogously an injustice is tolerable only when it is necessary for avoiding even greater injustice. A's first virtues of human activities, truth and justice are uncompromising.

A theory of justice, Rawls, p3.

The values I advocate

Equality is the most fundamental value for an institution. Then, what follow it are liberty, fairness, impartiality, democracy, constutionality and so on.
If I am disabled in mind, do I have a right to vote? You may say I have no capacity of reasoning, then I am able to vote. But the fact is that I have interest in myself, and therefore have the right to vote on relevant issues. So, even I have no reason or rationality, I still have competing right to vote. I can have my representative who should be my kin relative. He or she will be entitle by me to vote for me.

君君臣臣父父子子

Diagram two ways to analyze the grammar of this statement from the Analects. "君君臣臣父父子子" (ruler ruler minister minister father father son son). Argue for one of them using a radical translation argument.

 君君 臣臣 父父 子子

君君臣臣 父父子子

The older, the better?

"The most important thing for any new translation is to start with the original form of the Daodejing. Given recent archeological discoveries, we know that is not the traditional(Wang Bi)version. The Mawangdui version certainly better for getting the original intent of the author, Laozi." Discuss this theory of the text. Correct any errors you find.

Doctrine and meaning

Explain how assigning different meanings to a word can affect the doctrine we attribute to an author. What about the reverse? Can the conviction that he/she must believe some doctrine affect what meaning we assign to a term? Explain.

Danger of generalization of folk theory

Western interpreters often assume that everyone accepts their "folk theory" of language(the theory that the meanings of terms are private ideas). Is there any danger in making that assumption in interpreting ancient Chinese philosophy? Explain.

Principle for translation manual

Which principle should we apply in selecting a radical translation "translation manual" for ancient Chinese? Why?

Is holism important to interpretation?

Is holism important to interpretation? Why or why not? Does this mean that we can never find a "correct" translation/interpretation? Explain.

Radical translation and observable

Explain how the triangulation method of radical translation tries to "solve" the problem that meaning is not "observable". What "observable" should we use instead?

Textual theory and interpretive theory

Should we distinguish clearly between textual theory and interpretive theory? Why or why not? Give an example of how they might be confused.

Daode Jing II

天下皆知美之为美，斯恶已；天下皆知善之为善，斯不善已。
The whole world recognizes the beautiful as the beautiful, yet this is only the ugly; the whole world recognizes the good as the good, yet this is only the bad.

故有无相生；难易相成；长短相形；高下相倾；音声相和；前后相随。
Thus Something and Nothing produce each other;
The difficult and the easy complement each other;
The long and the short off-set each other;
The high and the low incline towards each other;
Not and sound harmonize with each other;
Before and after follow each other.

是以圣人处无为之事，行不言之教。
Therefore the sage keeps to the deed that consists in taking no action and practises the teaching that uses no words.

万物作焉儿不辞；生而不有；为而不恃；功成而弗居。
The myriad creatures rise from it yet it claims no authority;
It gives them life yet claims no possession;
It benefits them yet exacts no gratitude;
It accomplishes its task yet lays claim to no merit.

夫唯弗居，是以不去。
It is because it lays claim to no merit
that its merit never deserts it.

Belief, knowledge and Wu-wei

Explain how belief and knowledge are expressed in Classical Chinese. Why would that be important in understanding the meaning of Wu-wei / Lack-deem:do?

Topic one: Laozi, Daode Jing and Confucius

Which of the following is most and least likely to be true?
Confucius learned from Laozi.
Laozi wrote the Daode Jing.
Laozi went west and met "keeper of the pass" who requested him to write his dao.
Explain why in each case. Bonus: Is any item in A-C verifiable enough for someone to claim to "know" it?

The three basic facts about Laozi mentioned in the three items may be the merely facts we can find about Laozi in materials. Before responding to the required question, another relevant question should be considered at first, that is, who is Laozi. On this question, I more intend to support such a view that Laozi is not a single person existing in history but a group of person in history who together held the similar opinions as indicated in Daode Jing and finally formed the book together in the line of time. The reasons I have follow like this: Firstly, the term of Laozi could also be interpreted as "old (wise) man" except as the name of a person. This point indicates that Laozi may be used by descendants to refer some ancestor or ancestors who formed the book Daode Jing. Secondly, Laozi.Once the identification of Laozi is confirmed, responses to these items will be clear.

Confucius learned from Laozi. Indeed, evidence supporting this statement could be found in Analects and Taoist materials. It is understandable that versions from the two traditions are different on the same facts but


Laozi wrote the Daode Jing. As discussed above, the formulation of the book experienced a long time. Therefore we have reason to believe that the name of Laozi is used to refer to a group of persons who contributed to the book rather than a single person. Let's suppose this, the final version of the book was edited by a certain person who is certainly not Laozi, then who do he use the name to refer? There are possibilities. One is that Laozi refers to the person who initially put forth the basic idea of Daoist thoughts, but this ignores the fact that the book was indeed formed by all contributors and their contributions. The second one is that Laozi refers to a group of persons who contributed to the book anonymously.

Laozi went west and met "keeper of the pass" who requested him to write his dao. The keeper of the pass also means the god of death. Then, Laozi went west could also be understood as he passed away. Then the book is wrote before his death rather than he left to other place.

None of the three items could be verified by factual evidence. They are all stories told in a mysterious but historically way. Therefore, no body could be able to claim that he or she know they are true.

A chance to be reborn in mind

I know it is the only chance for me to be reborn in mind now. Once lose it, I will never get again. But we know it is painful to experience such a process. The fact is that I need to do that for I am not satisfied with my current situation. I need change in my lifestyle. This is the mere chance available for me.

What does the chance mean for my life? It will bring me to a stage of life, a more free and beautiful stage. Ask myself, am I enjoying my life? No. There are many hinders before me, some of which inhabit in myself and some out side of me.

To renew my mind require to keep my mind open to any new things and give up traditional one I am holding to.

Be up, my people

Bu up, my people
you are all free
you are equal with each other
and therefore will be treated as equally
no interference with your liberty

I believe you will deserve the liberty
and the quality you have
conduct on your liberty and obligation
that you alleged to have in your citizenship
do things with responsibility according to your reason
and therefore earn your dignity via your own conduct

no body can slave you except yourself
do not give up the hope
that you could be a free and good man
as you are being equally treated by us
for we see you as a rational and moral man
for we see you as an end in itself

you are the real source of dignity of human
the humanity locates in your free will
that directs your life on the world
where you are one member with all fellows
they trust to each other with dignity
the dignity of free choice and responsibility

Be up, my people
to be yourself as you are
the goodness lives in born nature
that is why you are human being
you are the origin of value

me too, one common member of you
no privilege
no special
because we are all human being
with the same nature
the same potential to be good
when we are free and be treated equally

Be up as a free man

On learning of language

How stupid I am. It is easy to find that listening usually is the easiest part of a language for learners. We note that there are many illiterates who can never give speech, reading books, and write papers but are able to understand what they hear from dictators. There is no doubt about that listening is the most basic ability of language. However, I now meet the biggest problem in this part of English learning. Here I will make some summaries concerning skills of learning language.

I can read and write well enough but am not able to catch up on people's utterances and not able to put my mind into oral words probably. The problem,I think, derives from the lack of enough practice of listening and speaking. My ears are not familiar to sounds of words that I am actually very familiar with in reading and writing. My mouth are not good at pronouncing verbs that I can write down very easily in writing. So, what is in urge for me is to do as much practice as much I can. I will listen to oral English everyday and imitate their pronunciation style which is alien to my mouth muscles. Additionally, I will keep on using them in daily life again and again till they become one part of my language.

One big difference between human being and animals is that animals just have abilities born with birth while we mankind have the ability to learn abilities that are not born with birth. We can learn how to count number by practicing the rule of counting system. We have ability of remembering which allow us to memorize what we learn. But it is different from the ability of counting because memorization does not have a coherent rule system that you can follow. Mathematics is a pure formal system while memory seem more to be empirical. Generally, we think redoing what we are learning is the best way of memorizing. However, admittedly redoing the same thing is very boring and therefore inefficient. What I wanna introduce is to memorize by reviewing in mind. We may pretend to be redoing but can not deceive to reviewing in mind. So, any reviewing in mind will be an efficient practice and the impress will be deeper than other ways.

Another ability I admire is the ability to reflect on what we learned. This ability is require more skills like analyzing, criticizing and so on.

The thing I most concern here is the method of reviewing in mind. It will be very useful in English study.

Language is the boundary of our world. You may be free for your richness in language or limited by the poorness of your language. Free yourself from language by put it under your control.

Ontology room

Ontology room
Norman, from Illinois university, gave a talk at source room this afternoon. He aimed at formulating a theory to resolve the conflict between ontological utterance and ordinary denials. He showed several current theories aiming at the same resolution, like illeminativism, compatibilism and the like, who hold some very surprising claims about the ontological issue, such as there is not tables, cups and the like ordinary objects.
He develops a notion of onxistence to solve the existence puzzle. Extremely philosophical approach.

A summary of proposal writting

The purpose of a thesis proposal is to clarify candidate's basic academic project of the following research. It basically consists of identification of academic problem which the author dedicates to resolve, description of academic context against which the project will work, and summaries of separate chapters as the more detailed plan deriving from the original problem identified in the first part. More briefly, it comprises of formulation of problem, contextualization of background and the summarization of contents in chapters. The more concrete the proposal is, the easier the future work will be. AS a fact of matter, the most important part would have been established up in research proposal in many cases and what left for the following research is just to add some specific supporting information in order to make the thesis more persuasive and comprehensive. 

The formulation of problem is generally considered as the most crucial part of proposal because it involves the core of the research and therefore refers to its potential academic value, that is, its potential contribution to the academic sphere. In fact, it is not easy to identify a specific problem in an area whether you support or attack some theory or opinion. One neither could nor ought to expect to build up a compelling theory immediately. So, what one need to do at least is to identify the potential value of the problem. 

This will lead us to the contextualization of background which is the basic job that a researcher will have to dedicate to. It is by the contextualization that you can find the real valuable problems in this area and show the value to examiners. However, as anyone will note, the most challenging aspect in this part is that one will have to collect and read numerous materials from the ocean of knowledge. 

Once the former two parts are completed, the third part and even the following writing would much easier. 

May I will work out an excellent proposal for my future thesis in the following one and a half years. 

Fifth week on toleration

Fifth week on toleration
On Dworkin

Mill's defense of liberty
Assignment

Individuality
Absoluteness of liberty lies in context of coercion
Self regarding conduct: not affect others at all
Wollheim's interpretation, Ree's interpretation
Distinction between effects
Count or discount some effect
Interests ; social representative
Morality dependent distress
Tule out some kind of effect

Given Wollheim is right, is there other utilitarian god reason
dislike is disapproval, no reason for intervention

Sled regarding conduct
Other regarding conduct
Two classes of conduct with different effects
Driving force behind is the point rather than the identification of class
Condition of moral approval

Reason for intervene is the focus rather there is alien conduct
Morally
Self safety, such A's suicide
Paternalism

Harm other

Dworkin
Personal preference: what I should or want to do
External preference: what I want someone else to do. My preference relating to other person.
Mix preference: sort out the dominant aspect, hard to sort

Good utilitarian reason to exclude
Government public policy

Classical utilitarian: hedonism, maximize the pleasure
Preference utilitarian: maximize satisfaction of desire

Double counting
Fairness
Every count only one

Utilitarian Fundamental commitment
Some count more than others
Racist
Count for equally
Contents of preference
Value of pleasure, disvalue of pain
The content of pleasure relates to what the preference is
Neutral position

Content is irrelevant
Each person A's a container of pleasure
Happiness cannot be transferred to others
Amount of pleasure count A's equal
Intensity of pleasure
All sources of happiness should be taken into account

Utility principle
Compatible to other absolute rules
Standard of evaluating conducts
Tell how to act in particular context

Hare
Intuitive level of moral thinking: following conventional rules
Critical level: when simple rules come into conflict

Indirect utilitarian

Act utilitarian
Rule utilitarian

David
Extensionally equivalent
1. Always keep your promises
2. Always keep your promises except situation A, B, c....

Never interfere with any self regarding conduct
How could you know the rule will be the best rule in particular case.
Actually, some self regarding conduct wil be ruled out for causing great distress even that is morality dependent distress.

Movement of society
Switch between intuitive and critical periods, the former with agreement while the later with disagreement.
Absolute rule is only acceptable from utilitarian perspective.

Sidgwick
Benard Williams

How to write a proposal

How to write a proposal

4 march Hansen
10 march tan, lim, Neil

Project proposal
Clarity of object
20-30 pages
Specific topic

Purpose
Aboutness explanation

1.
Formulation of problem
Clear, precise, relevant

Specific Problem you are going to attack or to solve
Why a Valuable topic
Review of current contribution

New perspective
Difference
Get the points, particular

2.
Contextualization
Contextualize the problem: relevant existing positions

Qualification of yourself to achieve it
Context
Not limited to one opponent
History
Understandable
Argument
Not vague
Clarify The target you attack or support

Framework first
Do not go into details first
Assess
Most central part
Direction of research

Do not change topic easily
Choose topic deliberately
Real drive for a topic
Interest relates to creativity
Ability

Original questions
Just show some potential originality

Do it Lonelily by yourself
Read more

Persuade your supervisor first, the the examiners.

3.
Discussion of methodology
How to solve these set problems
Approach of philosophy
What you expect in your project
Steps you need to get the conclusion.

4.
Summary of chapters
Derive from the formulation
Plan of each step
Keep things in control

How to judge the relevance of readings
Focus on the central topics

5.
Bibliography
Footnotes

use theory of language

Today Hansen introduced the use theory of language. Before doing this, he reviewed the inferential theory, propositional theory. These theories works on a interpretation of the meaning of language. The inferential theory claims that the meaning of words originate from the reference to respective objects while the propositional theory asserts that the meaning of language is based on the compositional structure of sentence. However, Waittgenstein claims that the meaning of langue derives from the practice of language in social interaction. The play of language is alike the play of a game which is ruled by it rules. Each move in this game is judged by the rule of the game.

Utilitarianism

Although I hear and use the word of utilitarianism very frequently in my study, I dear not to say I have a clear comprehension of it. As a matter of fact, Utilitarianism is a very complicated philosophical perspective in western tradition. However, what I know about it are mainly from discussion in secondary materials. That is to say I did not have a particular research on the area. Now I found it is urgent for me to do it because the deeper I engage in the political philosophy debates, the more necessary for me to know it better. As one can imagine, there are many variants of utilitarianism in the history from its origin to contemporary debate. It is certainly not easy for one to draw out a specific outline of the perspective. Fortunately, my supervisor is an specialized scholar in this area. So I have more good access to know the most important contributions of this school. As my pre-supervisor said, neglecting utilitarianism which is the most influential school in modern philosophy just indicates one's ignorance of knowledge. I must take utilitarianism seriously. In fact, there are many utilitarians around me. But I need a philosophical interpretation of it.

Mill's distinction between self-regarding and other-regarding actions

Mill's distinction between self-regarding and other-regarding actions
This distinction in on liberty is crucially important. However, there are variant versions of interpretation of it. The article I read today discussed the issue. Some critics assert there is no pure self regarding action because any action will indeed have effect upon others. So some defenders argue that the point is not whether an action has effect on others but whether affect the interest of others. If an action does not affect other's interest it cannot be considered as other regarding. But the author of this paper, Richard Wollheim, disagree this kind of defense because he thinks this kind of interpretation is inclined to fall into relativism for their account of interest that interest is derivable from socially recognized custom. Then Wollheim develops his own interpretation. He asserts that the condemnation of some behavior is not really based on moral beliefs but only on preference of individual, described by Mill as aberration of moral feeling. Wollheim's argument goes like this: A conducts an action which has an effect C on person B without harm to any others. If the negative effect on B is derived from B's preference, then B is holding non moral belief. Even B holds a moral belief which must be a false belief. There is nothing with A's action. That is, A's action is a self regarding action.