Great lecture. I know there’s a lot of cynicism about the CCP’s Confucian revival, and I agree that it’s certainly not the best kind of Confucianism, but I love that here he earnestly tries to see how a proper revival could benefit China.
I'm not so worried about their revival of Confucianism, despite my own personal problems with the system, I'm more concerned with their attempt to revive and merge in Legalism, another of the old Chinese philosophies which is any dictatorship's dream philosophy.
Just found this "Forgotten Thinkers" lecture series you've put out and it's kind of interesting comparing the similarities between the ideas in the first two videos (Cicero and Mencius) and thus in Chinese and Western thought. In the Cicero video what I digested was that one becomes good by aligning their self with reason and thus the purpose of education is to develop good people by honing their reason and developing their will to execute their reason, creating a society with high quality, righteous and capable people running it on every level. In Confucianism the idea is somewhat similar in that society thrives when it is made of good people, just that their idea of developing the person was based on developing the virtues. Two very different contexts, but they have this fundamental agreement, kinda interesting
Jambo. I hope this finds you well. I have been listening to your lectures on youtube and have been greatly impressed by your teaching style and wit. I am particularly interested in Chinese history. Bits of which you touched in your lectures on Mencius and Simone de beauvoir. Which resources (books and links) would you recommend in this area? I would like to do some additional reading. Shukran
Amigo I love these videos you do, but the audio quality is horrible, its like you're using a microphone from the audience to record these. Its honestly my only complaint, well besides there aren't more of these.
+grazzitdvram i think the audio is quite fine. if there wasnt some reverb (he states in the other lecture that he got moved to a bigger hall) it would sound like a radio program with a clip on mic. i think you misunderstand what horrible audio quality is. his words are clear to understand. i study audio, this is actually pretty good audio.
+George Koenig The term "generally the term horrible audio quality is misunderstood, I think what it means blah blah blah" idk man the way you said it was ad hominemyy
Pretty terrible misrepresentation of the modern Chinese mindset. Socialism hasn't been abandoned or proven to be a failure, it's been adapted to the conditions found in China. The government is still very much directed towards a Communist target, it's simply dealing with the material conditions of China coming out of a century or two of humiliation, poverty, and exploitation and trying to become a modern industrial power. Confucianism just so happens to be something that works well within the Chinese system.
I found this lecture from 5 years ago very informative. Too bad the graphs and charts presented to the live audience were not included in the video. I disagree with Mr. Cecil regarding people's views on communism or socialism. My perception is that now in 2021, more and more people are seeing the short comings of capitalism and some of the virtues of socialism as a balance to capitalism. In some respects, Mencius / Confucian emphasis on virtues, greater respect for the family / community over the individual has more in common with socialism.
@@adityarajan592 I see your point. Socialism developed as a response to Capitalism in the West. However, all 3 are human systems of thought dealing with how human societies should or can function. I think I posted my original comment as a response to a statement in Wes Cecil's lecture about how the Chinese people could see that their recent surge in economic development was not because of Communism but because of introduction of markets or Capitalism. So 1 of the Chinese government's response was to re-examine and revive Confucianism. I have not read any of Confucian texts in full or Marx's Capital so cannot list all they have in common. I can only observe that both Confucianism and Socialism put the well being of people or human societies before profit.
@@adityarajan592 I think examples that would help support my observation would be Ho Chi Minh and Mao. I suspect both knew more about Confucianism than I ever will. Even though Mao wanted to get rid of Confucianism, apparently he chose Communism / Socialism to replace it, not Capitalism. Both ultimately wanted independence from foreign domination.
@@adityarajan592 Regarding Mao, I was quite surprised that he appealed to the US for help but was ignored. I recall that was the case for HCM also from a different documentary but cannot find it now. I'll share a link that mentioned Mao. It's kind of long so I don't have the time to locate where it is exactly but it's a fascinating talk and I hope you'll watch all of it. I think it's as good as the lecture on Mencius, if not better. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-MgRJm-tF6Qo.html
Confucius was a student of Laozi. Viewed similar to a similar spiritual hierarchy as Jesus. EVERYTHING in traditional Chinese culture was understood in relation to the divine. Not in the same manner as conventional religion is understood in the west.
In the 21st century a good leader of a constitutioner governance will have people draw to him but also many people weren't draw near to him or her! Simply we are not a agrarian society mostly, but a highly competitive capitalist system that's division of society are immense and people will not be sincere and trustworthy among each other! A virtue leader as such are frown upon as a hindrances to their disenchanted life for more and more!
14:48 But the only reason you need laws is because of lack of virtue, so it's not so different. Both societies had police and laws - which must be an acknowledgement that both societies were similarly victims of the criminal class. (Because most people are kind and don't need to be policed)
+Alvaroeduardo Secular, yeah, but the other two adjectives have a certain connotation attached to them. Meaning, they have a different meaning to different people. If, however, your humanistic and moral connotation agrees with Mencius' Confucianism: then yes!
well I wouldn't call it any of that. one thing we have to remember about the works of any philosopher in my opinion is that they're bound by the time they inhabit. As such, the exclusion of women from discourse or the simple ability to own slaves takes away from the notion of a secular humanist society.
I find it odd how if you talk about these things as chinese old ways in current days it's ok, but if you have almost all the same points ideas and goals but call it Christianity...suddenly its this horrible thing
Cultivating compassion makes sure that you are just, albeit being flexible with the letter of the law. It is infinitely better than having son rise up against father and mother against sister resulting in the atomizing loneliness that is characteristic of modern society.
There are many forms of corruption. I don't need to be in family with someone to make corrupt dealings with them, as long as it is mutually beneficial. You might as well go so far as saying that any form of social-bond or relationship can lead to "huge corruption" if you get the right people together. There isn't any utopia, there is just balance and imbalance. And, I'll leave as an exercise for the reader to find out what that balance might be. I for one think that some measure of family as a societal value is a good thing.
Family centric ideas can be noble, kind, benevolent... so maybe this is more a comment on ideas and the kind of ideas, and the kind of family... A positive, well cultivated family that acts nobly and teaches those values - is still the greatest gift a child can have in life! And that society can have also. For what is a family but the basic first step to a neighbourhood and then society? The fairer version of your statement is "Family centric ideas can, depending on the family lead to huge corruption"
he only talking about people in the west, he even mentions that Mencious as being the most popular philosopher in modern times given that there are a billion people living in china.
Great lecture, but I don't get why you're letting the one kid who didn't get a Ritalin subscription and who can't stop eating his fucking table sit right next to the mic. You'd think after spending at least 12 years in the school system, people would at least consider to sit still in a lecture that literally mentions sitting still and studying as a virtue.
The recording is not made by him, actually those are open courses and the micro is localized next to a desk close to the students. Needless to say that the classes are always full and this noise is fro the people close to the micro
