On Equality of Outcomes in Pre-Qin Confucianism 先秦儒家的结果均等思想研究

Dissertation, East China Normal University (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Egalitarianism seeks equality, which can be divided into two types: equality of process and equality of outcome. However, equality of outcome has been criticized for neglecting responsibility and failing to maximize utility. While pre-Qin Confucianism did not directly address these criticisms, its philosophical ideas can be used to respond to them. Confucius’ idea of equality of outcome can be seen in several texts, such as his comparison of poverty and inequality, his different treatment of Zi Hua’s mother, and his opinion on Yuan Si’s high salary. Confucius believed in maintaining emotional desires in the middle way, which can address the criticism of neglecting responsibility. The Confucians between Confucius and Mencius emphasized “equal distribution” and “equal governance”, which embody the idea of equality of outcome. The emphasis on “employ people at the appropriate times” can also address the question of how to maximize the utility of equality of outcome. Mencius’ distinction between “those who rule” and “those who are ruled” and the concept of “equal field” reflect his idea of equality of outcome. In response to the levelling-down objection raised by Parfit, Mencius could potentially offer a presuppositional critique. Mencius believed that a gentleman would actively choose benevolence and accept the consequences, suggesting that equality of outcome does not ignore responsibility. Xunzi’s statement that “total equality is not order” is not contradictory to equality of outcome, as it emphasizes the importance of division of labour and cooperation among groups. Xunzi acknowledged the existence of a certain level of inequality between rich and poor, considering equality as more of a guiding principle rather than an absolute standard. The philosophical concept of equality, as proposed by pre-Qin Confucianism, provides a response to the criticisms directed towards equality of outcome. 平等主义所追求的平等可分为两种:过程公正和结果均等。相较于过程公正,结果均等遭受的更多的是批评:忽视责任、无法实现最大效用。虽然先秦儒家没有直面也不可能直面这些批评,但其哲学可用来应对这些挑战。 孔子区别贫和不均、对子华母亲态度的前后变化和对原思高俸禄的看法等多处文本,体现了结果均等思想。孔子提倡情感欲望保持中道,这有助于回应忽视责任的批评。孔孟间儒者所强调的分均、政均和平政,体现了结果均等思想。强调“使民以时”,可以帮助回应结果均等实现最大效用何以可能的问题。孟子区分“治人者”和“治于人者”以及“均井田”等做法体现了结果均等。面对帕菲特的拉平反驳,可以设想孟子会给出前提批判。孟子相信,君子会主动选择仁并承担后果,这同样说明结果均等并不忽视责任。荀子的“维齐非齐”不违背结果均等,因为它重视的是群体分工合作。荀子允许一定程度的贫富不平等,是因为他更多地把平等视为方向性原则。 先秦儒家的平等思想有助于回应结果均等所遭受到的批评。

Author's Profile

Haixuan Pan
East China Normal University

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-05-26

Downloads
32 (#94,401)

6 months
32 (#92,192)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?