在新的世界秩序的尖端?儒德对话与实用主义

Q2 Arts and Humanities Journal of Global Ethics Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI:10.1080/17449626.2021.1942140
R. Ames
{"title":"在新的世界秩序的尖端?儒德对话与实用主义","authors":"R. Ames","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1942140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT At the end of 2013, China introduced what it calls the ‘One Belt, One Road Initiative’ (BRI) (yidaiyiluchangyi 一带一路战倡议). From a Chinese perspective, this initiative is nothing less than a strategy to replace the existing world order in all of its parts with a vision of ‘intra-national relations’ that emerges out of traditional Chinese thinking reaching back as early as the Yijing 易经or Book of Changes. The self-conscious rhetoric of BRI is ‘equity’ (gongying 共赢) and ‘diversity’ interpreted through the language of a ‘shared future for the human community’ (renleimingyun gongtongti人类命运共同体). China can be challenged to live up to its own rhetoric. John Dewey makes a helpful distinction between the ‘idea’ and the political ‘forms’ of democracy, where his ‘idea’ of democracy is his own account of equity and shared diversity. Again, there is a direct link between Dewey’s ‘idea’ of democracy and his ‘internationalism.’ Can we use Dewey’s ‘idea’ of democracy to formulate the ‘idea’ of BRI as a Confucian version of ‘internationalism?’","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the cusp of a new world order? a dialogue between Confucianism and Dewey and pragmatism\",\"authors\":\"R. Ames\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17449626.2021.1942140\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT At the end of 2013, China introduced what it calls the ‘One Belt, One Road Initiative’ (BRI) (yidaiyiluchangyi 一带一路战倡议). From a Chinese perspective, this initiative is nothing less than a strategy to replace the existing world order in all of its parts with a vision of ‘intra-national relations’ that emerges out of traditional Chinese thinking reaching back as early as the Yijing 易经or Book of Changes. The self-conscious rhetoric of BRI is ‘equity’ (gongying 共赢) and ‘diversity’ interpreted through the language of a ‘shared future for the human community’ (renleimingyun gongtongti人类命运共同体). China can be challenged to live up to its own rhetoric. John Dewey makes a helpful distinction between the ‘idea’ and the political ‘forms’ of democracy, where his ‘idea’ of democracy is his own account of equity and shared diversity. Again, there is a direct link between Dewey’s ‘idea’ of democracy and his ‘internationalism.’ Can we use Dewey’s ‘idea’ of democracy to formulate the ‘idea’ of BRI as a Confucian version of ‘internationalism?’\",\"PeriodicalId\":35191,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Global Ethics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Global Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1942140\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Global Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1942140","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2013年底,中国提出了所谓的“一带一路”倡议(BRI)。从中国的角度来看,这一倡议无非是一种战略,旨在用一种“国内关系”的愿景来取代现有的世界秩序,这种愿景源于中国的传统思想,可以追溯到《易经》。“一带一路”的自我意识修辞是“公平”和“多样性”,通过“人类社会共同命运”的语言来诠释。中国可能会受到挑战,要求其兑现自己的承诺。约翰·杜威对民主的“理念”和政治“形式”进行了有益的区分,他的民主“理念”是他自己对公平和共享多样性的描述。再一次,杜威的民主“理念”和他的“国际主义”之间有着直接的联系。我们能否用杜威的民主“理念”来将一带一路“理念”表述为儒家版本的“国际主义”?”
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
On the cusp of a new world order? a dialogue between Confucianism and Dewey and pragmatism
ABSTRACT At the end of 2013, China introduced what it calls the ‘One Belt, One Road Initiative’ (BRI) (yidaiyiluchangyi 一带一路战倡议). From a Chinese perspective, this initiative is nothing less than a strategy to replace the existing world order in all of its parts with a vision of ‘intra-national relations’ that emerges out of traditional Chinese thinking reaching back as early as the Yijing 易经or Book of Changes. The self-conscious rhetoric of BRI is ‘equity’ (gongying 共赢) and ‘diversity’ interpreted through the language of a ‘shared future for the human community’ (renleimingyun gongtongti人类命运共同体). China can be challenged to live up to its own rhetoric. John Dewey makes a helpful distinction between the ‘idea’ and the political ‘forms’ of democracy, where his ‘idea’ of democracy is his own account of equity and shared diversity. Again, there is a direct link between Dewey’s ‘idea’ of democracy and his ‘internationalism.’ Can we use Dewey’s ‘idea’ of democracy to formulate the ‘idea’ of BRI as a Confucian version of ‘internationalism?’
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Global Ethics
Journal of Global Ethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊最新文献
The Journal of Global Ethics after Twenty Years A human rights method of ethics – marrying intuitionism, reasoning, and communication Assessing the capability approach as a justice basis of climate resilience strategies Global ethics: sentimental education or ideological construction? Twenty-five years on: to move forward, we should return to Rawls’ The Law of Peoples
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1