Editor’s Foreword

The project of comparative philosophy is almost exclusively associated with Western philosophers opening their minds and hearts to non-Western ways of thinking. Even the term “comparative philosophy” was coined by a small group of Western philosophers who founded the University of Hawai‘i’s philosophy program. This new vision was borne primarily through the imagination of Charles A. Moore, who wished to create an opportunity where outsiders “could most closely approach the ideal of understanding other traditions as the people of those traditions understand themselves.”1 We may forget in the twentieth-first century how radical an idea this must have been in 1939, when the first East-West Philosophers’ Conference was held.

As Moore realized, one must understand from within before creating a new philosophical approach. And before a new approach can gain ascendancy as method—that is, before considering the way in which comparative philosophy is to be done—the way in which it is approached is fundamental and crucial. In other words, we need to have a clear direction before the process develops and a theoretical framework before techniques and practices are put into place—only after the approach to comparative philosophy is developed, is there an opening for deciding what method or methods we wish to engage.

But comparative philosophy is not exclusively a Western undertaking as some think. In fact, many non-Western philosophers have been engaging in their own approaches and development of methods. In seeking an understanding of European ways of thinking, Ming-huei Lee left his native Taipei for the University of Bonn, where he studied the philosophy of Immanuel Kant. Today, he is one of New Confucianism’s most prominent thinkers. In Confucianism: Its Roots and Global Significance, English-language readers get a rare opportunity to read in a single volume the work of one of Taiwan’s most distinguished scholars. Although Ming-huei Lee has published in English before, the corpus of his non-Chinese writings is in German. Readers of this volume will soon discover the hard-mindedness and precision of thinking so associated with German philosophy as they enter into his discussions of Confucianism. As readers progress xthrough this book, they will be constantly reminded that all philosophy should be truly comparative.

In arranging and editing this book, I have tried as much as possible to let Lee jiaoshou’s philosophical insights and deep understandings of Confucianism come forth both as he intended as well as in the spirit of comparative philosophy’s originary time. At times, I have added some minimal text for clarity purposes and enhancement of his points. In no way has the meaning or style of his text been altered. All edited and content contributions have been approved by Professor Lee. The book has been divided into three sections: Classical Confucianism and Its Modern Reinterpretations, Neo-Confucianism in China and Korea, and Ethics and Politics. These sections evince just some of the range of Ming-huei Lee’s thinking as well as his inclusive reach of Confucian philosophy to the whole of East Asia, especially to Korea. In the Ethics and Politics section, readers will get a taste for the return to his own tradition through the lens of Kantian philosophy with his analysis of Confucius and the virtue ethics debate in Confucian philosophical circles. Lee’s thinking through Mou Zongsan’s interpretation of Confucianism, Zhu Xi and the Huxiang scholars’ debate on ren, and the unfolding of the debates over the “four buddings” and “seven feelings” in Korea by Yi Toegye and Gi Gobong sets up the subsequent chapters of the book: a reconstruction of Wang Yangming’s philosophy and theories of democracy, and a critique of Jiang Qing’s “political Confucianism.” His work in this book adds a sizable appendage to Confucian scholarship. Moreover, the interrelated ideas and arguments presented in this book are a special contribution to the Confucian project in English-speaking countries across the world.

I am grateful for the opportunity to convert these essays into a unified book form for readers because they show in many ways how to think with, through, and beyond a tradition. Being able to assist in bringing Ming-huei Lee’s work to English readers in a more accessible fashion is indeed an honor. This project originated with and was mentored by Huang Chun-chieh, University Chair Professor and dean of the Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities and Social Sciences at National Taiwan University. Much of the fine work of the institute occurs behind the scenes with Kirill O. Thompson, the associate dean, and this project is no exception. So many extraordinary projects and undertakings that have benefited so many have found their origin with Huang Chunchieh and the institute. My deep gratitude to Huang Chun-chieh laoshi moves unendingly throughout my life. This book is just one of the contributions originating with him and moving munificently beyond him for the benefit of others. To me, he is the embodiment of the Confucian ideal, and I dedicate my work on this project to him.

Finally, I am most grateful to Professor Ming-huei Lee for his generosity, xipatience, and cooperation. As one of East-Asia’s most prominent Kant authorities and Confucian scholars, he offers both East Asia and the West something very few can provide. Through his work, we are given a space to reflect critically about what it means to be human—a being that is human—and the future of humanity.xii