The Concept of Filial Piety in East Asian Confucian Culture from the Perspective of Gadamer and Habermas

This paper examines the role of filial piety in East Asian Confucian societies as a means of drawing out political implications by showing two different standpoints elaborated by Gadamer and Habermas. The two thinkers seem to display different outlooks on the notion of filial piety in the East Asian...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Kim, Donghyun
Format: text
Published: Archīum Ateneo 2024
Subjects:
Online Access:https://archium.ateneo.edu/kk/vol1/iss33/3
https://archium.ateneo.edu/context/kk/article/1795/viewcontent/KK_2033_2C_202019_2C_20_26_2034_2C_202020_203_20Regular_20Section_20__20Kim.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Ateneo De Manila University
id ph-ateneo-arc.kk-1795
record_format eprints
spelling ph-ateneo-arc.kk-17952024-12-19T03:24:03Z The Concept of Filial Piety in East Asian Confucian Culture from the Perspective of Gadamer and Habermas Kim, Donghyun This paper examines the role of filial piety in East Asian Confucian societies as a means of drawing out political implications by showing two different standpoints elaborated by Gadamer and Habermas. The two thinkers seem to display different outlooks on the notion of filial piety in the East Asian Confucian culture: Whereas Gadamer appears to approve the practice of filial piety as keeping tradition in the specific societies, i.e., Confucian East Asian culture, Habermas rejects it by refusing the concept of tradition. The debate primarily originates from two different—though both “Western”—philosophical traditions. Gadamer endorses tradition since all human beings are conditioned by the effects of cultural heritage, and events can never be disinterested. All previous contexts of human culture enter into the greater tradition that is transmitted to us through the generations as an inexhaustible stock of moral instruction. On the other hand, in his critique of Gadamer’s appropriation of tradition, Habermas argues that human beings can overcome the dogmatic force of tradition. In Habermas’s account, it is of significant importance to use reason—or critical reflection—in order to overcome such dogmatic force. In short, this paper appropriates Habermas’s charge that Gadamer hypostatizes tradition. In other words, Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics embeds understanding in tradition because all understanding is necessarily prejudiced. Habermas rejects Gadamer’s idea of tradition on the ground that it is absolutizing. 2024-12-19T06:05:11Z text application/pdf https://archium.ateneo.edu/kk/vol1/iss33/3 info:doi/10.13185/1656-152x.1795 https://archium.ateneo.edu/context/kk/article/1795/viewcontent/KK_2033_2C_202019_2C_20_26_2034_2C_202020_203_20Regular_20Section_20__20Kim.pdf Kritika Kultura Archīum Ateneo Confucianism; Confucian East Asian culture; critical reflection; filial piety; Gadamer; Habermas; tradition
institution Ateneo De Manila University
building Ateneo De Manila University Library
continent Asia
country Philippines
Philippines
content_provider Ateneo De Manila University Library
collection archium.Ateneo Institutional Repository
topic Confucianism; Confucian East Asian culture; critical reflection; filial piety; Gadamer; Habermas; tradition
spellingShingle Confucianism; Confucian East Asian culture; critical reflection; filial piety; Gadamer; Habermas; tradition
Kim, Donghyun
The Concept of Filial Piety in East Asian Confucian Culture from the Perspective of Gadamer and Habermas
description This paper examines the role of filial piety in East Asian Confucian societies as a means of drawing out political implications by showing two different standpoints elaborated by Gadamer and Habermas. The two thinkers seem to display different outlooks on the notion of filial piety in the East Asian Confucian culture: Whereas Gadamer appears to approve the practice of filial piety as keeping tradition in the specific societies, i.e., Confucian East Asian culture, Habermas rejects it by refusing the concept of tradition. The debate primarily originates from two different—though both “Western”—philosophical traditions. Gadamer endorses tradition since all human beings are conditioned by the effects of cultural heritage, and events can never be disinterested. All previous contexts of human culture enter into the greater tradition that is transmitted to us through the generations as an inexhaustible stock of moral instruction. On the other hand, in his critique of Gadamer’s appropriation of tradition, Habermas argues that human beings can overcome the dogmatic force of tradition. In Habermas’s account, it is of significant importance to use reason—or critical reflection—in order to overcome such dogmatic force. In short, this paper appropriates Habermas’s charge that Gadamer hypostatizes tradition. In other words, Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics embeds understanding in tradition because all understanding is necessarily prejudiced. Habermas rejects Gadamer’s idea of tradition on the ground that it is absolutizing.
format text
author Kim, Donghyun
author_facet Kim, Donghyun
author_sort Kim, Donghyun
title The Concept of Filial Piety in East Asian Confucian Culture from the Perspective of Gadamer and Habermas
title_short The Concept of Filial Piety in East Asian Confucian Culture from the Perspective of Gadamer and Habermas
title_full The Concept of Filial Piety in East Asian Confucian Culture from the Perspective of Gadamer and Habermas
title_fullStr The Concept of Filial Piety in East Asian Confucian Culture from the Perspective of Gadamer and Habermas
title_full_unstemmed The Concept of Filial Piety in East Asian Confucian Culture from the Perspective of Gadamer and Habermas
title_sort concept of filial piety in east asian confucian culture from the perspective of gadamer and habermas
publisher Archīum Ateneo
publishDate 2024
url https://archium.ateneo.edu/kk/vol1/iss33/3
https://archium.ateneo.edu/context/kk/article/1795/viewcontent/KK_2033_2C_202019_2C_20_26_2034_2C_202020_203_20Regular_20Section_20__20Kim.pdf
_version_ 1819113761637662720