Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T09:39:33.320Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Principle of Utility and the Principle of Righteousness: Yen Fu and Utilitarianism in Modern China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 January 2009

Qiang Li
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One aspect of the intellectual changes taking place in China in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries was the emergence of utilitarian ideas. Although it may be useful to think of modern Chinese thought from the perspective of the emergence of social Darwinism and nationalism, it is significant that the country's most progressive scholars at the turn of thecentury derived their inspiration from utilitarianism. Utilitarianism was accepted as a weapon with which to challenge traditional social, political, and cultural ideas, and to justify social and political reforms.

Type
Research Article
Information
Utilitas , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , March 1996 , pp. 109 - 126
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Schwartz, Benjamin, ‘Introduction’, Reflections on the May Fourth Movement: A Symposium, ed. Schwartz, , Cambridge, Mass., 1972, pp. 2, 4Google Scholar.

2 The term ‘conservatism’ has been used in the study of modern Chinese intellectual history to refer to two distinct political beliefs. First, it refers to the attitude of traditional Chinese intellectual élites who refused to change through learning from the West in the late nineteenth century (e.g., Wright, Mary Clabaugh, The Last Stand of Chinese Conservatism: the T'ung-chih Restoration, Stanford, 1957Google Scholar). Second, it refers to various ideas in the early twentieth century that either preferred a gradualist to a revolutionary approach in social and political change, or expressed the desire to preserve some elements of tradition. (See Furth, Charlotte, ed. The Limit of Change: Essays on Conservative Alternatives in Republican China, Cambridge, Mass., 1976CrossRefGoogle Scholar, esp. Benjamin Schwartz, ‘Notes on Conservatism in General and in China in Particular’, and Charlotte Furth, ‘Culture and Politics in Modern Chinese Conservatism’.) In order to avoid confusion, I refer to the former as ‘traditional conservatism’ (this term was used by Gasster, Michael, Chinese Intellectuals and the Revolution of 1911, Seattle, 1969, p. viiGoogle Scholar) and the latter as conservatism.

3 Liu, James T. C., China Turning inward: Intellectual-Political Changes in the Early Twelfth Century, Cambridge, Mass., 1988, p. 37CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Erh-ming, Wang, Wan-Ch'ing cheng-chih ssu-hsiang shih-lun, (Historical Essays on Political Thought in the Late Ch'ing Period), Taipei, 1969, pp. 32–4Google Scholar.

5 Hao, Chang, ‘Intellectual Change and the Reform Movement, 1890–1898’, Cambridge History of China, vol. II, Cambridge, 1980, p. 282Google Scholar.

6 Yu, Ying-shing, ‘The Radicalization of China in the Twentieth Century’, Daedalus, cxxii (1993), 126–7Google Scholar.

7 Yen Fu Chi, (The Collected Works of Yen Fu), ed. Shih, Wang, 5 vols., Peking, 1986Google Scholar (hereafter referred to as CYFW), i. 43.

8 Yi means ‘right’ or ‘proper’ and is often translated as ‘righteousness’. Li means ‘profit’, ‘utility’, or ‘interest’. In the following discussions, I will use these three English translations interchangeably.

9 Graham, A. C., Disputers of the Tao, La Salle, Illinois, 1989, p. 114Google Scholar.

10 Li means rite, propriety or norm. I capitalize it in order to distinguish it from li as referring to profit, interest, utility. These two words have an identical English pronunciation yet different characters in Chinese.

11 The English translation of Yen Fu's quotation of Confucius is from The Analects, trans. Lau, D. C., Harmondsworth, 1979, Bk IV, 13, p. 74Google Scholar.

12 CYFW, i. 116–17.

13 de Bary, Theodore, ‘Sagehood as a Secular and Spiritual Ideal in Tokugawa Neo-Confucianism’, Principle and Practicality: Essays in Neo-Confucianism and Practical Learning, ed. de Bary, and Bloom, Irene, New York, 1979, p. 128CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 Fu, Yen, ‘A Historical Account of Ancient Political Societies in China’, The Chinese Social and Political Science Review, i (1916), 22–3Google Scholar.

15 Watson, B. trans., Mo Tzu: Basic Writings, New York, 1963, pp. 117–18Google Scholar.

16 Ibid., p. 110.

17 Yu-lan, Fung, A History of Chinese Philosophy, trans. Bodde, D., 2nd edn., 2 vols., Princeton, 1952, i. 87Google Scholar; Graham, , Disputers of the Tao, pp. 39–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 Ahern, Dennis M., ‘Is Mo Tzu a Utilitarian?’, Journal of Chinese Philosophy, iii (1976), 185–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 Hansen, Chad, ‘Mo Tzu: Language Utilitarianism’, Journal of Chinese Philosophy, xvi (1989), 356–70Google Scholar.

20 Hao, Chang, Liang Ch'i-ch'ao and Intellectual Transition in China: 1890–1907, Cambridge, Mass., 1971, p. 209Google Scholar.

21 Graham, , Disputers of the Tao, p. 267Google Scholar. Most prominent figures in the Legalist school, except for its great synthesizer, Han Fei-tzu (?–233 BC), were famous ministers in certain of the states, which included Kuan Chung (?–645 BC), chief minister in Ch'i, Shang Yang (?–338 BC), chief minister of Ch'in, and Shen Pu-hai (?–337 BC), chief minister in Han.

22 Both Benjamin Schwartz and A. C. Graham have suggested that the Legalist tendency of pursuing wealth and strength rather than moral ideals entailed elements of modern rationalism and behaviourism. The ‘dynamic goal-oriented nature’ embodied in Legalism, they argued, is indeed almost ‘rationalistic in the Weberian sense of instrumental rationalism’. (Schwartz, , The World of Thought in Ancient China, Cambridge, Mass., 1985, pp. 328, 347Google Scholar; Graham, , Disputers of the Tao, p. 269Google Scholar.)

23 Hao, Chang, ‘The Intellectual Context of Reform’, Reform in Nineteenth-Century China, ed. Cohen, Paul A. and Schrecker, John E., Cambridge, Mass., 1976, pp. 145–6Google Scholar.

24 Mitchell, Peter M., ‘The Limits of Reformism: Wei Yuan's Reaction to Western Intrusion’, Modern Asian Studies, vi (1972), 179Google Scholar.

25 Ting-yee, Kuo & Kwang-ching, Liu, ‘Self-strengthening: the Pursuit of Western Technology’, Cambridge History of China, xi. 491–2Google Scholar.

26 CYFW, i. 117.

27 The English word ‘utilitarianists’ was used by Yen Fu.

28 CYFW, v. 1265.

29 Fu, Yen, Yuan-fu (A translation of Smith's, Adam The Wealth of Nations), 2 vols., Shanghai, 1931, i. 5Google Scholar, 12.

30 Ibid., ii. 347.

31 Fu, Yen, Fa-yi (A translation of Montesquieu's, The Spirit of the Laws), Shanghai, 1931, i. 7Google Scholar.

32 CYFW, ii. 328.

33 Ch'i-ch'ao, Liang, ‘Lo-li chu-i t'ai-tou Pien-hsin chih hsueh-shuo’ (The Doctrine of Bentham, the Master of Utilitarianism), Yin-ping-shih ho-chi, (Collected Works of Liang Ch'i-ch'ao), Shanghai, 1932, v. 30–47Google Scholar.

34 Campbell, T. D., Adam Smith's Science of Morals, London, 1971, p. 89Google Scholar.

35 CYFW, v. 1347.

36 There has been disagreement as to whether the principle of sympathy in Smith's moral philosophy is compatible with that of utility in his economic theory. See Winch, D., Adam Smith's Politics, Cambridge, 1978, p. 10CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37 Ju-Lun, Wu, Preface to Yen Fu's Yuan-fu (Smith's, Wealth of Nations), i. 2Google Scholar.

38 Fu, Yen, Yuan-fu (Smith's, Wealth of Nations), i. 77Google Scholar.

39 CYFW, v. 1359, 1355.

40 Ibid., 1359.

41 Ibid.

42 Sen, Amartya and Williams, Bernard ed., Introduction, Utilitarianism and beyond, Cambridge, 1982, p. 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

43 CYFW, i. 27.

44 Ibid., iv. 885.

45 I use ‘either directly or indirectly’ with the difference between ‘act utilitarianism’ and ‘rule utilitarianism’ in mind.

46 CYFW, i. 100–1.

47 Ibid., iv. 858–9; v. 1359.

48 Ibid., v. 1265.

49 Ibid.

50 Ibid., iii. 631–2.

51 Kung-chuan, Hsiao, Chung-kuo cheng-chi ssu-hsiang shih (A History of Chinese Political Thought), Taipei, 1982, ii. 608Google Scholar.

52 Quoted from Wakeman, Frederic Jr, History and Will, Berkeley, 1973, p. 113Google Scholar.

53 Yen Fu's praise of Smith's invisible hand theory can be seen in CYFW, v. 1347, 1359, 1395; Yuan-fu (Smith's, Wealth of Nations), ii. 481, 536Google Scholar.

54 CYFW, v. 1349.

55 Ibid., i. 14.

56 On Liang's distinction between public and private morality, see Hao, , Liang Ch'ich'ao and Intellectual Transition, pp. 149–54Google Scholar.

57 Fu, Yen, Yuan-fu (Smith's, Wealth of Nations), i. 76–7Google Scholar.

58 CYFW, v. 1395.

59 Fu, Yen, Yuan-fu (Smith's, Wealth of Nations), i. 76–7Google Scholar.

60 CYFW, v. 1395.

61 CYFW, iii. 623.

62 Ibid., i. 56.

63 Ibid.

64 Ibid., iii. 623.

65 Ibid., ii. 342.

66 Ibid.

67 Ibid., 330.

68 Ibid.

69 Pusey, James, China and Charles Darwin, Cambridge, Mass., 1983, p. 56CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

70 See Bonner, Joey, Wang Kuo-wei: an Intellectual Biography, Cambridge, Mass., 1986, p. 95Google Scholar.