A Couple Nagging Interpretive Difficulties in Zhuangzi Studies vis-à-vis William James on the Ethics and Psychology of Belief

doi:10.3868/s030-008-019-0035-5

Front. Philos. China

2019, Vol. 14

Issue (4) : 593-611 https://doi.org/10.3868/s030-008-019-0035-5

RESEARCH ARTICLE

A Couple Nagging Interpretive Difficulties in Zhuangzi Studies vis-à-vis William James on the Ethics and Psychology of Belief

John Robert Williams(

)

Department of Philosophy, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117570, Singapore

Download: PDF(396 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

The present article addresses two lingering questions in the interpretation of the Zhuangzi 莊子—(a) How can one reconcile the scepticism of the Zhuangzi with its positive project(s)? and (b) Who can become a sagely person? The questions are addressed with reference to aspects of William James’ accounts of the ethics and psychology of belief.

Keywords Zhuangzi William James scepticism ethics of belief psychology of belief sagely person

Issue Date: 06 January 2020

Cite this article:

John Robert Williams. A Couple Nagging Interpretive Difficulties in Zhuangzi Studies vis-à-vis William James on the Ethics and Psychology of Belief[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(4): 593-611.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fpc/EN/10.3868/s030-008-019-0035-5
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fpc/EN/Y2019/V14/I4/593

[1]	LAI Changsheng. My Ordinary Anti-Sceptical Beliefs Are Not Insensitive[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(3): 469-489.
[2]	JIANG Niling, ZHOU Jing. Ontological Epistemology: William James and the Chinese Traditional Philosophy of Experience[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(2): 342-356.
[3]	Lisa Raphals 瑞麗. When Virtues, Roles and Duties Fail: Early Greek and Chinese Accounts of Akrasia[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(1): 29-46.
[4]	Ellen Y. Zhang. The Face/Facelessness of the Other—A Levinasian Reading of the Ethical of the Zhuangzi [J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(4): 533-553.
[5]	SUN Ning. Natural Realism or Transactionalism: On the Relationships between Putnam and Two Pragmatists, James and Dewey[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(2): 295-305.
[6]	Alan Fox. A Process Interpretation of Daoist Thought[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(1): 26-37.
[7]	David Chai. On Pillowing One’s Skull: Zhuangzi and Heidegger on Death[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2016, 11(3): 483-500.
[8]	Joanna Guzowska. The Spatiality of Cognition in the Zhuangzi[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2015, 10(3): 415-429.
[9]	Mark L. Farrugia. To Die or Not to Die: Zhuangzi’s Three Immortalities[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2015, 10(3): 380-414.
[10]	Paul J. D’Ambrosio. Authenticity in the Zhuangzi ? Contemporary Misreadings of Zhen 真and an Alternative to Existentialism[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2015, 10(3): 353-379.
[11]	CHEN Guying. The Tradition of Emotive Writing in the Zhuangzi and Its Echoes in Later Generations[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2015, 10(3): 340-352.
[12]	Roger T. Ames. “Bodyheartminding” (Xin 心): Reconceiving the Inner Self and the Outer World in the Language of Holographic Focus and Field[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2015, 10(2): 167-180.
[13]	Wai Wai Chiu. Goblet Words and Indeterminacy：A Writing Style that Is Free of Commitment[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2015, 10(2): 255-272.
[14]	Nicholas S. Brasovan. Conjunctions and/or Disjunctions: Radical Empiricism in the History of Philosophy[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2014, 9(1): 130-148.
[15]	Chris Fraser. Xunzi Versus Zhuangzi: Two Approaches to Death in Classical Chinese Thought[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2013, 8(3): 410-427.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed