Misplaced Pages

Xin (philosophy): Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 12:42, 10 May 2022 editEzraBrooksX (talk | contribs)1 edit ReferencesTags: Reverted Mobile edit Mobile app edit Android app edit← Previous edit Revision as of 14:43, 10 May 2022 edit undoAnomieBOT (talk | contribs)Bots6,552,047 editsm Dating maintenance tags: {{External}}Tag: RevertedNext edit →
Line 23: Line 23:


{{shell}} {{shell}}
{{external}} {{external|date=May 2022}}
{{internal}} {{internal}}
{{OPXIN}} ========== 🩸⭐🩸 {{OPXIN}} ========== 🩸⭐🩸
{{internal}} {{internal}}
{{external}} {{external|date=May 2022}}
{{shell}} {{shell}}



Revision as of 14:43, 10 May 2022

For other uses, see Xin (disambiguation).
It has been suggested that this article be split into multiple articles. (discuss) (April 2022)

In Chinese philosophy, xin can refer to either one's "heart" and "mind" (Chinese: ; pinyin: xīn), or to the concept of sincerity or faithfulness (Chinese: ; pinyin: xìn).

Xin (heart-mind)

Literally, xin (心) refers to the physical heart, though it also refers to the "mind" as the ancient Chinese believed the heart was the center of human cognition. However, emotion and reason were not considered as separate, but rather as coextensive; xin is as much cognitive as emotional, being simultaneously associated with thought and feeling. For these reasons, it is also often translated as "heart-mind". It has a connotation of intention, yet can be used to refer to long-term goals.

Confucianism

Xunzi, an important early Confucian thinker, considered xin (心) to be cultivated during one's life, in contrast to innate qualities of xing (Chinese: ; pinyin: xìng), or human nature.

Daoism

A Daoist view, specifically that of Zhuang Zhou, describes xin (心) as being socialised, with environmental pressures influencing personal intentions, sometimes in such a way that can provoke disagreements and conflict. Whereas Confucians viewed it necessary to cultivate xin to develop de, or moral virtue, Zhuang Zhou considered this socialisation to be detrimental to one's personal nature.

Xin (virtue)

Often translated as sincerity or faithfulness, xin (信) is one of "five constants" (Chinese: 五常; pinyin: wŭ cháng), a group of five cardinal virtues recognised in Confucianism which adds xin to the "four sprouts" (Chinese: 四端; pinyin: sì duān) listed in the Mengzi.

See also

Operation XIN

Template:Shell

This article's use of external links may not follow Misplaced Pages's policies or guidelines. Please improve this article by removing excessive or inappropriate external links, and converting useful links where appropriate into footnote references. (May 2022) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Template:Internal Template:OPXIN ========== 🩸⭐🩸 Template:Internal

This article's use of external links may not follow Misplaced Pages's policies or guidelines. Please improve this article by removing excessive or inappropriate external links, and converting useful links where appropriate into footnote references. (May 2022) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Template:Shell

Bibliography

  • Hansen, Chad (2012). "Taoism". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  • Ivanhoe, P.J.; Van Norden, B.W., eds. (2001). Readings in Classical Chinese Philosophy (2nd ed.). Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Co.
  • Robins, Dan (2008). "Xunzi". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  • Shun, Kwong Loi (2010). "Mencius". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Chinese philosophy
Schools
Philosophers
Eastern Zhou
Five Dynasties
Ten Kingdoms
Song
Qing
20th century
Concepts
Topics
Stub icon

This Chinese philosophy-related article is a stub. You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it.

  1. ^ Shun (2010).
  2. Robins (2008).
  3. Hansen (2012).
  4. Ivanhoe & Van Norden (2001), p. 393.
Categories: