| Revision as of 07:32, 16 March 2015 edit198.53.57.34 (talk) Move comments to talk pageTag: section blanking← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:25, 24 May 2015 edit undoBD2412 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, IP block exemptions, Administrators2,448,451 editsm clean up from page move and change of redirect target using AWBNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| In ], '''xin''' can refer to one's "disposition" or "feelings" ({{zh|c=心 |p=xīn}}), or to one's confidence or trust in something or someone ({{zh|c=信 |p=xìn}}). Literally, ''xin'' (心) refers to the physical heart, though it is sometimes translated as "mind" as the ancient Chinese believed the heart was the center of human ]. For this reason, it is also sometimes translated as "heart-mind". It has a connotation of intention, yet can be used to refer to long-term goals.<ref>Shun, Kwong Loi, "Mencius", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2010/entries/mencius/></ref> ], an important early ] thinker, considered ''xin'' (心) to be cultivated during one's life, in contrast to innate qualities of '']'' ({{zh|c=性 |p=xìng}}), or human nature.<ref>Robins, Dan, "Xunzi", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/xunzi/></ref> | In ], '''xin''' can refer to one's "disposition" or "feelings" ({{zh|c=心 |p=xīn}}), or to one's confidence or trust in something or someone ({{zh|c=信 |p=xìn}}). Literally, ''xin'' (心) refers to the physical heart, though it is sometimes translated as "mind" as the ancient Chinese believed the heart was the center of human ]. For this reason, it is also sometimes translated as "heart-mind". It has a connotation of intention, yet can be used to refer to long-term goals.<ref>Shun, Kwong Loi, "Mencius", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2010/entries/mencius/></ref> ], an important early ] thinker, considered ''xin'' (心) to be cultivated during one's life, in contrast to innate qualities of '']'' ({{zh|c=性 |p=xìng}}), or human nature.<ref>Robins, Dan, "Xunzi", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/xunzi/></ref> | ||
| A ] view, specifically from the philosopher ], understands ''xin'' (-?-) as being socialized, with environmental pressures influencing personal intentions, sometimes in such a way that can provoke disagreements and conflict. While a Confucian might take heart that ''xin'' (-?-) may be cultivated in order to develop '']'', or moral virtue, Zhuangzi considered this socialization as detrimental to one's personal nature, somewhat along the lines of the later French philosopher, ]. However, unlike Rousseau, ] and many other ]-era European philosophers following the classical example of ], emotion and reason were not considered separate entities, but rather as coextensive; ''xin'' (-?-, but most likely 心) itself is a concept that is as much cognitive as emotional.<ref>Hansen, Chad, "Taoism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2012 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2012/entries/taoism/></ref><ref>Ivanhoe, P.J., & Van Norden, B.W. (Eds.) (2001). Readings in Classical Chinese Philosophy, 2nd Ed. Hackett Publishing Co.: Indianapolis, p. 393</ref> | A ] view, specifically from the philosopher ], understands ''xin'' (-?-) as being socialized, with environmental pressures influencing personal intentions, sometimes in such a way that can provoke disagreements and conflict. While a Confucian might take heart that ''xin'' (-?-) may be cultivated in order to develop '']'', or moral virtue, Zhuangzi considered this socialization as detrimental to one's personal nature, somewhat along the lines of the later French philosopher, ]. However, unlike Rousseau, ] and many other ]-era European philosophers following the classical example of ], emotion and reason were not considered separate entities, but rather as coextensive; ''xin'' (-?-, but most likely 心) itself is a concept that is as much cognitive as emotional.<ref>Hansen, Chad, "Taoism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2012 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2012/entries/taoism/></ref><ref>Ivanhoe, P.J., & Van Norden, B.W. (Eds.) (2001). Readings in Classical Chinese Philosophy, 2nd Ed. Hackett Publishing Co.: Indianapolis, p. 393</ref> | ||
Revision as of 16:25, 24 May 2015
In Chinese philosophy, xin can refer to one's "disposition" or "feelings" (Chinese: 心; pinyin: xīn), or to one's confidence or trust in something or someone (Chinese: 信; pinyin: xìn). Literally, xin (心) refers to the physical heart, though it is sometimes translated as "mind" as the ancient Chinese believed the heart was the center of human cognition. For this reason, it is also sometimes translated as "heart-mind". It has a connotation of intention, yet can be used to refer to long-term goals. Xunzi, an important early Confucian thinker, considered xin (心) to be cultivated during one's life, in contrast to innate qualities of xing (Chinese: 性; pinyin: xìng), or human nature.
A Daoist view, specifically from the philosopher Zhuangzi, understands xin (-?-) as being socialized, with environmental pressures influencing personal intentions, sometimes in such a way that can provoke disagreements and conflict. While a Confucian might take heart that xin (-?-) may be cultivated in order to develop de, or moral virtue, Zhuangzi considered this socialization as detrimental to one's personal nature, somewhat along the lines of the later French philosopher, Jean-Jacques Rousseau. However, unlike Rousseau, René Descartes and many other Enlightenment-era European philosophers following the classical example of Plato, emotion and reason were not considered separate entities, but rather as coextensive; xin (-?-, but most likely 心) itself is a concept that is as much cognitive as emotional.
See also
- Qing, a related concept
- Somatic marker hypothesis, a modern scientific hypothesis linking emotion and reason
References
- Shun, Kwong Loi, "Mencius", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2010/entries/mencius/>
- Robins, Dan, "Xunzi", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/xunzi/>
- Hansen, Chad, "Taoism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2012 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2012/entries/taoism/>
- Ivanhoe, P.J., & Van Norden, B.W. (Eds.) (2001). Readings in Classical Chinese Philosophy, 2nd Ed. Hackett Publishing Co.: Indianapolis, p. 393