Author Information

Sarah MatticeFollow

College

College of Arts and Sciences

Department

Philosophy and Religious Studies

Rank

Associate Professor

Biographical Statement

Sarah Mattice is an Associate Professor in the Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies at UNF, specializing in comparative and non-western philosophy. Much of her research concerns East Asian philosophical philosophical traditions, including Confucianism (Ruism), Buddhism, and Daoism.

Type of Work

Book Chapter

Publication Information

"Confucian Role Ethics: Issues of Naming, Translation, and Interpretation" in The Bloomsbury Research Handbook of Early Chinese Ethics and Political Philosophy, edited by Alexus McLeod (New York: Bloomsbury Academic, Feb 21, 2019).

Description of Work

This chapter explores the arguments behind considering Confucian ethics as a kind of "role ethics", as articulated by Roger Ames and others. I see at least three sets of concerns that animate the reasoning behind Confucian role ethics: naming, translation, and interpretation. In terms of naming, I discuss this project as an example of zhengming 正名, or proper naming, which is a common Confucian ethical project. Confucian thinkers are often preoccupied with appropriate categorization, one species of which is naming. The naming of Confucian ethics as role ethics, I argue, is not only consistent with but is situated in a larger Confucian concern with appropriate names. In terms of translation, I explore CRE in conversation with the translation theory of Lawrence Venuti, who argues against translations of “fluency” for an anti-domestication strategy—a method for translations to maintain some level of “foreignness.” Finally, I engage certain hermeneutic and interpretive assumptions about the very project of coming to understand “Confucian” ethics at all. In doing so, I also provide certain critical reflections on “role ethics” as a way of understanding Confucianism.

Share

COinS
 

Confucian Role Ethics: Issues of Naming, Translation, and Interpretation

This chapter explores the arguments behind considering Confucian ethics as a kind of "role ethics", as articulated by Roger Ames and others. I see at least three sets of concerns that animate the reasoning behind Confucian role ethics: naming, translation, and interpretation. In terms of naming, I discuss this project as an example of zhengming 正名, or proper naming, which is a common Confucian ethical project. Confucian thinkers are often preoccupied with appropriate categorization, one species of which is naming. The naming of Confucian ethics as role ethics, I argue, is not only consistent with but is situated in a larger Confucian concern with appropriate names. In terms of translation, I explore CRE in conversation with the translation theory of Lawrence Venuti, who argues against translations of “fluency” for an anti-domestication strategy—a method for translations to maintain some level of “foreignness.” Finally, I engage certain hermeneutic and interpretive assumptions about the very project of coming to understand “Confucian” ethics at all. In doing so, I also provide certain critical reflections on “role ethics” as a way of understanding Confucianism.