are all cited as having drawn inspiration from the book. Military and political leaders such as the Chinese communist revolutionary Mao Zedong, Japanese daimyō Takeda Shingen, Vietnamese general Võ Nguyên Giáp, and American military generals Douglas MacArthur and Norman Schwarzkopf Jr. The first annotated English translation was completed and published by Lionel Giles in 1910. A partial translation into English was attempted by British officer Everard Ferguson Calthrop in 1905 under the title The Book of War. The book was translated into French and published in 1772 (re-published in 1782) by the French Jesuit Jean Joseph Marie Amiot. Considered one of history's finest military tacticians and analysts, his teachings and strategies formed the basis of advanced military training for millennia to come. Sun also stressed the importance of intelligence operatives and espionage to the war effort. The book contains a detailed explanation and analysis of the 5th-century BC Chinese military, from weapons, environmental conditions, and strategy to rank and discipline. The Art of War remains the most influential strategy text in East Asian warfare and has influenced both East Asian and Western military theory and thinking and has found a variety of applications in a myriad of competitive non-military endeavors across the modern world including espionage, Ĭulture, politics, business, and sports. For almost 1,500 years it was the lead text in an anthology that was formalized as the Seven Military Classics by Emperor Shenzong of Song in 1080. Each one is devoted to a different set of skills or art related to warfare and how it applies to military strategy and tactics. The work, which is attributed to the ancient Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu ("Master Sun"), is composed of 13 chapters. 'Sun Tzu's Military Method') is an ancient Chinese military treatise dating from the Late Spring and Autumn Period (roughly 5th century BC). I conclude by exploring how Ganeri's perfomativist theory of the self can illuminate recent attempts by both Buddhist and Kierkegaard scholars to articulate their accounts of the self by an appeal to narrative.The Art of War ( Chinese: 孫子兵法 pinyin: Sūnzǐ bīngfǎ lit. Third, I discuss Jonardon Ganeri's performativist theory of the self and his suggestion that this view, originally developed by Candrakīrti, informs the view of the self which is developed by Kierkegaard's pseudonym Johannes Climacus in the Concluding Unscientific Postscript. Next, although many Buddhists accept a reductionist account of the kind found in the Abhidharma tradition, Madhyamaka thinkers such as Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti are well-known for offering an account of the self, based on the notion of emptiness (śūnyatā), which resembles in some ways the account of the self that is proposed by Kierkegaard's pseudonym Anti-Climacus in The Sickness Unto Death. Is it possible for there to be a fruitful dialogue between Søren Kierkegaard and Buddhists regarding the understanding of the self? In this paper, I explore the possibilities for such a dialogue by first discussing the rejection of substantialism shared by Kierkegaard and Buddhists. In this article, I argue (1) that Kierkegaard offers a relational ontology of the self that moves in a Confucian direction, (2) subjectivity and relational reciprocity not fundamentally at odds in the two thinkers, (3) that both thinkers value a life of harmonious integration that entails right relation to others, and finally (4) that Confucius' appeal to Heaven as a source of normativity allows for salutary social critique of prevailing ethical norms and practices, in a way that provides important comparative insights with Kierkegaardian theism. In this article I challenge this oppositional approach, since it is both erroneous and obscures fruitful dialogue between the two on conceptually commensurate problems. Kierkegaard is pictured as the paradigmatic exemplar of the Western self: a discrete rights-bearing and volitional atom who is quite alone in the world, while Confucius, by contrast, is the paradigmatic exemplar of the Eastern self: a complex and irreducibly embedded communitarian bundle of relations and rich social roles. Nearly all of the scant comparative work on Søren Kierkegaard and Confucius places the two starkly at odds with each other.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |