To Be As Not To Be: In Search of an Alternative Humanism in the Light of Early Daoism and Deconstruction

E-ISSN： 1467-9752|49|3|418-434

ISSN： 0309-8249

Source： JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION, Vol.49, Iss.3, 2015-08, pp. : 418-434

Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.

Previous Menu Next

Abstract

Humanism and humanistic education have been recognised as an issue of the utmost importance, whether in the East or in the West. Underpinning the Eastern and Western humanism is a common belief that there is an essence or essences of humanness. In the Confucian tradition, the core of humanity lies in the idea of ‘ren’; in the Platonic tradition, ‘rationality’. For some critics, this belief may lead to violence as much as justice. One way to be aware of the danger is not to follow the line of traditional humanism without question. The strategy that the early Daoists and the contemporary philosopher Derrida use is to challenge, question, rethink, re‐examine, and reposition the meaning of self. In this article, I will first argue that the idea of non‐I (or non‐self) in early Daoism is indeed a ‘question of the self’ as well as a doubt cast upon the ‘junzi’ (君子) or sage (聖賢) in Confucian orthodoxy. Then, I explore the concept of human subject in Derrida. The consonance between the Daoist undoing of the self and Derrida's deconstructing subject sheds new light on our understanding of humanistic education.