2003/01/01 by Philip Clart · 3 citations
Social Sciences · Arts and Humanities · #Chinese history and philosophy #Japanese History and Culture #Religious Studies and Spiritual Practices #Asian studies #China #Subject (documents) #Subject matter #Neo-Confucianism #Epistemology #Chinese philosophy #Sociology #Aesthetics #Philosophy #Religious studies #History #Law #Political science
paper · doi:10.1163/156853203322691301
openalex publication_date 2003/01/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/15
In most areas of study it is the fundamental questions that tend to remain unresolved. Thus, scholars in religious studies have been amassing innumerable studies on specific religions, aspects of religious life, beliefs, doctrines and practices, but so far have not yet been able to agree on what religion actually is, what falls under this label and what does not. Likewise, students of Confucianism have not been able to solve such basic issues concerning their chosen subject matter as: Is Confucianism a philosophy or a religion? Should we even speak of it as an -ism, or should we call it more loosely tradition or thought? The present article will deal with a related basic question that so far has not been resolved satisfactorily, namely, whether there is such a thing as a Confucianism? Or, put differently: are there sections of Chinese popular culture that can meaningfully be interpreted as Confucian? I approach this question not by imposing the label Confucian on likely elements of popular culture, but by examining the use of the label Ru 5 among twentieth-century popular religious groups. As I will be dealing with religious groups that self-consciously use this label as an autonym, the question will not be: Are these groups Confucian?, but rather: What do they