2012/09/17 by Judson B. Murray · 1 citation
Social Sciences · Psychology · Arts and Humanities · #Chinese history and philosophy #Cultural Differences and Values #Indian and Buddhist Studies #Indoctrination #Nature versus nurture #Confucian ethics #Sociology #Character education #Moral authority #Politics #Moral disengagement #Epistemology #Curriculum #Moral development #Autocracy #Social cognitive theory of morality #Power (physics) #Environmental ethics #China #Pedagogy #Social psychology #Law #Democracy #Psychology #Philosophy #Political science #Character (mathematics) #Ideology
paper · doi:10.1080/03057240.2012.721759
openalex publication_date 2012/09/17 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/29
This study examines early Chinese moral education—its curriculum, objectives and the philosophical assumptions underlying them—in its classical Confucian expression. It analyzes early Confucian debates on moral psychology, the Confucian moral curriculum consisting of model emulation, cultural practices and canonical instruction, and the methods and aims of Confucian statecraft. The study reveals how ancient Confucians integrated these components into a coherent discourse on moral education and its implementation for the related purposes of cultivating virtuous people and benevolent rulers. It explains why different early Confucians argued that ‘nature’ and ‘nurture’ must interrelate suitably not only for people to develop morally and prosper collectively, but also to moderate the ruler’s power by subjecting it to alternative sources of authority. This examination demonstrates that, contrary to modern criticisms of traditional Confucian culture and unlike contemporary uses of moral education in China, classical Confucian moral education was understood to serve aims quite different from either bolstering an autocracy or political indoctrination.