Chinese Thought: from Confucius to Mao Tse-tung by Herrlee Glessner Creel | Goodreads

Chinese Thought: from Confucius to Mao Tse-tung by Herrlee Glessner Creel | Goodreads



Want to Read

Rate this book
1 of 5 stars2 of 5 stars3 of 5 stars4 of 5 stars5 of 5 stars


Chinese Thought: from Confucius to Mao Tse-tung

by Herrlee Glessner Creel
3.75 · Rating details · 118 ratings · 18 reviews

"Chinese philosophy before our Christian era is emphasized in this nontechnical summary of Chinese thought. Professor Creel also deals with Confucianism, the ideas of Mo-tsu and Mencius, Taoism, Legalism, and their variations and adaptations. As an introduction for the general reader, this book stands among the best."—China: A Resource and Curriculum Guide

"There exists nowhere else such a well-written presentation of the main trends in Chinese thought in so brief a space. The text is not cluttered with Chinese names and the pages are not weighed down with footnotes—but the references are there for those who want them, with suggestions for further readings. This is a book which can be understood by those who have never read anything else about China."—The New York Times Book Review

Paperback, 304 pages
Published January 15th 1971 by University of Chicago Press (first published 1953)
Original Title
Chinese Thought, from Confucius to Mao Tse-Tung
ISBN
0226120309 (ISBN13: 9780226120300)
Edition Language
English

Other Editions (12)




COMMUNITY REVIEWS
Showing 1-30
3.75 ·
Rating details
· 118 ratings · 18 reviews




Nov 24, 2008Tim rated it really liked it
Published in 1953, this book is a bit dated, but it’s a good, brief and readable synopsis of Chinese philosophy’s history and main concepts. It starts off a bit weakly, with rather broad generalizations about Chinese thought and culture and a less-than critical take on Confucius, apparently treating the entire Analects as representing reliable records of his statements. It’s generally believed these were compiled over a long period, with some material neither originating with Confucius nor representing his thought. A couple chapters are markedly Taoist and even anti-Confucian, but Creel only mentions them in passing, suggesting they can be reconciled with Confucian thought. It’s hard to see how, but Creel doesn’t elaborate. No doubt Creel knew his subject well and the simplistic impression is due to brevity, but a caveat or two would have helped.

However, Creel becomes considerably more critical regarding both texts and concepts as he moves on to Mo Tzu, Mencius, the Taoists, Hsun Tzu, the Legalists, etc. There’s still simplification, but this can’t be avoided in such a short work, and his combining philosophical with political history is quite helpful. This is particularly true as Chinese philosophy has often had a pronounced political orientation (even Taoism, in reacting against this focus), as many of the leading thinkers served in government or aspired to, and as the state and emperors have typically aligned themselves publicly with a particular philosophy (with varying degrees of sincerity).

Another strength is the book’s inclusion of post-classical philosophy, continuing through the Communist state’s establishment. It’s hard to find brief, popular works on Chinese philosophy that cover its entire history, much less ones that do it well and place ideas in historical and political context (Fung Yu-Lan’s Short History may be another, but I’ve just started it). Necessarily the result is a synopsis rather than treatment in depth, but Creel does this quite well. In little space he sheds considerable light on the philosophical eclecticism of the Han Dynasty, Buddhism’s introduction to China and its evolution and impacts there, neo-Confucianism, reactions against it, and Western influence.

This background is helpful in trying to understand China’s difficulties and struggles during the twentieth century, and Creel gives a very plausible explanation for the quick and fairly widespread acceptance of Communism by both the Chinese people and the intellectuals. At the end of the book he lapses again into some breezy generalizations and perhaps a touch of romanticizing, although not without some useful insights. Overall it’s a very good book and one wishes Creel were available for a final word on China today.
(less)
flag3 likes · Like · comment · see review



Jul 27, 2019Evan Spadoni rated it really liked it
An effective broad overview of Chinese philosophy and its relationship with power and government.
flagLike · comment · see review



Mar 20, 2010Bob Nichols rated it really liked it · review of another edition
Creel surveys Chinese thought from pre-Confucius times to the 20th century. The thought is rich in its attempt to address universal themes surrounding the "human condition."

Three themes in particular stand out and these were largely articulated before the beginning of the current era. First, when it comes to managing the social order, Confucius promoted a philosophy of moderation, as exemplified by his (Middle Way) comment that too much is as bad as too little. He believed individuals and rulers alike should follow a Taoist-like principle of "li" that involved yielding and limiting one's actions. In contrast to Confucius, the Taoists largely removed themselves from government and concentrated on management of oneself instead. At the opposite extreme, the legalists (c. 220 BCE) supported the power of the rulers over the people, including the use of force.

A second and related theme is the tension between passion and rational control of the emotions. Confucius had faith in the abilities of individuals to control their passions. Mo Tzu (480-390 BCE) articulated an "intellectual love" for mankind, which was a Kantian-like limitation of self in deference to the good of the whole. Lao-Tzu's perspective was to employ self-inhibition because this was the law of nature (to live in balance) and was the key to individual happiness. Love for human kind and social order per se were not paramount considerations. Mencius (390-305 BCE) and Hsun-Tzu (335-286 BCE)operated from different premises (respectively, human nature is good, human nature is bad), yet both believed in the power of rational control over the passions. As noted, the legalists had no faith in the ability to control their behavior. This was a task for the ruler.

The third theme involved the role of transcendent principles in human behavior. Confucius' thought was only vaguely connected to heaven. He was more rooted in the past, to a golden era that was in turn anchored to heaven. In varying degrees, this view was shared by Mo Tzu and Mencius. As interpreted by many, the Taoists, Lao-Tzu and Yang Chu, stripped the heavens of divinity and focused instead on the laws of nature (and the cosmos). Wang Chu'ung (27-97 CE) believed there's nothing divine out there. There are, he said, no ghosts. Like Plato, some philosophers divided the cosmos into eternal form and impermanent substance. Others saw no distinction between form and substance, mind and matter. Tai Chen (1724-1777 CE) was a strong voice for this materialistic viewpoint. In "response" to Descartes, he commented that it is because man has a living body that he has a mind. Virtues are developed from our instinctive tendencies. We seek life, we fear death; we move to advantage and we avoid the harmful. There is, in this way, no essential difference between man and animal. Our natural desires are good if understood and properly guided. Desires must not be repressed, but (like Confucius) they must be socialized.

Another striking theme is how much Confucius, Buddhism and Taoism bump into each other and the blending that occurs as a result. These are the three legs to the stool in Chinese philosophical and religious thought, and the thinkers covered by Creel emphasize or extend, or criticise or react to these three primary traditions. (less)
flagLike · comment · see review