Episode 28: Mencius Against Mohist Impartialism

In this episode, we continue our exploration of Mohist impartial caring (jian'ai 兼愛) by examining two of Mencius’s most influential objections: (1) the “Without a Father” Argument (Mencius 3B9) and (2) the “Two Roots” Argument (Mencius 3A5).

Along the way, we take up some important questions: Should moral values be impartial even between family members and total strangers? Is radical impartiality incompatible with being human? And should ethics be grounded in rational doctrine or in human nature?

Many thanks to The Hong Kong Ethics Lab for sponsoring this podcast series.

Want to continue the discussion? Need links to some of the sources mentioned? Go to the support page for this episode on Warp, Weft, and Way.

We thank Lena Li (LI La 李拉 ) for her expert editing and sound engineering. We also thank the blog Warp, Weft & Way for hosting the discussion for this episode.

Co-hosts:
Richard Kim's website
Justin Tiwald's website

Chapters

• 0:00 Part I -- Introduction
• 11:23 Part II -- Mencius's critcisms of impartial caring
• 18:50 • The "without a father" argument (Mencius 3B9)
• 37:25 • The "two sources" (or "two roots") objection (Mencius 3A5)
• 1:03:55 • A rejoinder from proponents doctrine-based ethics: natural emotions are very unreliable
• 1:06:12 • The wholeheartedness criterion for ethics