SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Barkley Rosser <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Societies for the History of Economics <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 17 Mar 2009 20:48:31 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (19 lines)
I do not know how strong the Chinese influence was on the actual 
theoretical (or policy) thinking of the physiocrats, but one thing 
that the French philosophes in general liked about Confucianism was 
its relative lack of theism, although the Emperor was still supposed 
to maintain the "Mandate of Heaven."  Nevertheless, Quesnay was an 
especial fan of the Chinese and was known as the "French Confucius."

The old split in Chinese philosophy was long that between Taoism and 
Confucianism.  In terms of economics, the former was more generally 
associated with a more anti-authoritarian and anti-state, more 
laissez-faire approach, whereas Confucianism was more with emphasis 
on hierarchy, order, and central government authority (and also 
reason and rationality, as opposed to a more spontaneous and 
emotional approach).  It was often said that "Confucianism is the 
philosophy of the scholar in power, whereas Taoism is the philosophy 
of the scholar out of power."

Barkley Rosser

ATOM RSS1 RSS2