Titlebook: Dao Companion to the Philosophy of Han Fei; Paul R. Goldin Book 20131st edition Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013 Chinese con

一再遛

Dissipative Systems with Steady States political realm. He argues particularly against Confucian political theory on a variety of grounds. Not only does he argue that a Confucian political theory cannot practically be implemented, he gives reasons to doubt the efficacy of such a system even if it were possible. I argue that, for . Fei,

aggressor

Dissipative Nonautonomous Systemsucians believed in the political efficacy of the transformative power of the ruler’s Virtue. . Fei, in contrast, regards Virtue as exceedingly rare and impractical. However, despite these substantive disagreements, I contend that . Confucianism and Legalism have a place in today’s society. On the on

Coterminous

insolence

Debility

kyphoplasty

Attractors, Bifurcations, & Chaosuch less common than on other Warring States texts like the . and the . (not to mention the . and the .). A half century has passed since the full translation by W.K. Liao 廖文奎 was published in 1959 (Liao 1939–1959), and only a few monographs have appeared in English since then (Wang 1986; Lundahl 19

nominal

Introduction: , Fei and the ,including the contributors to this collection, accept the bulk of the . as genuine, one cannot simply assume that . Fei was the author of everything in its pages. Moreover, even if . Fei is responsible for the lion’s share of the extant ., a reader must be careful not to identify the philosophy of .

gregarious

左右連貫

, Dao’s Theory of , and His Influence on , Feiventional view, which is based the “Critique of Circumstantial Advantage” (“Nanshi” 難勢) chapter of the ., would lead us to believe that . Dao was a theorist of .. This article attempts to examine whether . Dao’s main idea is . by analyzing . 愼子fragments and other early Chinese texts. Contrary to the

個阿姨勾引你

Submerged by Absolute Power: The Ruler’s Predicament in the ,ned resolutely committed to safeguarding the ruler’s interests; and many of his pronouncements can be read as supportive of concentration of absolute power in the monarch’s hands. On the other hand, he remained soberly aware of the potential inadequacy of the monarch, and was skeptical of the possib