This book feels like an introduction to ethics and moral philosophy to me. The difference between this book and other kinds of philosophy books is that it breaks a lot of misconceptions proposed by other philosophers. Philosopher tends to split concepts to make their explanation earlier or clarify different things. But as the book states in the beginning, the purpose of moral philosophy should be to lead people to a good ending, or later there is a better in my opinion -- eudaimonia. Separating and introducing concepts cannot help people to have a better life. For example, 知行合一, in author's mind, 知 and 行 are the same things. People cannot say they know but they don't act out. Another example is body and mind, the author argues that you cannot claim you have a nice spiritual fulfilment without fulfilment for your body. Same as your 才 and 德, it is not possible for a person to have a high level in 才 but a low level in 德, because a high level of 才 usually leads him/her to think more about 德. Therefore, besides the introduction to various philosophical concepts, the book challenges the definition and separation of the concepts. Although the challenges usually only come to a thought-provoking process rather than a conclusion, they deliver an important point, 一體. I think this makes a lot of sense because the sciences of the world often intertwine with each other. We understand the world by splitting things into atomic concepts but we cannot use them to improve our lives until we integrate them. I have enjoyed this book. One thing I don't like about the book is that the author is kind of picky on the definition of concepts by other philosophers. He is also picky on the word choice by other philosophers. That is fine but I found that the author makes the same mistake very often. I can think of a better word choice or example to explain some concepts than him. Therefore, understanding the meanings behind the book is not difficult but the way he explains them complicate it.
Therefore, besides the introduction to various philosophical concepts, the book challenges the definition and separation of the concepts. Although the challenges usually only come to a thought-provoking process rather than a conclusion, they deliver an important point, 一體. I think this makes a lot of sense because the sciences of the world often intertwine with each other. We understand the world by splitting things into atomic concepts but we cannot use them to improve our lives until we integrate them.
I have enjoyed this book. One thing I don't like about the book is that the author is kind of picky on the definition of concepts by other philosophers. He is also picky on the word choice by other philosophers. That is fine but I found that the author makes the same mistake very often. I can think of a better word choice or example to explain some concepts than him. Therefore, understanding the meanings behind the book is not difficult but the way he explains them complicate it.