• Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia
• /
• 제20권1호
• /
• pp.120-133
• /
• 2021

This paper proposes an interpretation of Charles Ess's pros hen pluralism, especially concerning what constitutes the single end point (hen) toward which the pluralistic viewpoints converge (pros). The single end point, I argue, is constituted by an empirical social reality that obtains in the world at a particular period. In other words, it is the fact that we happen to agree largely and broadly on several ethical issues that serves as the end point in Ess's theory. The reason is that humans happen largely to share the same goals and values qua human beings, such as the desire for communication and cooperation with one another. It is not their rationality, or any other permanent and ideal characteristic, that serves as the source of normativity for human beings, but rather the contingent facts that obtain at a particular place and time, facts that humans happen to agree on. This raises an obvious objection of what to do with those who might cherish a very different set of values. The answer is that the globalized nature of the world today, especially deepened by information technology, makes it increasingly difficult for any groups to remain isolated. This does not imply, however, that disagreements are not possible. On the contrary, disagreements are a part of the whole process from the beginning. At the theoretical level, there is always a need for those who disagree on the theoretical issues rationally to persuade one another. This is also part of the empirical reality referred to earlier.

• Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia
• /
• 제20권1호
• /
• pp.102-119
• /
• 2021

Social credit rating in China (SCRC) has been criticized as "dystopian" and "Orwellian," an attempt by the Communist Party to hold onto power by exerting ever greater control over its citizens. To explain such measures, value differences are often invoked, that Chinese value stability and cooperation over privacy and freedom. However, these explanations are oversimplifications that result in ethical impasses. This article argues social credit rating should be understood in terms of the commonly human problem of large-scale cooperation. To do so, this paper relies on a cultural evolutionary framework and is an exercise in interpretive pros hen ethical pluralism, attempting to understand how apparently irresolvable cultural differences stem from common human concerns. Wholesale condemnation of SCRC fails to acknowledge the serious, intractable nature of problems resulting from a lack of trust in China. They take for granted the existence of institutions ensuring largescale, anonymous cooperation characteristic of - but somewhat unique to - Western Educated Industrialized Rich and Democratic (WEIRD) cultures. Because of its history and rapid development, China lacks the institutions necessary to ensure such cooperation, and because of anti-social punishment, social credit rating might be one of the few ways to ensure cooperation at this scale. The point is not to defend social credit rating in general, but to raise the possibility of its defense in China and show one way this would be done.