Abstract

Abstract:

This article puts forward the argument that it will be more viable to use transliteration (collaborating with further articulation) than literal translation in terms of exploring the notion of liangzhi 良知. And an interpretation of liangzhi as innate, original, or cognitive knowledge is likely to sink into “the interpretative morass regarding knowledge.” These misinterpretations are clarified as well as followed by the analysis of relationships between liangzhi and three types of zhi 知: Zhi shan zhi e 知善知惡, empirical knowledge, and moral knowledge.

pdf