Paper short abstract:

In this paper I analyze the ten central capabilities which Martha Nussbaum posits as being at the core of the capabilities approach. As I demonstrate here through a comparative analysis, Nussbaum’s ten central capabilities overlap considerably with a number of key values and principles found in the classical Chinese text of Laozi’s Daodejing and in other early Daoist writings.

Paper long abstract:

Research Context: This paper offers a Chinese philosophical and ethical perspective on international development by drawing upon seasoned wisdom from classical Daoist texts. At first glance, Daoist thought in general and Chinese thinking about international development appears to have little or nothing in common with the human development and capabilities approach (HDCA) promoted globally by the United Nations since 1990. In fact, very few member of the human development and capabilities association are from China, even though it is one of the world's most populous and economically significant countries. There are also very few publications by Chinese scholars engaging with the HDCA. Does this mean that China has nothing in common with the HDCA?

Methodology: In this paper I examine compatibility between one of the most important schools of classical Chinese philosophy and the HDCA through a comparison of Martha Nussbaum's writings on the capabilities approach (and its ten central capabilities) and the foundational texts of China's indigenous religion, Daoism (a.k.a. Taoism). As I demonstrate here through a comparative discourse analysis, Nussbaum’s ten central capabilities actually overlap considerably with a number of key values and principles found in the classical Chinese text of Laozi’s Daodejing (a.k.a. Tao Te Ching) and other early Daoist writings. Her discussion of bodily health and bodily integrity mirrors the Daoist concept of yangsheng. Her emphasis on senses, imagination, and reason resembles Daoist writings on xiaoyao you (wandering at ease in the world). The importance of play and valuing other species that she mentions are also captured in the Daoist ideas of ziran (the intrinsic nature of things) and buzheng (not fighting).

Conclusion: What the comparative analysis in this paper reveals is that an important set of traditional Chinese and Asian values long surviving for centuries within the Daoist tradition and into the new millennium are indeed rather compatible with many though not all aspects of the HDCA. The HDCA is admittedly more anthropocentric than Daoism and focuses less on simplicity and emptiness than Daoism. That said, both traditions appreciate the idea of valuing life and encouraging freedom. Thus, overall there appear to be more similarities than differences between these two schools of normative thought about individual and global development of humans and human societies.