Next Article in Journal
Older Adults with Dementia: Association of Prayer with Neuropsychiatric Symptoms, Cognitive Function, and Sleep Disturbances
Next Article in Special Issue
Reexamining the Different Paths to the Dao of the Daodejing
Previous Article in Journal
How Do Theological and Secular Ethics Relate and Compare?
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Daoist Reflections on the See-Saw of Contingency and Autonomy: The Laozi and Zhuangzi in Dialogue with Sandel, Rosa, Rorty, Gray

Religions 2022, 13(10), 972; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel13100972
by Paul Joseph D’Ambrosio
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Religions 2022, 13(10), 972; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel13100972
Submission received: 21 September 2022 / Revised: 10 October 2022 / Accepted: 12 October 2022 / Published: 17 October 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Pathways into Early Daoist Philosophy)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is a brilliant paper, expressing a powerful and distinctive point of view on the question of contingency and autonomy, well contextualized within contemporary debates on these subjects, and with a broad comparative vision that clarifies the issue in novel ways due to well-chosen juxtapositions and exposition.   It makes a significant contribution to both defining and advancing a conversation with immense present relevance both to philosophy and to broader social and cultural issues.   I recommend it be published as is.   

Author Response

Thank you.

Reviewer 2 Report

My only concern is the last paragraph where a judgment is rendered regarding the fact that modern thinkers do a much better job than Zhuangzi in solving the issues they raise, though it is not at all clear that Zhuangzi is trying to solve any problems, so it might be a little unfair, and you don't seem to have really argued for that in the paper. It might not be necessary or helpful in the conclusion.

Author Response

I agree with the point about the last paragraph.

Back to TopTop