Precursory Trust and Apodictic Trust: A Confucian Response to Max Weber

Abstract Max Weber remarks that Confucianism was unconducive to the emergence of capitalism in premodern China because it did not foster trust among strangers, unlike Protestantism in Europe. In response, I propose a tripartite division of trust: (1) empirical trust based on observation; (2) precursory trust that is prereflective, not based on observation, but serves as an indispensable preunderstanding out of which empirical trust can emerge; and (3) apodictic trust that goes beyond empirical trust and claims that one should be inclusive toward people, not based on any desirable consequence but out of apodictic moral duty. This apodictic trust can be expressed as follows: “Trust a person unless one has good reasons not to do so.” Although this formula is not “unconditional” in the sense of Kantian ethics, I would still call it “apodictic” because it obliges people to trust one another in an indefinitely vast number of cases. Recent philosophical literature primarily focuses on empirical trust, but this essay presents a tripartite framework that expands the boundaries of trust beyond direct experience. I respond to Weber by a synthesis: Confucianism emphasizes precursory trust, while Protestantism stresses apodictic trust, yet some Confucian texts also convey the notion of apodictic trust.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Dao
Published
2025-04-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11712-025-09988-5
Primary Topic
Free Will and Agency
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Precursory Trust and Apodictic Trust: A Confucian Response to Max Weber

Zemian Zheng
1 links
Dao
Free Will and Agency
article

Precursory Trust and Apodictic Trust: A Confucian Response to Max Weber

Zemian Zheng
article en

Abstract

Abstract Max Weber remarks that Confucianism was unconducive to the emergence of capitalism in premodern China because it did not foster trust among strangers, unlike Protestantism in Europe. In response, I propose a tripartite division of trust: (1) empirical trust based on observation; (2) precursory trust that is prereflective, not based on observation, but serves as an indispensable preunderstanding out of which empirical trust can emerge; and (3) apodictic trust that goes beyond empirical trust and claims that one should be inclusive toward people, not based on any desirable consequence but out of apodictic moral duty. This apodictic trust can be expressed as follows: “Trust a person unless one has good reasons not to do so.” Although this formula is not “unconditional” in the sense of Kantian ethics, I would still call it “apodictic” because it obliges people to trust one another in an indefinitely vast number of cases. Recent philosophical literature primarily focuses on empirical trust, but this essay presents a tripartite framework that expands the boundaries of trust beyond direct experience. I respond to Weber by a synthesis: Confucianism emphasizes precursory trust, while Protestantism stresses apodictic trust, yet some Confucian texts also convey the notion of apodictic trust.

DaoVol. 24(2)
Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
Openalex Percentile: Top 93%
Free Will and Agency
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.