浙江工商大学学报

近代以来对孝的激烈批评，源于对不同形态孝道的混同。孝可区分为伦理之孝、政治之孝与专制之孝。伦理之孝侧重于家庭生活与代际和谐，关注敬养、继志等内容，由子女对父母的深厚情感一以贯之。政治之孝偏向公共领域，强调构建一种温情的道德政治。专制之孝则意在维护等级制度，混淆政治服从与道德义务的界限，将孝从美德转变为一种不可置疑的绝对义务，发生了异化。近代以来对孝的激烈批评，主要针对的便是专制之孝。在当代孝文化传承中，需要剥离其专制成分，使其归正：强调孝是父母子女的双向互动成果，而非单方面的孝道义务；倡导孝是自主自发的报恩行为，而非偿还债务的经济活动；重视孝的仁爱与平等，而非等级秩序与权威服从。

The intense criticism of filial piety since modern times has largely arisen from the conflation of its distinct forms. Filial piety can be classified into three types: ethical filial piety, political filial piety, and authoritarian filial piety. Ethical filial piety centers on family life and intergenerational harmony, emphasizing such practices as reverent care for parents and the continuation of their aspirations, all grounded in the deep affection that children bear toward their parents. Political filial piety extends into the public sphere and seeks to foster a humane and morally informed political order. Authoritarian filial piety, by contrast, is designed to uphold hierarchical structures. It blurs the boundary between political obedience and moral obligation, transforming filial piety from a virtue into an unquestionable and absolute duty. The vigorous critiques of filial piety in modern times have been directed primarily at this authoritarian form. In the contemporary inheritance and development of filial culture, its authoritarian elements should be removed so as to restore its true meaning. Filial piety should be understood as the product of reciprocal interaction between parents and children rather than a unilateral obligation imposed on children; as a voluntary and spontaneous expression of gratitude rather than an economic act of debt repayment; and as a value rooted in benevolence and equality rather than in hierarchical order and unquestioning obedience to authority.