CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 813Chinese history and philosophyPhilosophy and Historical ThoughtClassical Philosophy and Thought

The World of Thought in Ancient China

Schwartz, Benjamin Isadore·1985·Harvard University Press eBooks
DOI 10.4159/9780674043312
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4159/9780674043312

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The Statutes derived their authority from their conformance to the order of Heaven above, and they opposed the intractability and waywardness of humankind below.

    “They derived their authority from their conformance to the order of Heaven above, and they opposed the intractability and waywardness of humankind below (Schwartz 1985:113, 269).”

    From Chinese Hierarchy in Comparative Perspective (1989) · cites this paper as Schwartz 1985:113, 269

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schwartz, B. I.
Corresponding author
Schwartz, Benjamin Isadore
Venue
Harvard University Press eBooks
Publisher
Harvard University Press
Published
1985-12-31
DOI
10.4159/9780674043312
OpenAlex
W4213456678
Cited by
813
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 47 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 83 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 70 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 18
FWCI
6.23
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Harvard University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Chinese history and philosophy
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophy and Historical Thought
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Classical Philosophy and Thought
Keywords
ancient Chinese philosophy, Chinese philosophy, Confucianism, Daoism, pre-Qin philosophy, intellectual history

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review