When we turn to Confucianism, the certainty that we are still dealing with a religious tradition seems to change. Why is this? A variety of reasons have been given. Some would say that Confucianism seems to be more a social-humanistic and ethical teaching than a religion because it is focused on the establishment of proper relationships between persons and the capacity of the individual to develop his or her moral nature.[3] Beyond the role of the individual, it appears to be focused on societal well-being. There is little that points beyond self and society. Is such a focus necessarily exclusive of religious motivation? Religion certainly has a capacity for social-humanistic and ethical responses to issues. In fact, it might be the case that a particular religious tradition would define itself primarily in terms of these kinds of responses. Why, then, is the capacity for religious response questioned in the case of Confucianism when a similar response in another tradition would not be questioned as anything other than religious?

€”The religious character of Confucian tradition. By: Taylor, Rodney L., Philosophy East & West, 00318221, Jan98, Vol. 48

Consider these questions:

Why is Confucianism questioned as a religion?

Should there be a certain definition of religion or a specific way to categorize something as a religion?

How has learning about Confucianism affected how you define religion?