Abstract This article proposes that the “Yi Ziran” legal analysis method can be adopted to strengthen the right to development under the international law. The right to development has evolved into a substantive right in international law. The “Yi Ziran” method is inspired by the philosophical teachings of Laozi, Zhuangzi, Confucius, Legalism, and New Neo-Confucianism, incorporating the view of the universe found in the Yijing (Book of Changes). It argues that the right to development should respect the Dao (law) and De (virtue).The “Yi Ziran” method is based on the close relationship between law and culture, recognizing that legal development is intertwined with culture and tradition. Cultural and traditional values often reflect common human values and contribute to the advancement of law, jurisprudence, and legal philosophy. Unlike theistic perspectives, Yijing and Laozi’s philosophy advocate atheism, asserting that “Dao” is the fundamental source of all things. According to this philosophy, all entities in the universe are born, develop prosper, decline, and die in accordance with the principles of “Dao”. Therefore, “Dao” serves as the highest standard for human behavior and the ultimate paradigm for legal systems and norms. This perspective aligns with the natural progression of phenomena and demonstrates the wisdom of Chinese traditional culture. It can serve as a bridge between Eastern and Western cultures, offering a logical foundation for regulating cross-border exchanges and transactions among humans.The “Yi Ziran” legal analysis method examines the right to development from four perspectives: “Dao”, “De”, “Wu” (material) and “Shi” (conditionality). The right to development in international law has its own evolutionary process, guided by its own rules or “Dao”. It also requires the cultivation of “De” to take shape. “Wu” and “Shi” contribute to its formation and realization. “Dao” represents the root of all creation, and its specific manifestation relies on “De”. As a right in international law, the right to development is not solely the right of nations but also the right of individuals. It possesses unique characteristics derived from its inherent “De”. Furthermore, the generation and growth of entities require certain conditions, namely “Wu” and “Shi”. Human dignity can be considered the “Wu”, namely, the material aspect of the right to development. Descriptions of on human dignity in Chinese traditional culture reaffirm that human dignity, as the “Wu” of the right to development, is a shared value of humanity. The “Shi” of the right to development involves understanding its essence and necessity within the international community, national and sub-national societies, and individuals, as well as effectively implementing the right to development. People are the most crucial element in this process, as society, states, and the international community rely on their presence.Rights require specific content for the effective implementation. The successful realization of the right to development depends on defining its content or “Shi”. The New Haven School of Jurisprudence’s analysis of human dignity aids in determining the content of the right to development. The concept of human dignity under the United Nations Charter and the values of good faith, tolerance, selflessness, respect for justice, and personal responsibility in Chinese traditional culture can be incorporated into the content or “Wu” of the right to development. Since individuals are the beneficiaries of the right to development, they should also bear related responsibilities and work towards completing the “Wu” and “Shi” (implementation conditions) of the right to development.In summary, the “Yi Ziran” legal analysis method advocates the integration of various thoughts, concepts, standards, methods, and approaches involved in Chinese traditional culture into the right to development. This approach ensures that the right to development is implemented in accordance with the principles of “Dao”, promoting the human dignity and world peace as envisioned by the United Nations Charter for the benefit of all humankind.
1 方铭注译：《诗经：古义复原版》，西安：陕西人民出版社，2021年。 2 傅佩荣：《傅佩荣译解易经》，北京：东方出版社，2012年。 3 陈鼓应注译：《庄子今注今译》，北京：中华书局，2020年。 4 陆玖译注：《吕氏春秋》，北京：中华书局，2011年。 5 张铭一注译：《论语全集》，北京：海潮出版社，2009年。 6 李延仓：《〈老子〉与〈易〉道关系检讨》，《周易研究》2020年第6期，第49-55页。 7 陈鼓应注译：《老子今注今译》，北京：商务印书馆，2003年。 8 李炳南：《论语讲要》，武汉：长江文艺出版社，2011年。 9 黎翔凤：《管子校注》，梁运华整理，北京：中华书局，2004年。 10 高华平、王齐洲、张三夕译注：《韩非子》，北京：中华书局，2010年。 11 朱杰人、严佐之、刘永翔主编：《朱子全书外编》第2册，上海：华东师范大学出版社，2010年。 12 刘梦溪主编：《中国现代学术经典：冯友兰卷》，石家庄：河北教育出版社，1996年。 13 方勇、李波译注：《荀子》，北京：中华书局，2011年。 14 郭象注、成玄英疏：《庄子注疏》，曹础基、黄兰发点校，北京：中华书局，2011年。 15 范勇毅注译：《大学全集》，北京：海潮出版社，2009年。 16 方勇译注：《孟子》，北京：中华书局，2010年。 17 Kleining J. & Nicholas G. E.， “Human flourishing， human dignity， and human rights，” Law and Philosophy， Vol. 32， No. 5 （2013）， pp. 539-564. 18 美］哈罗德·D.拉斯韦尔、迈尔斯·S.麦克道格尔：《自由社会之法学理论：法律、科学和政策的研究》，王贵国总审校，北京：法律出版社，2013年。 19 河上公：《老子道德经河上公章句》，王卡点校，北京：中华书局，1993年。 20 英］伯特兰·罗素：《哲学大纲》，黄翔译，北京：商务印书馆，2017年。 21 梁启超：《梁启超评历史人物合集（先秦卷）》，武汉：华中科技大学出版社，2017年。 22 Dales R. C.， “A medieval view of human dignity，” Journal of the History of Ideas， Vol. 38， No. 4 （1977）， pp. 557-572. 23 黎明文化事业股份有限公司编辑部编：《王阳明传习录及大学问》，台北：黎明文化事业股份有限公司，1986年。 24 Reisman W. M. & Takaki T. B.， “How shall we fashion international legal goals and criteria for appraisal in a world of many civilizations and cultures？ review of Onuma Yasuaki’s International Law in a Transcivilizational World，” Asian Journal of International Law， Vol. 9， No. 1 （2019）， pp. 177-184. 25 张松辉、张景译注：《抱朴子外篇》，北京：中华书局，2013年。 26 陈寿：《三国志集解》，裴松之注，卢弼集解，钱剑夫整理，上海：上海古籍出版社，2009年。
2024, Vol. 54 
