From
here on out in the course, we will be studying modern European logic.
Today we will examine the logical positivist position of Bertrand
Russell and the utilitarian position of John Stuart Mill, putting the
dogmatic vs. skeptic duel into modern European times. I gave you
several texts from Russell and Mill in your reader to give you the
debate in the author’s words. Next class, we will begin studying Ludwig
Wittgenstein and his truth table method.
As
we have noted, in the ancient world logic was about the foundations of
debate. In the modern world, particularly fueled by the success of
algebraic code-breaking of nature (cryptography from Islamic
civilization, discussed last time) logic became a mathematical language
that many hoped would provide and prove the foundations of algebraic
mathematics. As physicists used mathematics to uncover the mechanics of
the universe, mathematicians used logic to uncover the mechanics of
mathematics. Unfortunately for Newton’s laws and Wittgenstein’s truth
tables, both of these searches uncovered much and produced many useful
systems and tools, but neither succeeded in uncovering the full and
final mechanisms.
Bertrand Russell
(1872-1970) was born into one of the most prominent aristocratic
families of Britain, and retained the title ‘Lord’ even when arrested
for demonstrating as a pacifist against World War One and dabbling in
socialism. With Frege and Wittgenstein, Russell is one of the founders
of the anti-idealist Analytic school of Philosophy, the school which
broke from the European Continental tradition and became the
philosophical tradition of Britain and America. As one author put it,
on the European continent, philosophy wants to be art, and in the island
of Britain and in America, philosophy wants to be science. Just as
Russell was very influential in Britain and America, on the continent,
in Germany and France particularly, the German philosophers Hegel, who
argued that reality is contradiction, and Nietzsche, who was deeply
influenced by Heraclitus, took philosophy in a romantic and skeptical
direction.
Russell
is a highly influential rationalist philosopher of the Anglo-American
Analytic tradition, a tradition that believes in doing the groundwork
for scientific facts. Russell often argues against skepticism and
instrumentalism (or Utilitarianism, the position of Mill next) by name
as he does in the text I gave you. He also argues against Hegel and the
Hegelians, who we will study in the coming weeks, who argue that
reality is composed of contradictions and oppositional tensions.
Analytical positivism assumes that there are underlying facts that are
absolutely and universally true, much like the atomic truths of the
Vaisheshika and Nyaya schools of ancient India and Aristotle of ancient
Greece.
In
the first of Russell’s texts that I gave you, The Problem of Induction,
Russell says that we know the self and sense data exist.
Interestingly, Descartes started modern European philosophy with a very
similar position, though Descartes was certain of a good and just God
whereas Russell is a staunch atheist who believes in the positive truth
of science, not religion. On a side note, philosophy in the middle ages
and up through the European Enlightenment of the 1600s and 1700s was
almost entirely supportive and uncritical of Christianity, and with the
Enlightenment and through modern times in the English and American
Analytic tradition been almost entirely supportive and uncritical of
science, in spite of the fact that philosophy is the deep questioning of
assumptions and traditions. Apparently, one can be uncritical of
assumptions and traditions while being critical of assumptions and
traditions in the name of religion or science equally. But let us
return to Russell, my skepticism aside.
Russell
argues that if we want to know anything other than the obvious and
immediate, we need to gather things in our conceptions into general
principles. We can perceive lightning following thunder again and
again, but we must draw a general principle from this if we want to know
the relationship between the two. Notice this is exactly what the
Nyaya sutra said about the relationship between induction and deduction,
and what the Charvakas called illusion. Two questions can be asked
here. First, how do we know even the obvious or immediate without
drawing generalities? If I see an apple, don’t I have to draw
generalities about the parts to see it as a whole, and don’t I have to
draw generalities about apples to see it as an apple? Second, why do we
need to gather things into concepts or general principles? Russell
wants to argue against Mill and ‘Instrumentalism’ which argues that our
concepts are not absolute truth but merely truth as it is useful. Is
Russell’s necessity different from utility?
Russell
admits that this creates a problem (the central issue between
positivism and skepticism, in fact): if we only know general principles
by induction, then how can we know anything for certain? Russell takes
the same position as Aristotle, and argues that we cannot be satisfied
with mere opinion, but need knowledge of certain principles that are
always true in order to have knowledge. It is true that we seek
certainty, but if the skeptic is right and there is only more or less
certain opinion, the relatively more certain being what we often call
objective knowledge, then we are satisfied with mere opinion, even if it
is only the relatively certain opinions that satisfy us. Is any
situation of knowledge/opinion entirely satisfactory? Russell argues
that we need a founding principle, a starting point of certainty, or
otherwise all of our sciences, including mathematics, are mere opinions.
We must believe that there are certainties out there, and that our
induction sometimes leads us to certain truth.
Russell
says that science finds the laws of uniformity in nature, and thus
gives us knowledge of certainties. Remember, science in Russell’s time
has made major advances since algebraic code-breaking, and is not simply
the observation of nature as it was in Gotama and Aristotle’s time, but
Russell’s position is identical to that of Gotama in ancient India and
Aristotle in ancient Greece. While in ancient times science was largely
observation of nature, with Islamic algebra and the increasing levels
of mechanics infused into daily life science became not just passive
observation but active experimentation.
Unfortunately
for Russell, he was writing the piece before the work of Einstein, when
Newton’s laws of nature were the dominant model of science and physics.
Einstein’s work did much to swing scientists away from the use of the
word “law” and toward use of the word “theory” to describe proposed
conceptions of the regularities of nature, humanity and the universe.
Another philosopher of science, Thomas Kuhn, would use the term
“paradigm” to describe scientific conceptions in a similarly
relativistic and hypothetical light. As we will see, Mill would be
quite happy by this change of language. It is also similar to the Jain
principle of sayadvada, that all human truth is put forward as a best
guess, as a hypothetical proposition or theory.
In
the second text I gave you, The Empiricist Answer to Skepticism,
Russell calls out Hegelians and skeptics by name and says we cannot get
the sort of independent certainties we want to call facts or laws by
these methods. He says we can indeed whittle away at our theories to
get to the pure data, the facts without interpretation but as they must
be. Wittgenstein will later use the metaphor of bedrock (like Russell
uses the metaphor or analogy of whittling).
Russell
has faith in a ‘minimal theory’, what people are trying to find with
string theory in physics today. He concedes to the Hegelians and
skeptics that there is always SOME uncertainty in truth, some relations
of views institutions, room for error, but Russell argues that some data
has “independent credibility”, meaning we know its ‘just true’, ‘right
there’, and we can assume correctly that this is true data or fact.
Russell
argues that some things must be more than opinion, as opinions can
contradict each other but the true fact never contradicts itself or
other things. This is diametrically opposite Hegel, who argues that
contradictions are what compose all things and their situations.
Russell argues we should give the greatest weight (note the use of
metaphor and analogy, again) to that which is most regular and most
certain, and in this way form our principles and propositions. This is
the method which Russell believes answers the skeptic. Interestingly,
the examples Russell uses suffer from the same problems that Aristotle
had before, arguing that what is red cannot be blue. The Jains,
Buddhists, and Sextus Empiricus would argue that things can be red and
blue at different times, parts, together as the color purple, etc.
Russell
is a big believer in the Principle of Non-Contradiction (a statement
must be true or false, but not both) and the Principle of the Excluded
Middle or alternatively titled Principle of Bivalence (a statement must
be either true or false, but not neither). These two principles are, as
we have seen in the ancient world and we will continue to see in modern
thought, the central issue dividing dogmatic/positivist and
skeptical/relativist thought.
John Stuart Mill (1806-1873
CE) was born in London, influenced by Ancient Greek, French, and
liberal thought. He is considered the major founder of Utilitarianism
and one of the first champions of individual freedom, women’s rights,
and the abolition of slavery. His father wrote a history of India, and
Mill was for a time involved with his father in the British East India
company, the corporation that helped Britain maintain their economic
hold over India.
Mill’s
family was friends with the Bentham family, from whom Mill took up his
consequentialist, ‘happy principle’ thought. Mill’s father had Bentham
tutor Mill as a child with the idea that Mill would become a champion of
consequentialist thought. However, it was Mill who found the name
‘utilitarian’ in a Christian text that used the term to describe an evil
way to strive for good without principles. Mill picked up the name and
developed the thinking in line with Bentham, his mentor, becoming its
famous spokesman. Mill is a central thinker in Logic, Economics and
Ethics. In all of these subjects, he advocated rethinking basic
principles and assumptions based on the ongoing experiences of their
usefulness. For Mill and Utilitarianism, the true is not true in itself
but true because it is useful for creating happiness and avoiding pain.
Political
laws, ethical morals, mathematical rules, and scientific understandings
are to be continuously examined and developed such that they are best
for A) the greatest number of people, and B) over the longest period of
time. Apart from this practical value, Mill argues there is no
objective truth to things. Rather, the objective of truth is its
beneficial use. If a certain logic or form of mathematics is useful,
proving itself a valuable tool that can be put to good work, then this
is the only proof that it is solid and sure.
Utilitarianism,
which Russell attacks as ‘Instrumentalism’ says that there is no truth
to things other than how they are used and for whom they are used. This
is a very similar position to the “existentialism” of Avicenna and
Ockham, with a social bent. Both Russell and Mill agree that the world
has regular patterns, and that we use our minds to form concepts of
these regularities. However, Mill and utilitarians argue that we are
often fooled by our use and concepts of things into thinking that we
grasp the essence of the thing when in fact all we are doing is using
and grasping. What is useful to some may not be useful to others, and
what is useful for many years may not be useful years later.
As
algebraic science made many new discoveries, it is interesting that
human beings again split along positivist and skeptic lines. Does
science show us that the truth is out there and can be discovered, or
that we should always be suspicious of our certain truths because new
truths can overturn the old truths?
Utilitarianism
was a powerful force in Britain against more traditional thinkers like
Russell, who is fighting back against Hegelian process theory and
Utilitarian ‘its whatever we want to do with it or make of it’ theory.
Russell believes that things are factually as they are, and we should
be objective to have true knowledge. A Utilitarian would say we can
arrange situations such that we have knowledge, but there is no ‘true
view’, purpose or nature of things. For instance, Utilitarianism was
very useful for feminism, that there is no ‘true position’ of women but
it is however we position things such that they are most useful.
In the text Logic and Mathematics, Mill asks: if we admit that all is
induction (British Empiricism, which Russell embraces) then why do we
say there are “exact sciences”? We also similarly say that there are
‘hard sciences’. He argues that this is an illusion due to the fact
that objects of math are conceptions and thus imaginary, hence they have
perfect straight edges like an ideally straight line. A perfectly
straight line, the example he uses, with no width, like a point, cannot
exist outside of the imagination. It is a real being of the world, but
imaginary and not physical. Some (Russell) say without perfection of a
sort there is no math, science or knowledge possible (eternal facts as
well), but Mill argues this is silly as we have these things yet do not
have an instance of a perfectly straight line in the real world.
Russell
argued that we can strip down or “whittle” to the pure straight edged
truth, but Mill argues that this helps us to focus our observation and
thinking but it does nothing to guarantee that our knowledge is certain
at all. We can ignore aspects of a thing to focus on particular aspects
or parts, but this does not successfully or completely take these
factors out of the picture, even as far as relevance to the parts that
are in focus. This is a very important ground for the
positivist/skeptic debate today. If we take a banana and put it in a
lab, are we more or less capable of seeing its truths there? If we
create abstractions about bananas with our minds, are these getting into
the thing or away from it?
Russell
wanted a first certain principle of non-contradiction to give us
certainty. Mill argues that there are no first principles of geometry,
mathematics or anything else. Mill argues that the ‘first principles’
are in fact simply generalized observations of real world situations.
Mill turns specifically to the two principles of Non-Contradiction and
Excluded Middle with this skepticism. These principles are in fact
observation in practice. We can see that belief and disbelief oppose
one another, that they are “oppositional mental states” just as we can
see that opposing stories tend to mean that someone is somewhat
mistaken. This is the simple contrast between any two opposites. Mill
argues that the two principles are merely useful generalizations, as are
all “true” concepts used by human beings whether scientists,
philosophers or common folk.
The
Problem of Self Referentially is one of the most famous and interesting
problems with the principles of Non-Contradiction and Excluded Middle.
This problem was very important for Russell’s career, and it brought
him both great success and frustration.
The
classic example is the liar’s paradox. Consider the sentence, “This
sentence is false”. According to non-contradiction, this must be either
true or false but not both, but if it is true then it is false and if
it is false then it is true. It cannot be fully resolved either way.
Russell
pointed out a similar paradox in the work of Frege, the German analytic
philosopher who was central in trying to turn Logic towards founding
arithmetic, who Russell and then Wittgenstein followed and overturned
(as Wittgenstein later did to his teacher Russell). Frege thought he
could prove that mathematics is simply a system of non-contradictory
sets, which he called Set Theory. Russell realized, however, that there
are still contradictions possible in this system of mere sets. He
asked, “Is the set of all sets which are not members of themselves a
member of itself?” Just like the liar paradox, if it is, then it isn’t,
and vice-versa.
Russell’s
point is that there is a paradox that results from self-reference
(‘this sentence’ or ‘this set’). Russell tried to use Frege’s work to
finish a foundation of math, which he never completed to his own
satisfaction. He thought that he could come up with a ‘theory of types’
that would prevent the paradox (so a ‘set’ is of objects but a ‘type’
is a group of sets, not objects), but it lead to further paradoxes. At
this time, he discovered a young Austrian genius who showed up at his
office hours one day simply to argue endlessly against everything
Russell said, who Russell believed would finish his work but in the end
came to stand completely against proof theory: Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Recently,
a different version of the liar’s paradox has been proposed that
supposedly does not suffer from self-reference: consider two people
standing next to each other, one with a sign that reads “Her sign is
false” and another with a sign that reads, “His sign is true”. Like
Russell’s theory of types, this version of the paradox tries to
eliminate self-reference to tidy up the problem, but the paradox
remains.
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Asian Philosophy: Confucius & The Analects
Today
we examine one of the foremost ethical geniuses of world history: Grand
Master Kong, Kong Fu Zi, or as he is known to us, Confucius (550-480
BCE), the Latinized name transliterated by Catholic Jesuit missionaries
who got to China in the 1600s and were astounded to find that the most
influential philosopher in thousands of years of Chinese history has
teachings very similar to Jesus. Confucius was dedicated to the idea
that the individual can obtain fullness and happiness by placing others
before oneself and by recognizing the desires of others as equal to the
desires one has for oneself.
The Life of Confucius
About a hundred years before the birth of Confucius, the political philosopher Guan Zhong became prime minister of the state of Chi (Qi) in 685 BCE. Due to his benevolence and wise leadership, the state temporarily stabilized the neighboring states as the Zhou Dynasty was crumbling during the Spring and Autumn period. When Guan Zhong died forty years later in 642 BCE, Chi was attacked and the region again became destabilized.
Confucius was born 90 years later in the neighboring state of Lu, where like in Chi Guan Zhong was praised as a wise philosopher-king whose ways led to peace and harmony. Confucius’ father, a soldier, died when Confucius was very young, presumably in combat. Confucius was alive as the Zhou disintegrated during the Spring and Autumn period, though he did not see things deteriorate further as they did in the Warring State Period, the time when Confucius’ teachings were taken up by Mencius, Xunzi and others as the way to cultivate and restore both society and the self. Later, the Han would patronize Confucianism as the way to restore order without the need for the authoritarianism of the Legalists.
Confucius’ family were nobles, but they were lower level aristocrats, ‘shi’, sometimes translated into English as ‘knights’, and they had fallen on hard times. They had left the state of Song to the South after political infighting and assassinations. By the age of fifteen Confucius had decided that he wanted to study the classics, which fortunately were better kept and studied in Lu than in other states. When he was twenty three, he began teaching publicly and privately. By thirty, he was studying ancient government in the court of Lu with other scholars and had a position as overseer of public fields and the state granary.
Legend has it that early in his life Confucius opened a school for children and would charge parents of children what he thought they could afford. When the rich complained that their children were being taught for great sums and the poor children were being taught for next to nothing, Confucius replied that the rich were welcome to take their children to any teacher they saw fit, and he would keep his prices as they were. Another story tells of Confucius putting an apple in a vase, and telling the children that the first to get the apple out could eat it. The largest boy in the class shoved in front of the others and reached in to grasp the apple, but he could not pull it out as the apple was nearly the size of the opening. Confucius took the vase, turned it over, and the apple fell out into his hand. The story illustrates a basic lesson of Confucianism: study is central to self-development, but critical reflection (turning things over in the mind) is equally valuable.
After briefly fleeing to Chi during a time of unrest, and refusing to participate in the government of a tyrant who had taken control of Lu, in his fifties he joined the court of rulers who overthrew the tyrant and became Chief of Justice of Lu. Later in life, after teaching and participating in local government, Confucius left Lu in 479 BCE and traveled with many followers from local court to regional kingdom attempting to teach rulers his ways and find patronage.
In one story of his travels, Confucius came upon a woman weeping over the body of her son as a tiger disappeared into the forest. Confucius asked her why she chose to live where there are tigers, and she replied that the local rulers were corrupt and it was better to live with the tigers. Confucius turned to his followers and told them to remember her words. In another story, Confucius leaves a local Duke after he spends all of his time with dancing girls. The duke, enraged, sends an army after Confucius, who tells his students to abandon him to save their own lives, and sits happily playing a lute waiting for his death. Fortunately, another local ruler comes to his rescue, having heard of his teachings and his plight.
Confucius is said to have visited at least nine states of the old Zhou empire attempting to bring the rulers together in a new confederation that would restore the ancient order. Unfortunately the political tide was not in his favor, and just less than ten years before the Warring States Period (475 BCE) Confucius returned to Lu in 484 BCE, dying five years later at the age of seventy three in 479 BCE. His travels, while they did not restore the Zhou as he had hoped, surely helped spread his reputation and teachings such that his school flourished in the Warring States Period and was later patronized by the Han as they attempted to hold on to the disparate states.
The Teachings of Confucius
Confucius believes that the heart is the center of the human being, and compassion (ren) is the central thread running through his system according to a famous passage of the Analects. Notice that heart as ‘center’ is both mental and physical, fitting with cosmology, psychology and medical practices. The term ‘ren’, often translated as love or compassion, is literally, ‘humanity’. Loving others and being compassionate for others is to be more human and humane.
Confucius is often understood as a champion of tradition, principle and ritual (li), as he is a proponent of civilization and education against the Daoists who are proponents of nature and meditation. However, it is clear from the Analects that Confucius believed it was more important to have right insight rather than right ritual or tradition, to have right intentions than right actions, i.e. ‘one’s heart is in the right place’. In other words, while one should have both compassion and tradition, it is most important to have compassion, and without it tradition is corrupting the best things.
Confucius was a master of ritual, an official position important for civil ceremonies and legal practice as they still are in courts of law and political processes today. Confucius believed that ritual was the strength of a society and one should perform the rituals, but he also believed that the worst thing was to do ritual without the proper intention. Confucius would say to a churchgoer or student of any subject today: it is more important to enjoy your church or study, and to do it for your and other’s benefit, than to attend your church for show or study for a good paying career, for if you do not enjoy it whole-heartedly and do it for the right reasons you should not do it.
Consider the example of giving a gift to a friend. If you give gifts so that you can borrow someone’s car, you corrupt the act of giving gifts, which should be done without expectations of repayment. It would be better, according to Confucius, to not give gifts to friends than to give them expecting repayment. Empty ritual, ritual simply for the motions rather than authentic love for and continuity with one’s society, is the worst thing, and thus it would be better in such a case to avoid false ritual and simply not perform the ritual at all. This point is often lost when people focus on Confucius’ great love of ritual and traditional culture.
A good example of this point is Analects 5.5 (and yes, these are standardized so no matter the translation, ‘5.5’ is always the fifth aphorism of the fifth chapter or book, just like the Bible and Koran are standardized with numbers): Confucius says that Ran Yong does not need eloquence (civilized speech) if he is not good. Another good example is 11.10, where Confucius is grieving ‘inappropriately’ for his favorite student, and tells his students who complain that genuine love and expression of emotion is more important than being polite or pleasant (right intention trumps right outer form). However, the best example is clearly 3.26, “Authority without generosity, ceremony without reverence, mourning without grief, these things I cannot bear to contemplate”.
Confucius did believe in the Five Relationships: Son obeys father, younger brother respects older brother, wife obeys husband, younger defers to elder, and subject is loyal to ruler. It is also true, however, that this is not absolute authoritarianism in Confucius’ teachings. While many today would immediately see problems with wife obeying husband and subject loyal to ruler, putting each on equal terms in the name of feminism and democracy, Confucius teaches that if authority is unjust it should be mentioned and if the injustice persists it should be fought. In East Asia, including China, Korea, Japan and Vietnam, most champions of democracy and social welfare associate their ideas and goals with Confucius and speak of Confucian revival, in spite of the fact that he has also been vilified by both capitalists and communists as symbolic of feudalism.
While Confucius was from a low level noble family, like Plato in the Republic of ancient Athens Confucius argued for a meritocracy rather than an aristocracy, for merit through education rather than position by birth. Confucius and others believed that the great sage kings Yao and Shun ruled not by birthright but because they rose through the ranks by their noble actions and compassion for the people. According to tradition, Yao and Shun were so benevolent and righteous that they were able to maintain the state simply by sitting facing south, as everything had been set in its proper place and nothing improper was added. Confucius believed that education should be available to as wide a range of society as possible and encouraged local rulers to cultivate the people through education and the arts. In one passage, he says, “Where there is education, there are no classes”. (Perhaps if Confucius could see our public education system in America, he would have said, ‘Where there should be education, there are fewer and fewer classes’.) In another passage, he says, “As for the humane (ren), when they want to establish themselves they establish others, and when they want to succeed they help others to succeed”.
Because the Han and many later Chinese dynasties used Confucius as a voice supporting subordination to authority, and because Confucius does indeed say to obey the father and obey the chain of command, it is often overlooked that, just as intention is more important than tradition, unjust fathers and unjust states must be corrected. Many times Confucius says that truth must be spoken to power. How will things change if no one complains? In one passage, Confucius tells his students they should rise up and overthrow an unjust local prince. One should be subordinate to authority, but only just and good authority and tradition.
Another central term used by Confucius is ‘yi’, justice, courage and duty insofar as it is one’s basic duty to humanity to be just and do what is right. Together with righteousness, a sense of right and wrong (‘chih’), compassion (‘ren’), principle (‘li’) and justice (‘yi’) became the four virtues that Mencius (Menzi) believed grew out of the heart and formed the core of Confucius’ teaching. Because Confucianism followed Mencius’ system, these became the four traditional virtues of the noble person. Also important are the complementary sides of reciprocity or the ‘Golden Rule’: one should do for others what one wants for oneself (‘chung’) and not do to others what one does not want for oneself (‘shu’).
The ideal for the individual repeated throughout the Analects is the ‘great person’, literally the ‘master person’ (‘chun-zi’, strangely like Nietzsche’s ‘ubermench’), who develops love for others and knowledge through study. While it has often been translated in English as ‘gentleman’, this is problematic in two ways. First, the term is gender neutral, in the same way that ‘mankind’ and ‘man’ were recently used to mean ‘humankind’ and ‘person’. Second, Confucius was talking about the righteous rather than the nobly born, though the term was used before Confucius to refer exclusively to nobles of aristocratic birth. While it is also translated as ‘the noble’, which is gender neutral, Confucius’ great person should be understood as anyone of either gender or any social status who is an excellent human being.
Confucius was a great champion of scholarship. Like Plato, Confucius believed that society should not be an aristocracy but rather a meritocracy. Confucius believed that scholarship was necessary for developing the heart, and the noble person should devote themselves to a lifetime of learning and critical thinking. Confucius taught that six classics should be used for a classical education: the Book of Changes (which we studied last class), The Book of Music, The Book of History, The Book of Odes, The Book of Rites, and The Spring and Summer Record. There has been much debate over how much Confucius was the author of these, whether the texts existed before, or whether Confucius redacted them from earlier sources. The modern consensus is that Confucius was not the author, but he borrowed much from earlier sources to create texts for teaching his students. In a sense, they are ancient Chinese course readers.
Needless to say, Confucius’ Analects became one of the central texts for devoted study in Chinese society, and Confucius became an ancestor revered by devotees with ritual. Confucius is credited as the father of China’s civil service system, a system in which anyone who tested well, regardless of their position in society, was given a government position. This is similar to the development of types of scribes in Egypt. It is just such a development that we call ‘the middle class’, the individuals who through study and work can rise or fall in position to fit the many niches required to run large cities and systems. What Plato recognized in Egypt, Confucius was much more successful in implementing in Chinese society, though unfortunately only after his death. Confucius himself always hoped for a good position, but did not succeed in obtaining one during his own life though he did teach many students and was revered by many of them, including powerful nobility.
Just as Confucius taught that intention is more important than action, he hated scholarship for show without genuine love of learning and discovery of human nature. A good example is 4.9, ‘if a scholar is ashamed of his shabby clothes or poor food, he is not worth listening to’. He also taught that we should balance learning with critical reflection, just as Buddha did, though Buddha, like Daoists, argued that study and critical reflection also needed meditation whereas Confucius saw study as superior to meditation. In the Analects, Confucius says that studying without thinking is useless, but thinking without studying is dangerous, showing us that he does believe in individual insight but is traditional and believes in studying the traditional classics. He says, “The noble person is not a pot”, meaning that we are not containers for knowledge but should transform and reflect on what we study.
Confucius was a genius at seeing himself as equal to everyone, and he encouraged this attitude as the path to excellence itself. It was this point that the Jesuits found fascinating in comparing Confucianism to Christianity. Most of us have likely heard the ‘Golden Rule’, which is paraphrased from Confucius: ‘treat others the way you want to be treated’. While Jesus says, ‘don’t treat others how you do NOT want to be treated’, we can understand them to be one and the same.
My favorite example is 7.22: Confucius says that if you put yourself with any two people at random, you can take their strengths as a model to follow and their faults as a warning. Clearly, Confucius believed that we all share the same set of strengths and faults, no matter how talented (or horrible) we happen to individually be or where our talents are. Confucius taught that NO ONE is perfect, not even himself, but there is good in everyone and everything, and we had best remember that we will never lose any of our connection to our fellow human beings if we only remember to look hard enough for it. Another excellent example from the Analects: “When you see a worthy man, seek to emulate him…When you see an unworthy man, examine yourself”.
The Analects of Confucius
The Analects or Sayings of Confucius is the book compiled by his students and followers of things said by Confucius and short interactions between Confucius and others, including students, government officials, and scholars.
First we look at the criticism of the individual, clearing the individual heart and putting oneself in tune with the Way. Then we look at criticism of the state, and see that the same shape applies.
Second, notice the passages where Confucius is criticizing sages who go to nature and do not study. Pay attention to this for next week, as these are early Daoists who have different opinions than Confucius about the cultivation of the human individual.
Criticism of the Individual:
(4.12) He who acts out of self interest arouses much resentment.
(5.5) ‘Ran Yong is good but not eloquent’- I don’t know if he is good, but he certainly does not need eloquence if he isn’t.
(11.10) Yan Hui died. ‘Master, this grief isn’t right’ C; ‘What sort of grief for such a man is right?
Criticism of Luxury:
(5.18) Master said: Zang Sunchen built a house for his tortoise, with pillars in the shape of mountains and rafters decorated with duckweed. Has he lost his mind?
(7.16) Even if you have only coarse grain, water and your arm for a pillow, you may still be happy. Riches and honors without justice are to me as fleeting clouds.
Criticism of Ritual without Virtue:
(3.26) authority without generosity, ceremony without reverence, mourning without grief, these things I cannot bear to contemplate.
(4.13) If one cannot govern by observing ritual and showing compassion, what is the use of ritual?
Scholarship without greed or want of career:
(4.9) If a scholar is ashamed of his shabby clothes or poor food, he is not worth listening to.
Haven’t seen someone who studies without any thought of career.
Good is at Hand (7.30) but no one is perfect (7.26)
Says again and again that he is not perfect, nor has he met perfection…
(7.33) My seal is as strong as anyone, but I have not succeeded in living nobly.
yet: ‘Is goodness out of reach? As soon as I long for goodness, goodness is at hand.’
(7.34) I make no claims to wisdom or to human perfection- how would I dare? Yet my aim never flags and I never tire of teaching people.
Disciple: ‘This is what we fail to follow.’
Criticism of Selfishness and Pride:
Whatever one’s position, you always share the faults and talents of everyone.
Thus, you have to work to compare self with others, as not intuitive.
You should compare yourself to others, reflect yourself through others no matter how you judge them to be, and work to get over selfishness and become compassionate and balanced (the way of heaven, opposed to selfish desire for lower).
Confucius values joining all of humanity, not being selfish.
(7.22) Put me with any two people at random- they will invariably have something to teach me. I can take their qualities as a model and their defects as a warning.
(9.8) Am I knowledgeable? No. A Bumpkin asked me a question, and my mind went blank. Still, I hammered at his problem from all sides, till I worked out something.
(1.16) Don’t worry if others don’t recognize your merits: worry that you may not
recognize theirs.
(2.13) Practice what you preach.
(4.17) When you see a worthy man, seek to emulate him. When you see an unworthy man, examine yourself.
(5.12) Zigong ‘I do not want to do to others…’ C: you’re not that far yet…
(11.4) Yan Hui is of no help to me: whatever I say pleases him.
(9.28) It is in the cold of winter that you see how green the pines and cypresses are.
(15.24) ‘Single word to guide one’s life?’ C- Reciprocity: do not do to others…
(19.21) A gentleman’s mistake is like an eclipse of the sun or moon.
When happens, everyone notices, and when corrected everyone looks up in admiration.
Good as Unknown, Beyond Judgment and Opinion:
(9.17) The master stood by a river and said: ‘Everything flows like this, without ceasing’
(note Heraclitus)
(2.17) Master said: Knowledge is to take the known as known and unknown as unknown.
(pre 3.14) (quoted by Wittgenstein) About what we don’t know we must keep silent.
(5.13) Our master’s views on culture can be gathered, but you can’t hear his views on the nature of things or the Way of Heaven.
(7.21) The master never talked of miracles, violence, disorders, spirits.
(7.35) Confucius is ill, student: ‘pray to spirits above & spirits below’
Con: In that case, I have been praying for a long time already.
(note not a rejection of the spiritual, but a knowing unknowing)
(11.12) Asked how to serve spirits, says: You have not yet learned how to serve man, how could you learn to serve the spirits?
Death: You do not yet know life, how can you learn about death?
Middle Way: (much like Buddha, Heraclitus & Aristotle)
(6.17) Who would leave a house without using the door? Why do people seek to walk outside the way?
(6.29) The power of the middle way is supreme, and yet it is not found among the people anymore. (notice restore the golden age)
Reform the old, bring in the new:
(2.11) He who by revising the old knows the new is fit to be a teacher.
(2.12) A gentleman is not a pot.
(Pre 3.4 cut off) each generation has added and dropped from the ritual, so we know what people will look like 100 generations from now (they will add and drop)
(15.36) In pursuit of virtue, do not be afraid to outpace your teacher.
Criticism of the State:
Confucius is not a compliant sheep when it comes to the state.
His criticism of individual judgment and pride is matched by criticism of the state.
(11.17) to student regarding a tyrant: C- attack him: you have my permission.
Sees private interest trapped in the state (nobles dissolving Zhou court, into warring states)
(13.15) asked by Duke: Is there a single maxim/rule that could ruin a country?
C- The prince should never suffer contradiction. When in error, prince should be told.
(13.24) ‘What if everyone likes a man?’ C- Not enough
‘What if everyone hates him?’ C- Not enough: Good should love, bad should hate.
(13.20) ‘present politicians?’ Those puny creatures are not even worth mentioning.
(9.26) One cannot deny the humblest man his free will.
(18.18) I do things differently. I follow no rigid prescriptions on what should or should not be done.
Criticism of Daoism and its sages retreat into Nature:
Just as Confucius appears in Daoist texts as an ally but inferior rival, so do proto-Daoist sages in the Analects. This is very much like Buddha vs. the Jains, in that other group isn’t mentioned by name, but found not to be in balance but extremists. Daoists wanted to escape into nature, while Confucians believe in the value of the city and embracing not escaping humankind. Believe in balance, like Daoists, but seek to balance the city, not escape into the perfect balance of nature from the city. Daoists are more skeptical of society.
(18.16) One cannot associate with birds and beasts. If the world were following the way, I would not have to reform it.
It is not right to be a hermit, and discard human relationships to preserve one’s purity.
(4.1) It is beautiful to live amidst humanity. It is hardly wise to live in a place destitute of people (don’t be a Daoist hermit).
Criticism of Meditation (D and later B), to Confucians not as good as study:
(15.31) I once to meditate went without food for a day and a night without sleep.
It was no use. It is better to study.
(4.2) A good man rests in his humanity. A wise man profits from his humanity.
Finally, Confucius describing his own lifetime of learning and development:
(2.1): At 15, I set my mind upon learning. At 30, I took my stand. At 40 I had no doubts. At 50, I knew the will (mandate) of heaven. At 60, my ear was attuned. At 70, I follow all the desires of my heart without breaking any rule.
The Life of Confucius
About a hundred years before the birth of Confucius, the political philosopher Guan Zhong became prime minister of the state of Chi (Qi) in 685 BCE. Due to his benevolence and wise leadership, the state temporarily stabilized the neighboring states as the Zhou Dynasty was crumbling during the Spring and Autumn period. When Guan Zhong died forty years later in 642 BCE, Chi was attacked and the region again became destabilized.
Confucius was born 90 years later in the neighboring state of Lu, where like in Chi Guan Zhong was praised as a wise philosopher-king whose ways led to peace and harmony. Confucius’ father, a soldier, died when Confucius was very young, presumably in combat. Confucius was alive as the Zhou disintegrated during the Spring and Autumn period, though he did not see things deteriorate further as they did in the Warring State Period, the time when Confucius’ teachings were taken up by Mencius, Xunzi and others as the way to cultivate and restore both society and the self. Later, the Han would patronize Confucianism as the way to restore order without the need for the authoritarianism of the Legalists.
Confucius’ family were nobles, but they were lower level aristocrats, ‘shi’, sometimes translated into English as ‘knights’, and they had fallen on hard times. They had left the state of Song to the South after political infighting and assassinations. By the age of fifteen Confucius had decided that he wanted to study the classics, which fortunately were better kept and studied in Lu than in other states. When he was twenty three, he began teaching publicly and privately. By thirty, he was studying ancient government in the court of Lu with other scholars and had a position as overseer of public fields and the state granary.
Legend has it that early in his life Confucius opened a school for children and would charge parents of children what he thought they could afford. When the rich complained that their children were being taught for great sums and the poor children were being taught for next to nothing, Confucius replied that the rich were welcome to take their children to any teacher they saw fit, and he would keep his prices as they were. Another story tells of Confucius putting an apple in a vase, and telling the children that the first to get the apple out could eat it. The largest boy in the class shoved in front of the others and reached in to grasp the apple, but he could not pull it out as the apple was nearly the size of the opening. Confucius took the vase, turned it over, and the apple fell out into his hand. The story illustrates a basic lesson of Confucianism: study is central to self-development, but critical reflection (turning things over in the mind) is equally valuable.
After briefly fleeing to Chi during a time of unrest, and refusing to participate in the government of a tyrant who had taken control of Lu, in his fifties he joined the court of rulers who overthrew the tyrant and became Chief of Justice of Lu. Later in life, after teaching and participating in local government, Confucius left Lu in 479 BCE and traveled with many followers from local court to regional kingdom attempting to teach rulers his ways and find patronage.
In one story of his travels, Confucius came upon a woman weeping over the body of her son as a tiger disappeared into the forest. Confucius asked her why she chose to live where there are tigers, and she replied that the local rulers were corrupt and it was better to live with the tigers. Confucius turned to his followers and told them to remember her words. In another story, Confucius leaves a local Duke after he spends all of his time with dancing girls. The duke, enraged, sends an army after Confucius, who tells his students to abandon him to save their own lives, and sits happily playing a lute waiting for his death. Fortunately, another local ruler comes to his rescue, having heard of his teachings and his plight.
Confucius is said to have visited at least nine states of the old Zhou empire attempting to bring the rulers together in a new confederation that would restore the ancient order. Unfortunately the political tide was not in his favor, and just less than ten years before the Warring States Period (475 BCE) Confucius returned to Lu in 484 BCE, dying five years later at the age of seventy three in 479 BCE. His travels, while they did not restore the Zhou as he had hoped, surely helped spread his reputation and teachings such that his school flourished in the Warring States Period and was later patronized by the Han as they attempted to hold on to the disparate states.
The Teachings of Confucius
Confucius believes that the heart is the center of the human being, and compassion (ren) is the central thread running through his system according to a famous passage of the Analects. Notice that heart as ‘center’ is both mental and physical, fitting with cosmology, psychology and medical practices. The term ‘ren’, often translated as love or compassion, is literally, ‘humanity’. Loving others and being compassionate for others is to be more human and humane.
Confucius is often understood as a champion of tradition, principle and ritual (li), as he is a proponent of civilization and education against the Daoists who are proponents of nature and meditation. However, it is clear from the Analects that Confucius believed it was more important to have right insight rather than right ritual or tradition, to have right intentions than right actions, i.e. ‘one’s heart is in the right place’. In other words, while one should have both compassion and tradition, it is most important to have compassion, and without it tradition is corrupting the best things.
Confucius was a master of ritual, an official position important for civil ceremonies and legal practice as they still are in courts of law and political processes today. Confucius believed that ritual was the strength of a society and one should perform the rituals, but he also believed that the worst thing was to do ritual without the proper intention. Confucius would say to a churchgoer or student of any subject today: it is more important to enjoy your church or study, and to do it for your and other’s benefit, than to attend your church for show or study for a good paying career, for if you do not enjoy it whole-heartedly and do it for the right reasons you should not do it.
Consider the example of giving a gift to a friend. If you give gifts so that you can borrow someone’s car, you corrupt the act of giving gifts, which should be done without expectations of repayment. It would be better, according to Confucius, to not give gifts to friends than to give them expecting repayment. Empty ritual, ritual simply for the motions rather than authentic love for and continuity with one’s society, is the worst thing, and thus it would be better in such a case to avoid false ritual and simply not perform the ritual at all. This point is often lost when people focus on Confucius’ great love of ritual and traditional culture.
A good example of this point is Analects 5.5 (and yes, these are standardized so no matter the translation, ‘5.5’ is always the fifth aphorism of the fifth chapter or book, just like the Bible and Koran are standardized with numbers): Confucius says that Ran Yong does not need eloquence (civilized speech) if he is not good. Another good example is 11.10, where Confucius is grieving ‘inappropriately’ for his favorite student, and tells his students who complain that genuine love and expression of emotion is more important than being polite or pleasant (right intention trumps right outer form). However, the best example is clearly 3.26, “Authority without generosity, ceremony without reverence, mourning without grief, these things I cannot bear to contemplate”.
Confucius did believe in the Five Relationships: Son obeys father, younger brother respects older brother, wife obeys husband, younger defers to elder, and subject is loyal to ruler. It is also true, however, that this is not absolute authoritarianism in Confucius’ teachings. While many today would immediately see problems with wife obeying husband and subject loyal to ruler, putting each on equal terms in the name of feminism and democracy, Confucius teaches that if authority is unjust it should be mentioned and if the injustice persists it should be fought. In East Asia, including China, Korea, Japan and Vietnam, most champions of democracy and social welfare associate their ideas and goals with Confucius and speak of Confucian revival, in spite of the fact that he has also been vilified by both capitalists and communists as symbolic of feudalism.
While Confucius was from a low level noble family, like Plato in the Republic of ancient Athens Confucius argued for a meritocracy rather than an aristocracy, for merit through education rather than position by birth. Confucius and others believed that the great sage kings Yao and Shun ruled not by birthright but because they rose through the ranks by their noble actions and compassion for the people. According to tradition, Yao and Shun were so benevolent and righteous that they were able to maintain the state simply by sitting facing south, as everything had been set in its proper place and nothing improper was added. Confucius believed that education should be available to as wide a range of society as possible and encouraged local rulers to cultivate the people through education and the arts. In one passage, he says, “Where there is education, there are no classes”. (Perhaps if Confucius could see our public education system in America, he would have said, ‘Where there should be education, there are fewer and fewer classes’.) In another passage, he says, “As for the humane (ren), when they want to establish themselves they establish others, and when they want to succeed they help others to succeed”.
Because the Han and many later Chinese dynasties used Confucius as a voice supporting subordination to authority, and because Confucius does indeed say to obey the father and obey the chain of command, it is often overlooked that, just as intention is more important than tradition, unjust fathers and unjust states must be corrected. Many times Confucius says that truth must be spoken to power. How will things change if no one complains? In one passage, Confucius tells his students they should rise up and overthrow an unjust local prince. One should be subordinate to authority, but only just and good authority and tradition.
Another central term used by Confucius is ‘yi’, justice, courage and duty insofar as it is one’s basic duty to humanity to be just and do what is right. Together with righteousness, a sense of right and wrong (‘chih’), compassion (‘ren’), principle (‘li’) and justice (‘yi’) became the four virtues that Mencius (Menzi) believed grew out of the heart and formed the core of Confucius’ teaching. Because Confucianism followed Mencius’ system, these became the four traditional virtues of the noble person. Also important are the complementary sides of reciprocity or the ‘Golden Rule’: one should do for others what one wants for oneself (‘chung’) and not do to others what one does not want for oneself (‘shu’).
The ideal for the individual repeated throughout the Analects is the ‘great person’, literally the ‘master person’ (‘chun-zi’, strangely like Nietzsche’s ‘ubermench’), who develops love for others and knowledge through study. While it has often been translated in English as ‘gentleman’, this is problematic in two ways. First, the term is gender neutral, in the same way that ‘mankind’ and ‘man’ were recently used to mean ‘humankind’ and ‘person’. Second, Confucius was talking about the righteous rather than the nobly born, though the term was used before Confucius to refer exclusively to nobles of aristocratic birth. While it is also translated as ‘the noble’, which is gender neutral, Confucius’ great person should be understood as anyone of either gender or any social status who is an excellent human being.
Confucius was a great champion of scholarship. Like Plato, Confucius believed that society should not be an aristocracy but rather a meritocracy. Confucius believed that scholarship was necessary for developing the heart, and the noble person should devote themselves to a lifetime of learning and critical thinking. Confucius taught that six classics should be used for a classical education: the Book of Changes (which we studied last class), The Book of Music, The Book of History, The Book of Odes, The Book of Rites, and The Spring and Summer Record. There has been much debate over how much Confucius was the author of these, whether the texts existed before, or whether Confucius redacted them from earlier sources. The modern consensus is that Confucius was not the author, but he borrowed much from earlier sources to create texts for teaching his students. In a sense, they are ancient Chinese course readers.
Needless to say, Confucius’ Analects became one of the central texts for devoted study in Chinese society, and Confucius became an ancestor revered by devotees with ritual. Confucius is credited as the father of China’s civil service system, a system in which anyone who tested well, regardless of their position in society, was given a government position. This is similar to the development of types of scribes in Egypt. It is just such a development that we call ‘the middle class’, the individuals who through study and work can rise or fall in position to fit the many niches required to run large cities and systems. What Plato recognized in Egypt, Confucius was much more successful in implementing in Chinese society, though unfortunately only after his death. Confucius himself always hoped for a good position, but did not succeed in obtaining one during his own life though he did teach many students and was revered by many of them, including powerful nobility.
Just as Confucius taught that intention is more important than action, he hated scholarship for show without genuine love of learning and discovery of human nature. A good example is 4.9, ‘if a scholar is ashamed of his shabby clothes or poor food, he is not worth listening to’. He also taught that we should balance learning with critical reflection, just as Buddha did, though Buddha, like Daoists, argued that study and critical reflection also needed meditation whereas Confucius saw study as superior to meditation. In the Analects, Confucius says that studying without thinking is useless, but thinking without studying is dangerous, showing us that he does believe in individual insight but is traditional and believes in studying the traditional classics. He says, “The noble person is not a pot”, meaning that we are not containers for knowledge but should transform and reflect on what we study.
Confucius was a genius at seeing himself as equal to everyone, and he encouraged this attitude as the path to excellence itself. It was this point that the Jesuits found fascinating in comparing Confucianism to Christianity. Most of us have likely heard the ‘Golden Rule’, which is paraphrased from Confucius: ‘treat others the way you want to be treated’. While Jesus says, ‘don’t treat others how you do NOT want to be treated’, we can understand them to be one and the same.
My favorite example is 7.22: Confucius says that if you put yourself with any two people at random, you can take their strengths as a model to follow and their faults as a warning. Clearly, Confucius believed that we all share the same set of strengths and faults, no matter how talented (or horrible) we happen to individually be or where our talents are. Confucius taught that NO ONE is perfect, not even himself, but there is good in everyone and everything, and we had best remember that we will never lose any of our connection to our fellow human beings if we only remember to look hard enough for it. Another excellent example from the Analects: “When you see a worthy man, seek to emulate him…When you see an unworthy man, examine yourself”.
The Analects of Confucius
The Analects or Sayings of Confucius is the book compiled by his students and followers of things said by Confucius and short interactions between Confucius and others, including students, government officials, and scholars.
First we look at the criticism of the individual, clearing the individual heart and putting oneself in tune with the Way. Then we look at criticism of the state, and see that the same shape applies.
Second, notice the passages where Confucius is criticizing sages who go to nature and do not study. Pay attention to this for next week, as these are early Daoists who have different opinions than Confucius about the cultivation of the human individual.
Criticism of the Individual:
(4.12) He who acts out of self interest arouses much resentment.
(5.5) ‘Ran Yong is good but not eloquent’- I don’t know if he is good, but he certainly does not need eloquence if he isn’t.
(11.10) Yan Hui died. ‘Master, this grief isn’t right’ C; ‘What sort of grief for such a man is right?
Criticism of Luxury:
(5.18) Master said: Zang Sunchen built a house for his tortoise, with pillars in the shape of mountains and rafters decorated with duckweed. Has he lost his mind?
(7.16) Even if you have only coarse grain, water and your arm for a pillow, you may still be happy. Riches and honors without justice are to me as fleeting clouds.
Criticism of Ritual without Virtue:
(3.26) authority without generosity, ceremony without reverence, mourning without grief, these things I cannot bear to contemplate.
(4.13) If one cannot govern by observing ritual and showing compassion, what is the use of ritual?
Scholarship without greed or want of career:
(4.9) If a scholar is ashamed of his shabby clothes or poor food, he is not worth listening to.
Haven’t seen someone who studies without any thought of career.
Good is at Hand (7.30) but no one is perfect (7.26)
Says again and again that he is not perfect, nor has he met perfection…
(7.33) My seal is as strong as anyone, but I have not succeeded in living nobly.
yet: ‘Is goodness out of reach? As soon as I long for goodness, goodness is at hand.’
(7.34) I make no claims to wisdom or to human perfection- how would I dare? Yet my aim never flags and I never tire of teaching people.
Disciple: ‘This is what we fail to follow.’
Criticism of Selfishness and Pride:
Whatever one’s position, you always share the faults and talents of everyone.
Thus, you have to work to compare self with others, as not intuitive.
You should compare yourself to others, reflect yourself through others no matter how you judge them to be, and work to get over selfishness and become compassionate and balanced (the way of heaven, opposed to selfish desire for lower).
Confucius values joining all of humanity, not being selfish.
(7.22) Put me with any two people at random- they will invariably have something to teach me. I can take their qualities as a model and their defects as a warning.
(9.8) Am I knowledgeable? No. A Bumpkin asked me a question, and my mind went blank. Still, I hammered at his problem from all sides, till I worked out something.
(1.16) Don’t worry if others don’t recognize your merits: worry that you may not
recognize theirs.
(2.13) Practice what you preach.
(4.17) When you see a worthy man, seek to emulate him. When you see an unworthy man, examine yourself.
(5.12) Zigong ‘I do not want to do to others…’ C: you’re not that far yet…
(11.4) Yan Hui is of no help to me: whatever I say pleases him.
(9.28) It is in the cold of winter that you see how green the pines and cypresses are.
(15.23)
A gentleman does not approve of a person because he expresses a certain
opinion, nor does he reject an opinion because it is expressed by a
particular person.
(15.24) ‘Single word to guide one’s life?’ C- Reciprocity: do not do to others…
(19.21) A gentleman’s mistake is like an eclipse of the sun or moon.
When happens, everyone notices, and when corrected everyone looks up in admiration.
Good as Unknown, Beyond Judgment and Opinion:
(9.17) The master stood by a river and said: ‘Everything flows like this, without ceasing’
(note Heraclitus)
(2.17) Master said: Knowledge is to take the known as known and unknown as unknown.
(pre 3.14) (quoted by Wittgenstein) About what we don’t know we must keep silent.
(5.13) Our master’s views on culture can be gathered, but you can’t hear his views on the nature of things or the Way of Heaven.
(7.21) The master never talked of miracles, violence, disorders, spirits.
(7.35) Confucius is ill, student: ‘pray to spirits above & spirits below’
Con: In that case, I have been praying for a long time already.
(note not a rejection of the spiritual, but a knowing unknowing)
(11.12) Asked how to serve spirits, says: You have not yet learned how to serve man, how could you learn to serve the spirits?
Death: You do not yet know life, how can you learn about death?
Middle Way: (much like Buddha, Heraclitus & Aristotle)
(6.17) Who would leave a house without using the door? Why do people seek to walk outside the way?
(6.29) The power of the middle way is supreme, and yet it is not found among the people anymore. (notice restore the golden age)
Reform the old, bring in the new:
(2.11) He who by revising the old knows the new is fit to be a teacher.
(2.12) A gentleman is not a pot.
(Pre 3.4 cut off) each generation has added and dropped from the ritual, so we know what people will look like 100 generations from now (they will add and drop)
(15.36) In pursuit of virtue, do not be afraid to outpace your teacher.
Criticism of the State:
Confucius is not a compliant sheep when it comes to the state.
His criticism of individual judgment and pride is matched by criticism of the state.
(11.17) to student regarding a tyrant: C- attack him: you have my permission.
Sees private interest trapped in the state (nobles dissolving Zhou court, into warring states)
(13.15) asked by Duke: Is there a single maxim/rule that could ruin a country?
C- The prince should never suffer contradiction. When in error, prince should be told.
(13.24) ‘What if everyone likes a man?’ C- Not enough
‘What if everyone hates him?’ C- Not enough: Good should love, bad should hate.
(13.20) ‘present politicians?’ Those puny creatures are not even worth mentioning.
(9.26) One cannot deny the humblest man his free will.
(18.18) I do things differently. I follow no rigid prescriptions on what should or should not be done.
Criticism of Daoism and its sages retreat into Nature:
Just as Confucius appears in Daoist texts as an ally but inferior rival, so do proto-Daoist sages in the Analects. This is very much like Buddha vs. the Jains, in that other group isn’t mentioned by name, but found not to be in balance but extremists. Daoists wanted to escape into nature, while Confucians believe in the value of the city and embracing not escaping humankind. Believe in balance, like Daoists, but seek to balance the city, not escape into the perfect balance of nature from the city. Daoists are more skeptical of society.
(18.16) One cannot associate with birds and beasts. If the world were following the way, I would not have to reform it.
It is not right to be a hermit, and discard human relationships to preserve one’s purity.
(4.1) It is beautiful to live amidst humanity. It is hardly wise to live in a place destitute of people (don’t be a Daoist hermit).
Criticism of Meditation (D and later B), to Confucians not as good as study:
(15.31) I once to meditate went without food for a day and a night without sleep.
It was no use. It is better to study.
(4.2) A good man rests in his humanity. A wise man profits from his humanity.
Finally, Confucius describing his own lifetime of learning and development:
(2.1): At 15, I set my mind upon learning. At 30, I took my stand. At 40 I had no doubts. At 50, I knew the will (mandate) of heaven. At 60, my ear was attuned. At 70, I follow all the desires of my heart without breaking any rule.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)