mencius and Human nature

Mencius (371-289? BC) systematically elaborated upon Confucian teachings, explaining, interpreting, and filling in gaps, answering questions Confucius did not, and deepening the discussion of certain themes Confucius raised.Born in the state of Tsou (south of Confucius's Lu) during the Warring States Era, Mencius's last name was Meng, and Mencius is the Latinized form of Meng Zi (the respected sage Meng). Here we take another look at Mencius's discussion of human nature in association with his definition of ren/jen, and get at a better understanding of the Mencian approach to the human being. 1. Ren/jen (human heartedness/humaneness) as innate human nature One of Mencius's greatest contributions is clarifying the concept of ren/jen (humaneness; Fung interpreted it as human-heartedness).   Like a modern psychologist, Mencius pinpoints the origin of humaneness to the human sentiment of empathy/commiseration (famous example: empathy at seeing a child falling into a well).  Mencius went on to elaborate on what he perceived to be the basic four human sentiments: feeling of commiseration; feeling of shame and dislike; feeling of yielding and modesty, and sense of right and wrong.  These four were not just human feelings, but were the essential elements of human nature, constituting the basis of a human being.  Human morality, to Mencius, proceeded from these four sets of feelings: Empathy/commiseration--humaneness (human heartedness) feeling of shame and dislike--righteousness feeling of yielding and modesty--propriety sense of right and wrong--wisdom In other words, human morality was the application of natural, innate human feelings in daily life.   Even though humans possess the ability of virtuous behavior, there is a gap between moral sentiments and actual moral behavior which might never be bridged because humans were easily corruptible by the external environment.  The purpose of education was to help people develop these feelings into proper moral behavior. Mencius's definition of human nature (xing) differed from that of the Greek philosophers, such as Aristotle and Plato. Plato believed that human nature was rooted in the tripartite existence of three souls: the rational soul (thinking soul), the spirited soul (will/courage), and the appetitive soul (emotion/desire). The rational soul came from the outside, and was forever traveling from one body to another. It was often at odds with the appetitive soul, which belonged to the human body. A harmonious balance and cooperation of the three souls lead to justice and fairness of their owner. The contrast between the thinking versus the appetitive souls that is seen in Plato did not exist in the writings of Mencius. Instead of trivializing the human body as in Plato, Mencius built an immediate connection between human "biological" traits and moral virtues. It was through a cultivation of the biology that one would achieve moral perfection. Inklings of human moral sentiments were definitely to be cultivated, and sufficient food and clothing to satisfy basic human needs would help to maintain a "constant mind." (online reading, Bloom, p.25) Also, for Mencius, a material life force called qi complemented the development of human sentiments and helped humans reach moral perfection. Bloom brings up a contrast between Mencius and Gaozi, a contemporary of Mencius who disagreed with the latter over the significance of physical energy/qi in human moral cultivation. Gaozi also held on to a material perception of human nature, but his was a naturalistic perception (Bloom, p.26). In contrast, Mencius's approach to human nature included not only human biological needs but also human sentiments, including intellectual enjoyments, such as enjoyment of rightness. The "faculty of the moral mind or heart is just as natural among humans as their physical drives." (Bloom, p.27) Because unlike in Plato, there is no contrast between the eternal soul and the temporary body, the human mind was not seen in conflict with the body in Mencius--they coexisted and Heaven gave humans the ability to think and coordinate their thinking with physical action. (Bloom, p.29) In other words, according to Bloom, the contemporaneity of the mind and the body in Confucian/Mencian thinking made it easy to make an argument of a harmonious rather than confrontational relationship between the two, and to treat (at least certain) mental activities, such as sentiments, as biological activities. The gentleman, to Mencius, would consciously develop those loftier sentiments, make them constant, and develop them into moral habits. It is also interesting to note that traditionally, human sentiments were considered to originate from the heart in China. Arguably, it makes it easier to argue that sentiments, or even thoughts, were a part of human biology, even though it might be a different part of human biology from the more base needs for food and shelter. 2. Mencius as defender of Confucius against Mo Zi/ Mo Tzu and the Taoists/Daoists Mencius's emphasis on the innate human moral nature was a rebuttal against the writings of Mo Tzu and early Taoists who did not think human intentions/motives mattered.  It was also a rebuttal to the Taoists/Daoists, who did not think worldly matters were worthy of human consideration.  One example of a Taoist (a subject we will deal with in next session) response was that of Yang Zhu (Fung, chap.6), who expressed an indifference to human relationships.  Mencius was also against Mo Zi (Mohists)'s idea of universal love: which he interpreted as an indifference to the gradations of human sentiments.  3. Gradations of human relationships and the extension of humaneness from family to society Like Confucius, Mencius was for set patterns of social relationships.  Government was based on a gradation of social relationships.  As natural as a son obeyed his father, so subjects would respect their rulers.  More than Confucius, Mencius emphasized rulers must extend their humaneness to the people.  His attention to different gradations of human sentiments exercised in different places also led him to differentiate between humaneness and love.  Love could be the exercise of humaneness, or it could be exercised alone.  While it was exercised alone, it would be of a lower quality than when it was an exercise of humaneness.  Like Confucius, Mencius believed in enlightened self-interest.  People would love other people's parents or children because they loved their own.  So the love of others was an extension of love for one's own family.  It was this extension of love that would eventually enable sages and rulers to love the whole world and treat it as their own family members. Questions for thought: how did Confucius and Mencius differ in their discussion of humaneness? How did the two differ in their definitions of rulership? What would be the social impact of implementing Confucian/Mencian teachings versus the teachings of Mo Zi? 4. Mencius the idealist  Fung calls Mencius the idealist because Mencius focused on human sentiments as the basis of human moral behavior and treated human morality as the nature of the universe.  By Western definition, indeed, Mencius's focus on human sentiments would easily classify him in the camp of idealists, though for him, these sentiments were part of human biology and were tangible physical properties. In contrast to Confucius, Mencius did not pay much attention to rituals, but more attention to the observance of human relationships and the exercise of moral sentiments.  For him, the universe was a moral one, infused with a force called chi/qi (air, life force).  A gentleman/superior man would be aligned with this universal life force and humaneness is the essence of this life force.  Any man who achieved this level of development could be called a sage (even though Mencius was quite democratic about sagehood, historically very few people have been regarded as sages in China). Question: Did Confucius and Mencius differ in their views toward the universe and human self-cultivation? why or why not?