Thought Piece: Confucius vs. Rousseau

Thought Piece: Confucius vs. Rousseau

“The Master said, When natural substance prevails over ornamentation, you get the boorishness of the rustic. When ornamentation prevails over natural substance, you get the pedantry of the scribe. Only when ornament and substance are duly blended do you get the true gentleman” (pg. 119, VI. 16).

Following his earlier discussion of the manner in which “if harmony itself is not modulated by ritual, things will still go amiss,” Confucius cautions that ritual itself must be used in moderation. (86, I. 12) As he says, “Courtesy not bounded by the prescriptions of ritual becomes tiresome. Caution not bounded by the prescriptions of ritual becomes timidity, daring becomes turbulence, inflexibility becomes harshness” (132, VIII. 2). Essentially, Confucius seems to be saying that while rituals can lead to harmony, it is only prudent to practice them within certain limits.

Similarly, Confucius also speaks of the prudence of placing limits on cultural influences on the level of the individual. In light of the fact that any culture is merely the sum of many rituals that have accumulated over time, this discussion is clearly and naturally related to his statement about practicing ritual in moderation. It is most immediately evident in Book VI of the Analects, as he advocates the practice of moderation and the maintenance of balance with regard to culture and nature. He notes that, “only when ornament and substance are duly blended do you get the true gentleman” (119, VI. 16). In this particular excerpt, Confucius uses the term ‘ornament’ to represent culture while using the term ‘substance’ to represent nature.

Ultimately, Confucius seems to suggest that there is a dichotomy between culture and nature reminiscent of many of Rousseau’s ideas. However, while Confucius advocates a balance between culture and nature, Rousseau attributes many of the inadequacies of human society to the corrupting influence of culture. In his work “Discourse on the Origin of Inequality,” Rousseau expresses his belief that human society would be better off if it could return to a more natural state. Nevertheless, he struggles with the difficulty of discerning exactly what such an original, natural state would have been like. Finally, he seems to conclude that it is impossible to arrive at any comprehensive understanding of the original, natural state of humanity. Meanwhile, Confucius’ statements with regard to maintaining a balance between nature and culture seem to imply that it is indeed possible to obtain some knowledge about what the natural state of man might be like.

To what extent does Confucius believe that we can obtain knowledge about the natural state of humanity? What would he think of Rousseau’s ideas about the corrupting influence of culture and society? Indeed, the majority of Confucius’ aphorisms seem to be related to how one should conduct oneself within society and in one’s interactions with other people. What might he say about the relationship between culture, society and morality? Would he directly oppose Rousseau and argue that culture and society (in moderation) have had a positive effect on the overall moral development of humanity?

(457 words including internal quotations)