Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.2013-06-19T23:20:05-04:00Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/author/index.php?author=rodney-l-taylor-phdCopyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc.HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.Good old fashioned elbow grease.Partisanship: A Confucian Perspectivetag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.34160692013-06-10T15:27:53-04:002013-06-10T15:42:45-04:00Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rodney-l-taylor-phd/
I write, of course, from my perspective of attempting to present a Confucian perspective on a variety of contemporary issues, a perspective not commonly represented and perhaps seen by many to be of no particular relevance. But allow me my discourse.
The Confucian tradition has historically set its goals not only on the moral learning of the individual, but upon the moral transformation of society at large. Confucius lived and taught in a time of extreme political chaos. He saw the remedy to that chaos to be found in the process of learning, largely a learning that represented the inculcation, at both individual and state level, of the teachings of the ancient sages of China. These teachings of the sages, preserved in the so-called Chinese Classics, were seen as paradigmatic teachings that could transform both self and society.
As Confucian teachings became established as the official ideology of the Chinese state around the beginning of the Common Era, much of the focus of these teachings came to be utilized directly in the governing of the state itself. This was a trend in China that extended to the beginning of the 20th century, spreading as well throughout East Asia as well as into Southeast Asia.
The issue at stake is the relation of Confucian teaching to government and governing, and while I am not an apologist for the abuses of Asian governments across the centuries, there is something to be said for the fundamental relation understood to exist between the process of governing and the teachings finding their origin in Confucius.
Let's begin with the most fundamental statement made by Confucius regarding government and governing. "The Master said, 'To govern (cheng) is to rectify (cheng)" (Analects XII:17: James Legge, Chinese Classics, Volume I, p. 258).
A pun of sorts (cheng is cheng -- two different characters pronounced the same), but from the outset we see the relation that Confucius has established between governing and the process of rectification, a teaching that for Confucius suggests the process of correction or "rectification" toward a moral course on the part of both the individual and the state.
The teaching, however, is far deeper than that basic statement. And for the depth we must look at the individual words or characters involved in the passage. Yes, it is another lesson in the construction and meaning of Chinese characters! Here the focus of our attention is upon the character cheng, translated as "government" as a noun or "to govern" as a verb. This character cheng is a cognate for and ultimately derived from the term cheng, to rectify. The connection is critical to our understanding of the meaning of government.
The additional component of the character for "to govern" suggests the idea of "acting upon" or "pushing into effect." And how do we derive the translation of "government" or "to govern" from this combination? If we combine "rectification" with the idea of "pushing into effect," then the word for government means "to push into effect the process of rectification." Thus Confucius' statement is essentially a definition of government where the definition rests upon the moral role of government to steer or navigate the course of self and society alike.
Against American democracy, such a statement may seem only the very reason for our original American revolution! Stop for a minute, however, to think through the larger implications of the understanding of government in a Confucian context and then consider our recent failure of government in the debacle of partisanship.
There is a short passage in the Analects that seems to address very directly the nature of our present situation and suggest perhaps something of the fundamental problem partisanship represents.
The Master said, "The Noble Person in the world does not set himself either for things or against things; he simply follows what is right" (Analects IV:10, R. L. Taylor, "Confucius, the Analects," p. 25).
Partisanship -- few of us would debate, I suspect, that partisanship is largely the reason for much of the present failure of the political process. The basic function of government (i.e. to govern) has been brought to a grinding halt. In the rush to be either for or against any agenda item proposed, the larger function of governing has been forgotten.
Confucius draws our attention to the role of the Noble Person, chün-tzu, that highest ideal of the Confucian tradition: a person committed to the moral transformation of self and society alike and thus to the creation of a government where the larger purpose of the moral order of the state at large is not forgotten. In fact it is precisely this larger purpose, what Confucius has defined as the essential nature of government itself as rectification, that remains the goal and aspiration of Confucius for government.
Let the petty squabble, let the partisanships reign, and government will always fail to live up to its true character. Let government truly represent a process of rectification for self and society alike and the goal of goodness for all might be realized.
Surely there is plenty of food for thought in these observations from a long-ago observer as we observe our own day and age of crippled government.]]>Confucian Thoughts on Agingtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.32421822013-05-09T12:14:26-04:002013-05-09T12:17:08-04:00Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rodney-l-taylor-phd/
It is not difficult to picture the situation where the addressing of the senior member of the table as "grandma" would be taken as far less than the honorific that was intended. In fact, I can imagine a number of folks who would be insulted and even outraged and never patronize the restaurant again because of what they perceived as inappropriate and demeaning behavior on the part of the waiter to a member of their party.
To call my mother "grandma" however was the highest compliment that our waiter could have paid my mother. He was visibly and vocally honoring her for the role and status she bore in the family, a status that respected and honored her great age, at that time in her mid-90s.
As I myself soon approach another milestone in the aging process, retirement from 40 years of the professoriate in but a few days and a mere year left before I celebrate my 70th birthday, I think a lot about the age I am turning and how it is generally represented in the culture in which we reside. Are we honored for our increasing chronological numbers, that piling on of years, or is it more likely that we will be the brunt of the politically correct but highly derogatory phrase "chronologically challenged"? And often that is only the beginning of the jokes! That dementia can be the basis for humor is itself a rather sad comment about the values our society holds.
Really, however, the issue is not the jokes, but what the jokes represent as a far more pervasive attitude that has largely marginalized and defined the elderly out of any active role or participation in society. Rather than honoring them for all that they have given all their lives for their families and their society, there is a pervading sentiment that such folks are largely irrelevant and if anything, rather an inconvenience, if thought of at all. Society has passed them by. It is youth and youth alone that counts.
What a contrast to the simple honorific offered by our waiter to my mother: "Grandma!"
And as the proverbial question would have it, what does Confucius say?
The focus of the Confucian response is found largely in the importance placed upon the Confucian virtue, hsiao, filial piety -- a virtue that articulates the importance of the relation of parents and children. The character itself is the combination of the character for age and child, thus suggesting the relation of parent and child. Though suggesting to some a subservience of children to their parents, in its largest role its foundation rests with an honor and respect shown of age that is the cornerstone of virtually all of East Asia historically as well as today.
Thus we find Confucius commenting to his disciple Tzu-lu upon the meaning of filial piety and emphasizing that filial piety is a matter of honor and respect, not simply care and support.
The Master said, "The filial piety of nowadays means the support of one's parents. But dogs and horses are able to do something in the way of support; without reverence, what is there is distinguish the one support given from the other?" (Analects II:7: R. L. Taylor, Confucius, the Analects, p.51)
Even in his own time Confucius is suggesting that filial piety for most people means nothing more than providing basic care and support -- providing room and board if you will!
What is it then that would distinguish the filial piety of parent and child? Beyond care and support there is reverence, ching, the honor and respect due the relation of parent and child because it is the product of the love between parent and child.
There is a remarkable dimension of modernity to Confucius' comments. Is it not all too frequent that our exercise of "filial piety" might fulfill the basic requirements of care and support, but extend little further? The loved one is placed in assisted living and then in a nursing home. The bills are paid, but does the care extend further? Does the care reach the full respect of the name "loved one?" Where are the honor, respect and the love that should be the foundation of every human relation?
For me personally the issue we speak to is captured in a very simple but almost invisible way. It is represented by my knowing that anytime I get off an airplane at an East Asian destination, I will be treated with honor and respect and asked if I need assistance (perhaps it's the white beard!) rather than seen as a fumbling and bumbling "senior citizen," to use our society's euphemism!
In the end the issue is as simple as that wonderful honorific our waiter paid my mother: "Grandma." May we not only be so honored ourselves, but always honor others as well!]]>Sitting By a Friend: Confucius on Tragedytag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.30965172013-04-17T13:13:33-04:002013-06-17T05:12:01-04:00Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rodney-l-taylor-phd/Analects usually discussed as a description of Confucius' personality and character, there stands a very short passage (Analects VII: 9) that tells us a good deal about his feelings for others in times of tragedy and how he expresses such feelings. What better response to the tragedy of Boston that engulfs us all.
"When the Master was eating by the side of a mourner, he never ate to the full" (R. L. Taylor, Confucius, the Analects, p. 9).
A simple passage and an equally simple message. Out of respect for the person who is experiencing tragedy and suffering in their life, Confucius demonstrates his sympathy with that person's condition and situation by showing his own restraint in his conduct at a shared meal. To satiate himself with food and drink at such a time would merely demonstrate the degree to which he understood little of his fellow diner's distress and illustrate all too well vey little feeling for his fellow diner.
While the circumstances of the passage call our attention to a very particular situation -- that of mourning and of a meal with a person in mourning, by extension the passage suggests a foundation for a broad response to the suffering of others in situations too numerous to name or number.
The response suggested in this passage is merely one ramification of a broader feeling of Confucius for others that underlies all of his teachings. Let's probe more deeply into the Analects to understand this broader context of feelings for others.
One of the most central passages of Confucius' teachings that permits us to understand his feelings toward others and the centrality of this teaching to all of his teachings is Analects XV:23:
Tzu-kung asked, "Is there not one word that may serve as a rule of practice for all of one's life?" The Master said, "Is not reciprocity such a word? What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others." (R. L. Taylor, Confucius, the Analects, p. 109)
Several passages in the Analects speak to the question Confucius' disciple Tzu-kung raises. The Master has many teachings. Is there not some quintessential teaching in the midst of the plethora of words and discussions?
The answer from Confucius is direct and to the point. Yes, there is, in fact, a single word that covers the breadth of all the teachings Confucius articulates. That word is "reciprocity," the feelings and resulting actions toward others.
Let's look more closely at this word "reciprocity," shu. Chinese characters are more often than not composed of units, other characters, that when combined produce a meaning that approaches the translation we assign to the given character. In the case of the character shu, reciprocity, we have a character that is composed of two simpler characters and it is in their combination that we begin to understand something of this word we translate as reciprocity. The top of the character shu is a character pronounced ju, meaning "like" or "similar." The bottom of the character shu is a character pronounced hsin, meaning "heart" or "mind." Thus the character shu, reciprocity, is the combination of the characters "like" and "mind," to use two of the definitions.
How do we get from our words for "like" and "mind" to the word and the translation of shu as "reciprocity"? Quite simply actually. Combining them together we get something like "like-mindedness." Still, the word we are after is reciprocity, but it is now close. To be of "like-mind" means to be able to identify with another's situation -- to be able to share in and understand the other's situation. If the other's situation is good then there is in shared joy in that situation -- joy for the sake of the other person.
If, on the other hand, the other's situation is less than good and in fact is filled with suffering, then there is response on the basis of understanding the other's plight and recognizing that one has a moral responsibility to respond to it. The like-mindedness is the capacity to put oneself in the situation of the other and thus understand completely and fully that situation of the other
Such response to the situation of the other, particularly the plight and suffering of the other is marked by the common translation of shu as reciprocity. The question that persists, however, is whether reciprocity is actually the best word to describe what is essentially a feeling of other's pain and on the basis of that feeling, a reaching out to address their distress. One of the translations of shu that sometimes appears is "sympathy" the capacity to "sympathize" with the other's distress. The problem with the word sympathy is that it often suggests a certain level of condescension in the relation of one to the other. There is, however, a word that truly expresses "like-mindedness" and its capacity for reaching and responding to the feelings of others - that word is empathy.
Shu as the quintessential teaching of Confucius is best understood as the expression of empathy for the feelings of others.
And how does one act on this empathy"? In a statement predating the biblical reference to the Golden Rule, Confucius articulates the most basic of ethical maxims -- perhaps the true universal ethic. In his words: "What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others." Here truly the feelings of others are addressed!
May we take these words to heart and in our own small ways practice the empathy, the true care for others, the world so desperately needs in this hour.]]>Confucius Say, 'YOLO!'tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.29815332013-04-02T14:02:43-04:002013-06-02T05:12:01-04:00Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rodney-l-taylor-phd/that!"
As I understand the phrase, it is used to suggest a lifestyle that finds what meaning there is in the world only in the here and now, not what might come afterwards. Live with "no thought for the morrow" -- so the expression goes. Pleasure in the here and now. Take it while you can. And, perhaps most importantly, "it is all about me" and only me, with little or no thought for others and the possible ethical responsibilities we have to others even of our own generation, much less future generations! I want my pie-in-the-sky here and now, not by-and- by! And by the way, that pie is only for me! Point made...
Granted that the YOLO perspective captures a certain contemporary world-view, and perhaps even more a certain generational perspective, what explanation might we find for the emergence of this perception of the world? On the world scene we witness almost daily what appears to be a significant decrease in the role of religious traditions in our world. We witness equally an increase in a secularism often disassociated from any ethical foundation. We see as well a rise in ideologies that seem to be more about "me" than the "other guy." Where some might celebrate any or all of these characteristics, it is hard to deny the emergence of "self" and the "here and now" as dominant. With such dominance, the question arises of just how we do contemplate the future, and what responsibility we might have for it.
At its simplest level YOLO has denied any importance to the future -- whether collective or individual. In religious terms questions about the future are referred to as eschatology, the question of the future, the future in terms of what follows this life. And religions and religious perspectives are "all about" eschatology, whether a single life or multiple lives, postulated with goals of Heaven, Enlightenment or any other religious goal!
With eschatology the future counts, in a profound way! To the phrase "What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas," a religious response might well be, "What happens here, leaves here!" The Vegas metaphor by contrast is profoundly YOLO!
So as our eschatological leanings and proclivities have slipped away just as our religious commitments have slipped away, one might ask, is it possible to hold to any world-view other than YOLO in a postmodern and largely post-religion world?
Let's segue back to my son's question: What would Confucius say about that?
It is precisely in the area of eschatology that Confucianism, almost alone among religious traditions, has a distinctive position. Essentially there is no eschatology in Confucianism -- no discussion about what follows life, no ideology about the wince and future of the individual. There is simply no reference to what we might describe as some form of ultimate transformation, what we call soteriology or more commonly salvation, whatever form such a notion might take.
So here is the rub. If Confucianism has no eschatology, then is it not itself potentially closely allied with precisely the perspective born out in the expression YOLO? With no articulation of the future, then are we not in a position to justify precisely the perspective that makes up the foundation of the YOLO perspective? You only live once -- with no principled goal providing guidance for the significance of one's actions for the morrow, we are free to live today's actions with no implication of consequence. Anything goes, anything, that is, that one wants for oneself.
What then is the endpoint of the Confucian tradition? How might we describe that fundamental religious requirement of eschatology when it seems to be left wanting in Confucian expression?
The answer lies in the unique focus found in Confucianism upon life itself, rather than what comes after life. Life is the groundwork for the cultivation of the religious life and it is within life that one fulfills one's religious quest and finds ultimate meaning. It is for Confucius, as he articulates from the very first passage of the Confucian Analects, in a life dedicated to learning, that the seeds of ultimacy are sown and that the deepest meaning of life itself is fulfilled. The goal of Confucianism is nowhere better expressed than in Analects 2:4, an autobiographical footnote of Confucius himself:
The Master said: "At fifteen I had set my will upon learning. At thirty, I stood firm. At forty, I had no doubts. At fifty, I knew the will of Heaven. At sixty, I heard it with a listening ear. At seventy, I could follow my heart's desire without overstepping what was right." (R. L. Taylor, Confucius, the Analects, p. 121)
The goal is the fulfillment of a life of learning such that one comes to accord with the Way of Heaven, T'ien Tao, not in some eschatological point beyond life, but within one's life itself. And what of the afterlife? Simply of no concern and thus no articulation.
What then of YOLO? If YOLO is built around a world-view that sees little or no meaning in life other than the immediate gratification of what the self desires with no thought for the morrow, then Confucianism provides a most interesting antidote. Confucianism does not propose meaning to life because of the hereafter, but meaning without a hereafter. In this respect Confucianism's response answers the void left by the post-modern articulation of "meaning" expressed by the attitude of YOLO. Maybe there are grounds for optimism after all!]]>Winter Solstice: A Confucian Viewtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.22723492012-12-24T17:20:26-05:002013-02-23T05:12:01-05:00Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rodney-l-taylor-phd/
I am reminded of this progression by adjusting my solar panels on our mountain retreat to their near vertical position -- to capture as much of the diminishing light as possible with the now lower horizon line and fewer hours per day of sunlight. Writing from an off-grid setting miles up a dirt road at 9,000 feet in the Central Rockies of Colorado, I fill more hours of each day with "chopping wood and carrying water," as the Ch'an/Zen phrase would have it. And what a joy it is, kerosene lamps bringing light into steadily increasing hours of darkness each eve.
And then the nadir of light is reached -- that point at which light is closest to extinction and darkness pervades: Winter Solstice.
Religions worldwide, ancient and modern, have sought to address this point of greatest darknness be it by great bonfires burning through the longest night, decoration with greens or the burning of candles as reminders of the persistence of light, even "in the darkest hour."
Light will prevail, our traditions tell us, darkness will recede and even in the stony stillness of winter, life will flourish again. So we have the foundational metaphor of light and the particular meaning in this moment of the nadir of light, followed as it always is by its gradual increase.
The question before us is how Winter Solstice is viewed and interpreted in an even larger setting. Where world religions are often seen to incorporate the metaphor of darkness and light, little has been considered of a Confucian view of darkness and light or the nadir of light at Winter Solstice.
And, as the proverbial question would have it, what would Confucius say?
The answer, as one might expect, is that Confucius himself, like many religious founders, has little to say about a great variety of subjects. And Winter Solstice is certainly one of those! That does not exclude the topic from discussion in the later Confucian tradition, however, and one finds profound reflections upon the metaphors of light and dark as foundational to much of East Asian thought.
The most basic structure of such thought is found is the well-known symbol of Yin/Yang, a symbol ubiquitous to East Asian history and cultures. The Chinese characters contain the essential meaning of light and dark as ever changing phases of the coursing of all things, Nature and humanity alike. The totality of this changing and transforming universe is what generally is referred to as the Tao, the Way.
The motion of yin/yang is a circular one -- more a spiraling one -- ever changing between one phase and the other. As yin fulfills itself, inherent within it are the seeds of yang, and visa versa. All changes occur within the goodness of the nature of Nature, for there is no evil in the cosmology, most certainly not in darkness any more than light.
The major source for the philosophy of yin/yang is the Chinese Classic the I-Ching, "Book of Changes." Within the "Book of Changes" much of the philosophical speculations concerning yin/yang is found in the commentary hsi-tz'u chuan, "Great Treatise." It was often to this source that Confucians -- Chinese, Koreans and Japanese -- turned to understand the cosmology of yin/yang theory.
So, how does yin/yang theory connect to Winter Solstice?
To answer this question I turn to the writings of Okada Takehiko, a contemporary Japanese Confucian; and one of his books I translated a number of years ago, "Zazen to Seiza" (Buddhist and Confucian Meditation) (See R. L. Taylor, The Confucian Way of Contemplation, 1988).
This teaching focuses upon the "storing of wisdom," chih-ts'ang, a phrase the Confucian philosopher Chu Hsi (1130-1200) found in the "Great Treatise" of the "Book of Changes." The source of this teaching for Chu Hsi begins with the fundamental Confucian teaching of the Four Beginnings, ssu-tuan, of the moral nature of each person -- goodness, righteousness, propriety and wisdom. Chu Hsi and a lineage of teachers direct to Okada himself extend such "beginnings" to the nature of the universe and interpret wisdom, chih, as the endpoint and fulfillment of such teachings.
And here is the connection to Winter Solstice. When those same Four Beginnings are placed in the context of the four seasons, wisdom, chih, corresponds to winter.
The metaphor is profound: Wisdom for these Confucians is the endpoint of the Four Beginnings and it is best understood within the context of winter.
In Okada's own words:
"Stored wisdom is boundless and empty, but in it there is included all existence. It is the totality of principle with no distinguishing characteristics, and within it there is a vigorous activity. Therefore it is the unity of existence and activity. In terms of the four seasons it is the moment of midnight of the winter solstice, and it corresponds to the point of time when quietude is completely exhausted and subtle function is about to begin moving." (Okada, Zazen to seiza in Taylor, Confucian Way of Contemplation, p.148)
There are many technical points of later Confucian metaphysics in this passage, but what should be very clear is the degree to which Winter Solstice holds meaning as a profound metaphor for the acquisition of wisdom within the Confucian tradition.
And so, as we come once again to that shortest day and deepest night, consider the ways in which humankind has sought to find meaning, profound meaning, in the cycling of light and dark, the yin and yang of cosmic process, with the Confucian recognition of wisdom as that which is more often than not seen as "through a glass, darkly" (1 Corinthians 13:12).]]>Confucian Thoughts on Naturetag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.21153582012-11-14T08:00:08-05:002013-01-14T05:12:01-05:00Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rodney-l-taylor-phd/
A simple question emerges: Do we fulfill ourselves as humans by way of constant connectedness to more and more information or is there a fundamental necessity for reflection, self-reflection, to understand, define and develop who we are ultimately as human beings?
I find it interesting that recently the call has been made to separate oneself from all the communicative technologies -- from the 24/7 stream of constant information. Periods of separation, aloneness and self-reflection have been proposed as the antidote to a self defined largely by virtual connectedness.
Yes, take a moratorium from virtual connectedness -- the simple ones -- don't use your cell phone when in your car -- not just the danger of driving with the devices but as an opportunity to rediscover the world around you and possibly something about yourself as well.
And don't use your cell phone when you take a walk with you children, let alone a walk alone!
A greater commitment: take a moratorium on e-mail, Twitter, Facebook, texting and the web from say Friday at 5 p.m. until Monday morning.
And push it further! How about that walk alone -- with just Nature? When is the last time you stepped into Nature at all, let alone unencumbered?
Caution! You might be really bored with yourself and your immediate environment initially - but keep trying. You might find nothing less than yourself in the process and perhaps your loved ones as well! You and they can be more than a face on Facebook.
The New York Times has just featured a piece called "A Life Unplugged" suggesting that "for parents worried that their children might be spending too much of their young lives on line, Sandy provided a learning moment" (Nov. 11, 2012). The loss of the virtual connectedness of the grid in the storm has found an unintended consequence! Real time connectedness to others and to themselves -- and real priorities -- the health and well being of a person, not their virtual persona!
So what of Nature and of a Confucian view of Nature and what is its relevance here?
Even a tradition such as Confucianism, as focused upon societal and familial obligations, duties and responsibilities as it was, still saw the value of Nature as a deep and profound source for the learning and transformation of the individual.
And Nature requires the stillness and quietness of the individual -- complete absorption and thus disconnection from 'the grid," as it were.
I want to introduce the thoughts of one Confucian, Kao P'an-lung (1562-1626), a rigid follower of Confucius who nonetheless focused much of his attention upon Nature as the basis for his own self-understanding.
My quotes from Kao come from an essay he wrote in 1598, Shui-chü chi, "Recollections of the Water Dwelling," his thoughts from a small retreat he built for himself on a tiny island in the midst of an expansive lake. He is of course surrounded by Nature and it is to Nature he turns for his self-reflection, self-discovery and self-understanding.
"Dwelling here at length, the owner (i.e. himself), witnessing the risings and settings of sun and moon, the formation and dispersion of cloud and mist, the flourishing and perishing of trees and grasses, the comings and goings of animals and fishes, merged in turn into the same water of the four seasons and all things. In it all he no longer thought of himself."
"Dwelling here even longer, the owner, coming to rest in the vast silence of Heaven (T'ien), feasting upon the richness of the Primal Harmony (T'ai-ho), straddling the Flowing Forces (hao-ch'i), winging to and fro, ascended and descended through the Gate of the Inexhaustible (wu-ch'iung chih men). In it all he no longer thought of the water."
"Someone said, 'Your pleasures are so small and you are so isolated.' The owner ... said, 'It is the Creator most assuredly who retired me in this manner..." (Kao tzu i shu10/48b-49a, R.L. Taylor, 'Cultivation of Sagehood,' 1978)
I translated these words many years ago now, and yet their relevancy seems even greater to this time then when I first set to work researching his writings. There is much that is very technical about his thought as well as the language he uses and yet nonetheless his message is timeless.
Turn to Nature, he says, not as an escape or a shirking of responsibilities, but as a path of self-discovery and fulfillment. His words are those of a Confucian contemplating the significance of Nature in the path of learning. As stillness and quietude prevail in Nature, Kao comes face to face with himself and through that process he transforms himself toward the ideals uppermost to Confucius himself -- to become a moral person, a person of goodness, jen, and create a moral world for all of us.
And what about us then? Are we not more than the virtual connectedness our technology has created for us? Surely, we are more than our Facebook image, our texted message or our Twitter words. But when we are bombarded 24/7 with virtual realities, what chance do we have to peer behind the persona to the self as self? Therefore step back, step out of the mainstream, step off-grid -- take a path less traveled -- and discover a world awaits where Nature's path brings the self to the self. That is all the Confucian tradition is saying.]]>Confucius on Naturetag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.18935992012-09-28T13:00:09-04:002012-11-28T05:12:01-05:00Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rodney-l-taylor-phd/
We appear to have an insatiable appetite for more and more things, more and more comforts and always the "latest and greatest" technology, guaranteed to bring us even greater ease and pleasure!
To this world of environmental disaster we have created, what would Confucius say?
We know, of course, that such depletion of resources cannot continue. We do have a finite earth and I for one am not much for the belief that our problems will be overcome in a science-fiction-medium by the exploitation of resources of other worlds yet to be visited.
The insatiable appetite must at some point be controlled before we simply have expended our critical resources and/or we have irrevocably changed our climate to lead to a path of horrific destruction of the beauty of planet earth!
We can quote Confucius in his suggestions that the simple life, a life of few desires, will permit the return to a harmonious way of life, what in our own age we might highlight as an environmental point of view. But what do Confucius and the Confucian tradition have to tell us about the relation between humankind and nature?
The recent general topic of nature and religion has grown out of a number of these concerns and has asked the fundamental question of whether human religions might offer some foundation for thinking through some of these questions from a new and different perspective.
Whether one is for or against religion per se or thinks there is only one true religion, religion is fundamentally about meaning, the ultimate meaning, of humankind and human destiny. What we face today is the realization that to address the question of such meaning and destiny, it has become imperative to expand the context of our own meaning to include the context of all the earth. We are after all, as any biologist will tell you, ultimately linked to all life on the earth. In fact such recognition was the origin of the very term ecology, a term that has now come of age though perhaps not of full understanding!
Over the past several decades the scholarly world has begun to take the discussion of religion and nature seriously. The 10-volume series from Harvard "Religions of the World and Ecology" has provided extensive scholarship examining the role and meaning of nature within the historical as well as contemporary context of major religious traditions of the world.
One of those 10 volumes is on Confucianism: "Confucianism and Ecology: The Interrelation of Heaven, Earth and Humans" (Harvard, 1998). Confucianism might seem like an unlikely candidate for a volume devoted to the relation of religion and nature! After all isn't Confucianism all about humans as moral beings within the web of family and societal relations?
The answer to this question about the fundamental character of the Confucian tradition holds much for us to contemplate in our pursuit of the relation of religion and nature and the manner in which historic religious traditions have responded to the understanding of this issue.
Simply stated, Confucianism has a great deal to say about the relation of humankind and nature, but don't expect to see extensive explicit comments in the foundational works of the tradition. In other words, in the case of Confucianism, there is very little in the Analects of Confucius that addresses the relation of religion and nature. Would one expect anything different? Confucius was addressing the crisis of self and society in the sixth century B.C.E., not the status of the natural world in a world without the crisis of climate change.
Where does one find the extensive commentary of Confucianism on the relation of humankind and nature? Such commentary comes in the many centuries following the foundational figures and texts of the tradition. It unfolds naturally as the tradition becomes more self-consciously philosophical about its assumptions of humankind's place in the order of things. It is a natural evolutionary development of its religious and philosophical ideas and speculations.
Major later Chinese Confucian philosophers such as Chou Tun-i (1017-1073), Chang Tsai (1020-1073), Wang Yang-ming (1472-1529) or the Japanese Confucian Kaibara Ekken (1630-1714) have a great deal to tell us about the intimate relation of humankind and nature, thoughts that would have been very foreign to the founding figures of the tradition.
Is the issue any different with any religious tradition? The message here is not just to focus upon the foundational figures as the source of ideas about religion and nature, but to watch the ways in which the tradition has evolved to address what now is the most pressing issue of our time. It has been said with some degree of wisdom that a religious tradition is not a static entity. It evolves and develops, bringing its perspective to issues of our own day. Anything less is only a mark of its irrelevancy.
I want in subsequent blogs to address the speculations of these later Confucian authors and we will begin to understand the appropriateness of the subtitle of the Confucian and ecology volume: "The Interrelation of Heaven, Earth and Humans."]]>The Simple Life: Confucius as Taoist?tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.17648192012-08-16T11:06:34-04:002012-10-16T05:12:28-04:00Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rodney-l-taylor-phd/
Let's begin with a swiping view of the religious and philosophical roots of Chinese culture. If for purposes of this discussion we limit these stereotypes to that of Taoism and Confucianism, we find ourselves often in a realm of mutually exclusive images, suggesting highly contrasting views of the world and of the human role in and with that world.
At the level of stereotypes Taoism is all about Nature and the relation of humankind with Nature. The point will frequently be made that humankind is at its best when it has forsaken all that makes it uniquely human and embraced the Way, Tao, which is envisioned at the natural coursing of things. Going along with this image is a sense of stepping outside of human endeavors and the roles and responsibilities of the individual in human society.
By contrast Confucianism is seen and often described as focused almost exclusively upon the human endeavor. It is all about humanity.The Confucian path is seen as the development of self and society in which human fulfillment is measured by the culmination of the human potential in relation to others and in society in general.
Though such images might frequently be found in popular accounts purporting to represent the quintessence of Eastern wisdom, the history and the intellectual context of each tradition suggests a far more complex and nuanced interpretation.
Taoism is simply not all about Nature anymore than Confucianism is all about society and to treat them in this fashion is simply to succumb to the stereotypes of a popular persuasion.
Taoism has a lot more to do with human society than the oft-quoted stereotypes of the Taoist mystic who has renounced all attachments to the world for the splendors of living with Nature.
In turn, Confucianism has a great deal more to do with Nature than the popular image that suggests a tradition strictly and totally bound by the limits of human society and the role of the individual in relation to family and society at large.
Since I write my blog with reference to Confucianism, let me suggest that Confucianism has a great deal to say about Nature and sees the human endeavor as fitting into the larger coursing of the Way as humankind harmonizing with the ways of Nature.
It is for this reason that it has been fair and reasonable to begin to discuss Nature and religion or ecology and religion as a part of Confucianism just as the same relation is seen as part of virtually every religious tradition. Mary Evelyn Tucker and John Grim as Series Editors of "Religions of the World and Ecology," the 10-volume series from Harvard, have brought the issue home to the world of scholarship and beyond in now a general appreciation of humankind contemplating his/her relation to Nature at large.
Here, I simply want to call attention to a passage in the Analects of Confucius where Confucius is extolling the simple life, the life of Nature if you will, a description one might more anticipate being found in one of the collections of early Taoist writings than the foundational work of the Confucian tradition.
"The Master said, 'With coarse rice to eat, with water to drink, and my bended arm for a pillow, I still have joy amid these things..." (Analects VII:15)
Confucius sounds more Taoist than a Taoist! Is Confucius a Taoist? Not at all.
Confucius is simply saying that the simple life can be just as readily the foundation for ultimate meaning of self and the universe as the riches of all that society can offer. In fact, he goes on to suggest that such riches acquired without true humaneness offer the individual only a vacuous and delusionary sense of self.
Maybe then the simple life is the way to best find ultimate human understanding. A timely piece of advice for our own day and age, I must say. And this advice, from a Confucian no less!
So several conclusions might be considered:
First, in the matter of stereotypes, be cautious and don't succumb to popular and easy interpretations without a thorough understanding of the larger context out of which ideas and practices have arisen. It takes learning, lots of learning -- one of my favorite themes! Let's think through the richness of a worldview for a change, not be content with its simplest and easiest interpretation. Remember my favorite Confucius quote "Learning without thought is perilous" (Analects II:15), and let's get beyond thoughtless acceptance of those readily available stereotypes.
Second, on the matter of Confucius, consider Confucius as holding a very subtle understanding of the relation of humankind and Nature, not simply the stereotypical rejection of Nature with an anthropocentric (human-centered) worldview. Let's get beyond the stereotypes of both Confucianism and Taoism and every other religious tradition for that matter.
Third, consider the way in which Confucius is demonstrating in this passage the degree to which humankind can find meaning within the context of a simple life, one measured by a compatible and harmonious relationship between humankind and Nature. And listen to the call for a simple life and consider that call as a call of equal relevance to our own age.
I plan to address the topic of Nature and religion in subsequent blogs to specifically demonstrate the ways in which Confucianism has not only developed an environmental ethic, but a metaphysics and thus a cosmology that moves from anthropocentric to "cosmocentric" (universe-centered) where humankind is seen as part of the greater whole, not unlike a position of deep ecology! I know, it blows away all the stereotypes!!! Amen. Stay tuned!]]>Testing and Blogging: What Would Confucius Say?tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.16795632012-07-24T07:30:01-04:002012-09-23T05:12:09-04:00Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rodney-l-taylor-phd/
What is the technical nature of learning? The Chinese term translated as learning, hsüeh, suggests a broad base of engagement in the acquisition of knowledge. Knowledge is understood as we would understand the term visa vie Webster's dictionary, "the sum or range of what has been perceived, discovered or learned." Knowledge is information about things, data or facts, if you will.
For the Confucian, however, and unlike Webster's definition, learning is a broader term and a much deeper and more profound term than just knowledge acquisition alone.
The Confucian tradition has historically focused largely upon learning as textual learning, the mastery of which was demonstrated in one's knowledge and application of the so-called Chinese Classics, ching. Beyond this more narrow definition, however, learning has always extended to virtually every other form of activity, including observation of the natural world and human relationships, be they special moral relations or society at large.
While such activities produced the acquisition of knowledge, and a very broad base of knowledge, the agenda of learning is still broader than mere knowledge alone.
Such learning in Confucian terms is always directed toward becoming a moral human being, a Noble Person, chün tzu, and its sees life itself as the unfoldment of a great learning exercise. The result of such learning is self-knowledge, self-understanding if you will. And from the Confucian perspective such learning, self-learning, results directly in the development of the moral self and its capacity for moral action.
Beginning with Confucius himself learning remains as quintessential Confucian teaching to this very day! The Confucian Analects opens with a statement of the centrality of learning for Confucius, "The Master said: 'Is it not a joy to learn with a constant effort and application.'" (Analects I:1)
What then of learning in a modern context? What would Confucius say?
To address the question of modernity and Confucian learning we must understand all that goes into the process of learning from a Confucian point of view. The relevant passage from the Analects is short and to the point and yet of major import in understanding how Confucius intended his understanding of the nature of learning.
"The Master said: 'Learning without thought is labor lost; thought without learning is perilous." (Analects II:15)
In this passage another mental processes is added to the understanding of learning -- thought or thinking, ssu. We have seen learning as the overarching goal, a goal that extends beyond the mere acquisition of knowledge to the creation and activation of moral knowledge and moral action.
Thought or thinking, ssu, is also a part of the larger process of learning, but is particularly directed at what we might describe as reasoning about or reflecting upon the knowledge acquired. With the addition of ssu we begin to see the way in which Confucius describes learning as more than just the acquisition of knowledge. And with this "more than" quality, we begin to see the dynamics of learning for what it can be and wherein in turn lie its dangers.
The ramifications of this seemingly very simple passage from the Analects are enormous.
The first part of the passage says, "Learning without thought is labor lost."
What's the issue here?
Confucius is suggesting that knowledge acquisition alone is not enough to count as learning. Knowledge acquisition without thought is a mere collection of data points, facts, if you will -- the simple accumulation of data/facts with no capacity to entertain thought in or about the raw knowledge acquired.
To give forth of such "knowledge" is merely to reiterate or regurgitate what has been acquired. There is no ability to learn from or about the knowledge -- data in, data out, or at its worst, junk in, junk out! There is no learning, no self-understanding, no development of a moral self and moral action. Truly labor lost!
Does it remind you of the potential fallacy today of believing, as some if not many do, that learning can be measured by "teaching to the test"?
The second part of the passage says, "Thought without learning is perilous."
What's the issue here?
Confucius is wary of thought alone without a foundation in knowledge. He is concerned with both the content and intent of thought. Thought alone for Confucius has no content, no foundation in knowledge. In turn it has no intent toward the acquisition of knowledge as part of the larger agenda of learning, moral learning and action of the self.
Thought as reasoning and reflection needs to ground itself in a foundation of knowledge. From this root arises the capacity to grow in learning toward the ideal of being a moral person. Rootless thought as an end unto itself is seen as perilous of the learning process.
Does it remind you of the potential peril of our own development of social media, where sometimes blogging runs the risk of thought without knowledge? While blogging can be a positive steppingstone in the building of a learning process, it also suggests a cautionary warning -- rootless thought runs the risk of abandoning the larger goal of learning.
Does the Confucian understanding of true learning question the limits of our use of testing and blogging or at least a reevaluation of their roles?]]>Kool-Aid, Hemlock and Confuciustag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.14497812012-04-26T14:52:16-04:002012-06-26T05:12:01-04:00Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rodney-l-taylor-phd/
Profound differences, however, separate the two beverages and thus their metaphoric interpretations!
We would do well to stop for a moment and think through these metaphors -- Kool-Aid and hemlock. How could these two beverages, both involved in acts of suicide, come to have such profound differences in meaning?
Drinking the Kool-Aid is of course a reference to the Jonestown Massacre of 1978 when the followers of the Jonestown Temple of the Reverend Jim Jones committed mass suicide by drinking what is generally believed to have been a Kool-Aid-like beverage that had been laced with cyanide. The result was the mass suicide of more than 900 followers of Reverend Jones who lived in the remote commune of Jonestown in the nation of Guyana.
The resulting metaphor, "drinking the Kool-Aid," has come to be used for blind belief and unquestioning acceptance. Its most apt reference is to followers of a particular religious belief where all rational consideration has been put aside and a belief has been accepted with such total commitment that the belief is held even to the point of self-destruction.
To drink hemlock is also a metaphor held deeply in Western culture though of much greater antiquity than the recent event of Jonestown. The circumstance referenced by hemlock refers of course to the trial and eventual punishment of self-assisted suicide by the famous Athenian philosopher Socrates after he is tried and found guilty of "impious acts," supposed crimes against the Greek city-state of Athens in 399 BCE.
The trial and the resulting death of Athens most famous citizen, Socrates, has been the occasion for viewing suicide not as a blind obedience to an inchoate belief system, but as a righteous stand against forces that seek to silence opposition to blind beliefs, in Socrates' case the state itself.
Thus drinking the Kool-Aid comes to mean acquiescence to blind belief while drinking the hemlock by contrast comes to mean opposition to blind belief. The difference could not be more profound. Two drinks -- two different worlds.
And what would Confucius say?
As it turns out, the Confucian Analects has several direct comments about taking a righteous stand and, in so doing, not submitting to the potentially false and erroneous authority of others and their beliefs and practices.
"The determined scholar and the person of goodness will not seek to live at the expense of injuring their goodness. They will even sacrifice their lives to preserve their goodness complete." (Analects: XV:8)
Or again,
"The scholar, trained for public duty, seeing threatening danger, is prepared to sacrifice his life. When the opportunity for gain is presented to him, he thinks of righteousness... Such a person commands our approbation indeed." (Analects: XIX:1)
Kool-Aid or hemlock?
The passages suggest a stand of righteousness, a stand for moral goodness, come what may, where one must be prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice -- death.
The commitment to righteousness is in Confucian terms a far higher calling then the potential compromises exacted for the continuation of life. Drinking the hemlock might become the price one pays for a moral stand, a stand of righteous indignation.
Far easier it seems to drink the Kool-Aid -- far easier to follow, follow those who also follow.
And here is the basic question. Do we all have our price? Do we fold, do we compromise, do we give in -- do we all have a price? Or in the words of the theme of our commentary, do we all drink the Kool-Aid?
Did Socrates have his price, did he compromise, and did he fold under threat of the ultimate form of challenge - punishment by self-sacrifice - death at his own hands?
No! He accepted the consequences of his position - he stood on the grounds of righteousness, knowing, as Confucius knew, that for a moral position, the ultimate price might have to be paid.
He drank the bitter hemlock. He did not drink the sweet Kool-Aid.
And so we come to our own time and our own cultural context and we might ask ourselves, is our preferred drink sweet or bitter? Do we find it easier to simply follow, without question, without fuss, regardless of the conditions and consequences of the world we have constructed?
Do we all drink the sweet Kool-Aid? Might there be a few of us who prefer the bitter hemlock?
As Socrates and Confucius have provided profound respective metaphors, East and West, for the conviction of one's moral values, might we not hope that there are others for whom a moral stance is more importance than blind faith and unquestioning acceptance]]>Civility: A Contemporary Confucian Pleatag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.13954252012-04-09T13:53:00-04:002012-06-09T05:12:01-04:00Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rodney-l-taylor-phd/
Most of the time "civility" appears to be nothing but an old fashioned and out-of-fashion reminiscence of a by-gone era.
What has taken the place of civility in contemporary society may well represent "freedom of expression," but do we really benefit by having achieved the lowest common denominator of human expression as common parlance and conduct?
Is it really necessary to "give someone the finger" as an expression of the most minor of annoyances? (e.g. The guy behind you does not like the way you are driving!) Must we express ourselves daily in common discourse in what in another age would have been deemed a "vulgar tongue"? Must disagreements become the basis for personal attacks on the character of another person?
Dare we ask where lies dignity and respect?
Several months ago The New York Times (Sunday, February 5, 2012) carried an article suggesting that in South Korea an initiative has been undertaken to address the lack of civility that has become endemic of our contemporary world and Korean society in particular.
The initiative involves the reintroduction of Confucian education.
It is spearheaded by Korea's oldest private Confucian Academy, Sosu Seowon. Opening originally in 1543, the academy has seen a growing number of school children attending the academy over the past several years for extracurricular education in Confucian values. The country has some 150 such academies that have reopened to offer the same kind of education. Multiple thousands of students are involved in this educational initiative.
And what is the education offered? It is learning focused upon civility, upon the importance of community and family in a time where the dominant paradigm has shifted to monetary and material success of the individual seemingly at the sacrifice of numerous values.
The drum beat of the contemporary world's mantra continues -- me, money, me, money...
Perhaps, however, in the crazed competition for the world economic market something intrinsic to the soul and character of the Korean people had been lost. Deeply steeped in a heritage of Confucian learning and values, South Korea like other Asian nations, often saw much of modernization as a necessary rejection of its Confucian roots. And there are good reasons why much of the past was rejected. I am not justifying the past simply as the past.
The lesson came home, however, with the collapse of the halcyon days of the financial bubble for South Korea. The importance of the traditional heritage was suddenly more important than the newly found materialist opulence. The mania of materialism seems only to have separated people from each other and destroyed the foundation of civility at the deepest level of society, community and family. So-called modernization had taken its toll on the soul of Korean society.
Though we do not have a historical foundation of Confucianism ourselves, perhaps the mania of materialism have also taken a toll on our own tradition of values of respect and dignity. We may be "richer" by far through the "benefits" of modernization, but it is perhaps also the case that something has been lost in the process. Respect and dignity seem often to be the first casualties, and with their loss comes the loss of basic civility.
And what is Confucius' teaching on civility?
"To subdue oneself and return to propriety is goodness... Look not at what is contrary to propriety; listen not to what is contrary to propriety; speak not what is contrary to propriety; make no movement that is contrary to propriety..." (Analects XII:1)
Strong words and a strong code of conduct, an antidote perhaps to a world pervaded by its own strong (and expletive!) words and conduct that manifest so often only a forgetfulness of even the most basic standards of civility.
Respect and dignity -- where are they? -- Certainly not in giving someone "the finger" or using expletives in virtually all day-to-day discourse!
Confucius' passage suggests that "civility" is defined in terms of propriety, li, a virtue that emphasizes an inner attitude of respect and dignity toward others and the building of community. It suggests as well the need to "subdue the self," k'e chi, what is bound to be a very unpopular notion in an age where "freedom of expression" dominates civility.
"Freedom of expression" -- oh sure, the world we have created is all about "freedom of expression!" There seems to be no goal more important today and we certainly don't want to ever limit any freedom of expression!
And the mantra of "me" marches on...
Surely, however, the very dignity of the notion of "freedom of expression" is at best compromised, however, by its lowest common denominator. Such "compromise" is nothing short of prostitution -- a word whose basic meaning suggests taking something at less than its true meaning. What better way to describe where "freedom of expression" has taken us as a culture and as a community?
Must we dwell where dignity and respect no longer have a home, no longer define us as human beings, and no longer chart the long course of extraordinary human achievement? Should not human achievement, however, be more about building upon what is best about us as a species, not the lowest common denominator?
The answer to that question, at least for South Korea, is to reintroduce schools for the teaching of Confucian values as its own antidote to a world where the ability to act and talk with dignity and respect, civility, if you will, seem only vestiges of a by-gone era.
And how and when do we address our own lack of civility?]]>Sustainability, Wendell Berry and Confuciustag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.13382382012-03-18T21:23:14-04:002012-05-18T05:12:01-04:00Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rodney-l-taylor-phd/
Berry, author of more than 50 books crisscrossing genres of essay, poetry and novel, has presented a penetrating analysis of the malaise of American society. His seminal work, The Unsettling of America: Culture & Agriculture (1977), argues for the restoration of community and culture to the values of a life where sustainability is grounded in moral values for the way in which we treat ourselves and others as well as the land itself.
Berry speaks forcefully and eloquently to the loss of our sustainability in our loss to the pressures of a commercial world whose only product is not "progress," but the material aggrandizement centered upon the generation of "me."
He speaks passionately of those elements of our society that have gone the way of corporate America -- family values, community values, societal values, and agrarian values -- all gone in the name of the mighty dollar.
Behind these observations lies the thoughts of a man who has farmed in the hills of Kentucky for multiple decades and who is profoundly religious in his Christian faith, a faith he sees as potentially instrumental in returning humankind to their roots of a true moral community.
As Berry seeks analogs of a model for moral community, he finds Confucius. And what would Confucius say?
Lets look at the ways in which Berry finds Confucius and Confucian teachings a model for the very kind of community Berry sees as quintessential to the rectification of American society.
In his essay "The Way of Ignorance" in the book of the same name (2005), Berry cites example after example of what he refers to as the profound and arrogant ignorance of humankind as we stumble forward toward our own destruction and the ruination of the world in which we live. He talks of the necessity of a change in the human spirit, a change in outlook, a change that will bring humanity to realize the vanity of its ways.
Such a change, what he calls a "change of heart," is part, he believes, of the quintessential core of every religion. Granted that it is seminal to all religious traditions, Berry says he finds particularly insightful the way in which the call for change is spoken to in Confucian teachings.
The particular Confucian teaching that is primarily the object of his focus is a short text, Ta-hsüeh, Great Learning or in the translation of Ezra Pound used by Berry, The Great Digest. It has been one of the most important of Confucian writings throughout East Asia for the last 2000 years. Combined with three other texts, Confucian Analects, Mencius and Doctrine of the Mean, it was a critical part of what became known as the Four Books, the collection that was the primary basis for all Confucian education up to the 20th century throughout the Confucian world.
What is the teaching of the Great Learning? It is a model of the path of learning to become a person of goodness and humaneness, taking the individual from self-learning to learning in the world through rectification of self, family, society and the world at large. This is a learning that begins with the thorough learning and discipline of the self.
Just as Confucius had said that the Noble Person, chün tzu, takes responsibility for himself while the petty person always blames others (Analects XV:20), the Great Learning is rooted in the importance of the transformation of the individual first and foremost. Such a change in the individual is the apriori condition to any change or transformation that can be anticipated in society or the world at large.
And what is the nature of this change in the individual? It is the learning of goodness and humaneness, jen, exemplified by the model of the Noble Person, chün tzu, a figure committed to learning for the transformation of the self in order to lead in the transformation of the world.
The Great Learning offers a learning that focuses upon the "change of heart" Berry sees as so crucial to our own time and condition, a way in which there can be a rectification toward goodness of self and society and thus the sustainability of our world.
Such learning is the antidote for Berry to what he sees as the arrogance, the greed, and the selfishness that constitutes the dominant cultural paradigm of our own time -- individual, society and world out of control with their own self-absorption. Sustainability, on the other hand, demands a moral commitment to self and society alike. It can be said in no clearer way then when Berry quotes the Great Learning in The Unsettling of America: Culture & Agriculture, "... wanting good government in their states, they first established order in their own families; wanting order in the home, they first disciplined themselves...."
From ancient China to the contemporary hill farms of Kentucky -- a universal message in response to a universal problem.]]>Confucius on David Brookstag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.12599552012-02-10T10:11:22-05:002012-04-11T05:12:01-04:00Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rodney-l-taylor-phd/New York Times. I don't always agree with him, however I find his arguments cogent if not at times compelling, articulating views I like to take seriously and ponder.
Brooks' How to Fight the Man is a fascinating piece about the poverty of ideological rebellion without intellectual foundation. His example, one well known to HuffPost Religion readers, is Jefferson Bethke's YouTube video "Why I Hate Religion, but Love Jesus," a video that has now received more than 2 million hits and counting.
Brooks' point comes back to a larger issue. As he suggests, we live in a time that sees much protest against many of our institutions, be they political or religious institutions. Yet such protest is rarely grounded in significant let alone adequate intellectual foundation.
Taking the argument to the next level, the issue is a straightforward one. If one is going to protest, one needs an intellectual superstructure, a world-view if you will, within which to build an argument, to build a protest, and to provide an alternative to that which is protested. Otherwise it is just protest and as such is vacuous, and essentially incapable of soliciting change in any meaningful manner.
As Brooks suggests, few people are good at creating their own world-views and education generally has failed in its role of presenting alternative world-views in any serious fashion.
What is one to do?
And what does Confucius have to say about it?
Well, it turns out that there is a passage, a very short passage at that, in the Analects of Confucius that addresses exactly the issue raised by Brooks -- protests without intellectual foundation.
The Master said, "Learning without thought is labor lost; thought without learning is perilous." (Analects II:15)
Lets look at the passage in more detail. Confucius is making the distinction between mental processes, learning, hsüeh, and thought, ssu. Learning is the acquisition of knowledge, thought is the deliberation about what has been learned, the processes of reasoning, deliberating and reflecting.
The first statement of the passage -- "Learning without thought is labor lost" -- means the acquiring of knowledge with no mental process other than storage is simply a waste of time. But most importantly, knowledge unto itself is only data until it has been transformed through the utilization of mental processes. Might as well be nothing but a computer hard drive with lots of storage!
As human beings, however, there is more to leaning then just storage of data. For Confucius such learning, to be meaningful, must be put to use. To put learning to use is to utilize thought and with thought to apply learning to the implementation of goodness for both self and society.
As such we have a strong intellectual foundation to build upon, even to build a better world.
And yet our own educational system seems to have missed the connection of learning and thought. How is the contemporary educational system so readily described in the politics of educational philosophy? Teach to the test! Don't worry about anything else, least of all, real learning! Just teach to the test!
To teach to the test means nothing more than the acquisition of knowledge for nothing other than a meaningless exercise in the regurgitation of knowledge back.
Knowledge in, knowledge out -- no thought. Is that the definition of learning? Confucius thinks not.
The second statement of the passage -- "thought without learning is perilous."
Here we come to the chief argument offered by Brooks. To offer up a thought is nothing more than just that -- a thought -- if it is not first grounded in real learning. To offer protest without an argument grounded in thorough knowledge is in fact to offer no protest at all, for it is as if passing clouds, ideas floating with no tie to the earth itself.
All the reasoning, reflecting and deliberating in the world will not bring those thoughts to bear fruit unless they are firmly planted in the soil of knowledge and nurtured and cultivated with the waters of information.
To Confucius the lack of knowledge in the realm of thought was not only insufficient to accomplish the transformation of self and society toward humaneness and goodness, but it was dangerous. Thought unrestrained and without knowledge can build castles in the sky, but it can't work for the betterment of humankind. Unbridled from knowledge thought is mere fantasy and as such is perilous.
Brooks' argument for the establishment of intellectual foundations to our efforts toward protestation echoes Confucius cautionary call for knowledge and thought to go hand in hand. Together much can be accomplished, together the betterment of humanity can be a realistic goal.
I offer these comments as a Confucian addendum -- thus Confucius on Brooks!]]>'Bowling Alone' -- With Confucius!tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.12406532012-02-01T07:20:27-05:002012-04-02T05:12:01-04:00Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rodney-l-taylor-phd/ with Confucius. The point, however, is poignant -- an insight into contemporary American society we might all stop and consider for a moment!
When the sociologist Robert Putnam first published his now well-known work Bowling Alone in 2000, he was perhaps one of the first to point to a phenomenon of contemporary American society new at the time but now all too well known. As a sociologist he perceived a society rapidly losing its capacity for community, its ability to share, or to take up concern for the other guy, even its capacity for true friendship, a relationship of actual caring, not just a "friend" on Facebook.
This lack of community and lack of concern for the other he called "bowling alone." Bowling is something that one simply does not do alone -- never -- and yet here was a society rapidly moving toward a state of what Putnam describes as a "decline of general reciprocity." In its place was a set of behaviors that favored the individual at all costs, particularly the individual as the focus, and thus the individual as more important than the community.
"It's all about me" -- a phrase that has become endemic of our age.
Putnam's work is not the first to draw our attention to a characteristic of our national character. One of the most articulate voices in such discourse was that of de Tocqueville (1805-1859), a French intellectual visiting a young America in the early decades of the 19th century. In his now classic work, "Democracy in America" (1835), he astutely observed a key tension he believed the American spirit would wrestle with as inherent to their goals and aspirations.
The tension de Tocqueville observed was the relation of the individual to the community. In a phrase, "habits of the heart," de Tocqueville observed that there would be a challenge for the individual to address the needs of the community when so much emphasis was placed upon the importance of the individual itself. (The sociologist Robert Bellah in his seminal work appropriately titled Habits of the Heart has brilliantly studied this point.)
Bowling alone -- the malaise of a generation -- the malaise of contemporary American society. And what would Confucius say?
The Confucian antidote to the all too often heard phrase "its all about me" might best be articulated in a short passage from the Analects of Confucius:
The Master said, "I will not be troubled at people not knowing me; I will be troubled that I do not know people." (Analects, I:16)
The theme is a simple one and is repeated in a number of passages in the writings of Confucius. He is not concerned that he gains the recognition of others. He is only concerned least he not recognize others himself.
It is not all about me! It is about the capacity to recognize the importance of others -- to engage others, to learn from others, to help and care for others, to be friends with others, true friends.
Confucius believes that it is through the interaction with others that one becomes truly and fully human oneself. It is in the community of humankind that one can be human and thus fulfill oneself as human.
In discussing the Noble Person, chün-tzu, the person of humaneness and goodness, Confucius says, "He cultivates himself so as to give rest to all the people." (Analects XIV:45)
The center for human effort is learning, the learning of the self, but the goal is the outward force of learning upon others. The passage suggests that the Noble Person engages in learning to bring "rest" to others. The word "rest" or "peace," an, suggests the capacity of the Noble Person to look beyond self as self and see instead self in community. The focus is a community of humankind.
No passage better suggests this capacity of the individual to create a community of humankind than the opening lines of the first passage of the Analects.
The Master said, "Is it not a joy to learn with constant effort and application? Is it not delightful to have friends coming from distant quarters?" (Analects I:1)
That the Analects opens with Confucius' statement of his love of learning is easily anticipated! There is, after all, nothing more important to Confucius than learning, the learning whereby one becomes a person of goodness and humaneness, jen, a person fulfilling the Way of Heaven, T'ien-Tao.
What is perhaps surprising in this first passage of the Analects is the second sentence, a sentence devoted to the importance of friendship.
What does this second sentence tell us? It tells us that friendship is as important to being human as is the act of learning itself. Going further it suggests that friendship is also part of learning.
Learning is unceasing -- and is fulfilled in company -- in community with others, in cooperation with others, in care for others, in friendship with others.
This is not bowling alone! This is bowling with Confucius!]]>New Year's Resolutions: A Confucian Viewtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.11659322011-12-29T15:09:32-05:002012-02-28T05:12:02-05:00Rodney L. Taylor, Ph.D.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rodney-l-taylor-phd/
But New Year's resolutions seem all too automatically composed and all too soon and easily neglected and forgotten. And so their point would be?
The point of a resolution is the establishment of a goal and the commitment to that goal. We want to be a better person whatever our religious or non-religious persuasion and we make a resolution to pursue ways to fulfill that goal -- to become a better person.
What does such an idea mean for Confucius?
There is a passage in the Analects of Confucius that provides the foundation for a resolution. It is not a New Year's resolution per se, but rather a resolution for life. This particular passage suggests a resolution that becomes a compass charting the course of the development of a life -- a moral compass point if you will.
Confucius is quoted as saying, "At fifteen I had set my will upon learning. At thirty, I stood firm. At forty, I had no doubts. At fifty, I knew the will of Heaven. At sixty, I heard it with a listening ear. At seventy, I could follow my heart's desire without overstepping what was right." (Analects II:4)
Described by some as the shortest autobiography ever written (!), the passage in fact speaks to benchmarks of life, each a progression forward in a life defined by the quest to become a person of jen, goodness and humaneness.
And where does this life so described begin? It begins with a commitment, a resolution to pursue learning, the learning fundamental to the transformation of the individual into a person of goodness and humaneness.
And each of the succeeding statements in the passage is in a fashion a confirmation of the first resolution, suggesting resolve, tenacity, perseverance -- all the elements that sadly seem to guarantee our own New Year's resolutions will go the way of the wrapping paper of holiday gifts -- recycled at best!
The passage is remarkable not only for its commitment and resolve, but for the humility it shows. As Confucius brings his own life into accord with the ultimate Way, what he describes as the will of Heaven, he admits to faltering in his capacity to follow it.
Indeed, are we not all the same in those resolutions for betterment when we encounter the difficulty involved in their realization! So easy to make, so hard to maintain!
Thus, Confucius says, at 50, he knew the course to follow, but it was only at 60 that he could follow its course with docile ear! And then the summation of a life of commitment to learning -- at 70 his life is free for it is now in accord with the ultimate Way -- all actions mirror the actions of the Way.
Throughout we witness Confucius' commitment and recommitment to a resolution made in youth and followed throughout a life, a commitment maintained through resolve, tenacity and perseverance.
Surely such a passage is much more than any of us would consider for those infamous New Year's resolutions. At the same time, Confucius' passage should give us pause to reflect upon the nature of the commitments we make to ourselves and others in order to better ourselves and the life of others.
There is no religious tradition that does not encourage the taking of such commitments and even the advent of commitment by a resolution. One also does not need to stand within a religious tradition to make the same kind of commitment. Such a commitment, such a resolution, is always there as a path that any human is capable of treading.
What stands in our way is the oft-characterized banalities with which we live. Life can be as meaningful or meaningless as one chooses.
Not unlike the American poet Robert Frost's (1874-1963) allusion to the road "less taken" from his poem "The Road Not taken," often the pursuit of the most meaningful course is the least popular course. The resolution Confucius makes to pursue a life of learning toward betterment of himself and others was the road not just less taken, but unfortunately the road least taken in his own day. Dare I suggest it is as true today as it was in the world Confucius faced?
The road most frequently taken seems all too sadly to be the life of ease, the life without self-reflection, without commitment to our brothers and sisters, without sacrifice for others, a life focused upon our own material comforts that holds sway and that attracts us again and again. But one does not have to choose the easy route, the road most traveled. The choice is ours. We can choose the road "less taken."
And that brings us back to this issue of New Year's resolutions -- a true commitment; a true resolution that might actually cause the betterment of ourselves as individuals and thus the world in which we live. Was Confucius saying anything different in his expression of a life committed to learning of Way of goodness and humaneness?
Take the opportunity this year to turn those New Year's resolutions to self-reflection upon and commitment toward what ultimately will bring peace and good will to all humankind.
The motion of yin/yang is a circular one -- more a spiraling one -- ever changing between one phase and the other. As yin fulfills itself, inherent within it are the seeds of yang, and visa versa. All changes occur within the goodness of the nature of Nature, for there is no evil in the cosmology, most certainly not in darkness any more than light.