In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Essay 4 THE PROBLEM OF CONCEPTUAL UNITY It is reported that Confucius once said to Zengzi, “My way has one thread that runs through it (Wudao yi yi guanzhi).”1 The “way” (dao) here, it is widely acknowledged, refers to Confucius’s teachings. Zengzi construed this dao to consist of zhong (conscientiousness) and shu (consideration for others). There are at least two reasons for not accepting Zengzi’s interpretation as a guide to Confucius’s intention. In the first place, the interpretation, as it stands, is uninformative. We are not told anything about the object or goal of zhong. While it is unproblematic to construe shu as pertaining to the adoption of an other-regarding attitude , it is not clear what sort of standard is at issue. In the second place, if shu is defined as “using oneself as a measure,”2 then according to another remark of Confucius, it is a method of realizing ren (humanity): “To be able to judge others by what is near to ourselves may be called the method of realizing humanity (ren).”3 It is plausible to maintain that ren is the “one thread” of Confucius’s dao.4 However, to the same question on ren, Confucius gave different answers to different pupils. For example , to Zigong, it is shu; to Fan Chi, it is the love of others; and to Yan 99 1. Analects (Lunyu), 4.15. Unless otherwise specified, all translations from the Analects are taken from Wing-tsit Chan, trans., A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1963). Asterisks indicate minor emendations. 2. D. C. Lau, trans., Confucius: The Analects (Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1979), Introduction, 16 n. 3. Analects 6.28. 4. The basis for this claim is this remark of Confucius: “If a superior man (junzi) departs from humanity (ren), how can he fulfill that name? A superior man never abandons humanity even for the lapse of a single meal. In moments of haste, he acts according to it. In times of difficulty or confusion, he acts according to it” (Analects 4:5). It must be noted that Zengzi’s interpretation, if taken as a heuristic assumption for a philosophical elaboration of the importance of zhong and shu, can be quite incisive in contrast with certain views in contemporary moral philosophy. See Herbert Fingarette, “Following the ‘One Thread’ of the Analects,” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 47, no. 35 (1979); and A. S. Cua, “Confucian Vision and Human Community,” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 11, no. 3 (1984), or Essay 11 of this volume. For a plausible interpretation of the “one thread” as ren, see Xu Fuguan, Zhongguo sixiang shi lunji (Taipei: Xuesheng, 1975), 226–34. Yuan, it is self-discipline and compliance with li (ritual rules).5 One way of easing this perplexity is to point out that Confucius adapted his teaching to the ability of his students (yincai shijiao), or to the needs of his students in terms of helping them to rectify defects or weaknesses of character, rather than imparting theses or doctrines that claim the allegiance of all reasonable persons. This common observation, however, does not resolve the problem of coherence in the Analects. Toward the solution of this problem, one may draw attention to the conversational tradition in Chinese thought,6 and attempt to characterize the logico-semantical aspects of Confucius’s general remarks in particular contexts. In this manner, it is possible to mark the salient features of Confucian as distinct from Zen and Socratic dialogues.7 While this approach may throw some light on the conversational form of the Analects, it does not by itself contribute to the problem of the coherence of Confucius’s vision of dao as the good life consisting in the attainment of a variety of human excellences or virtues, more centrally of ren, li, and yi (rightness).8 In the Analects, ren, li, and yi are recurrent and central aretaic notions (that is, notions of virtue). In addition, there are many others like trustworthiness, uprightness, courage, wisdom, tolerance, and so forth.9 The Analects thus presents a complex ethical vocabulary and a problem of conceptual unity, that is, the connection or interdependence of central aretaic notions (ren, li, and yi). For philosophical reconstruction, one can take either ren or li as the key aretaic term and explain the other aretaic notions by way of a holistic or subsumptive approach. The holistic approach proceeds by regarding, say, ren...

Share