Aristotle and Confucius: a Comparison Author(S): Max Hamburger Source: Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol

Home , Filial piety, Philia

Aristotle and Confucius: A Comparison Author(s): Max Hamburger Source: Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 20, No. 2 (Apr., 1959), pp. 236-249 Published by: University of Pennsylvania Press Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2707821 Accessed: 05-08-2018 09:34 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms

University of Pennsylvania Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the History of Ideas

This content downloaded from 198.11.31.211 on Sun, 05 Aug 2018 09:34:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms ARISTOTLE AND CONFUCIUS: A COMPARISON

BY MAX HAMBURGER

Introduction 1

Our comparison of Aristotle and Confucius proceeds not so much from an abstract point of view but from the viewpoint of still living thought, of lasting influence. By referring to "living thought " and " lasting influence " I wish to avoid another obstacle which might prove fatal to a comparison of Aristotle and Confucius: I mean the question of the historicity of Confucius and above all of the authenticity of the texts attributed to Confucianism. Modern Sinology and Confucian scholarship prove to be extremely critical of, and skeptical about the authenticity of the Confucian texts generally known under the two headings, namely, The Four Books (The Great Learning, The Doctrine of the Mean, The Analects and Mencius), and the Five Classics (Book of Songs, Book of History, Book of Changes, Spring and Autumn, and Book of Rites) to which we have to add the Book of Filial Piety. There is no doubt a certain amount of justification in this modern textual criticism. But this critical attitude of modern Sinologists and Confucian scholars need not deter us here. We know the Homeric question and the Bacon-Shakespearean controversy; on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of Goethe's death a satirical play appeared with the significant title Did Goethe Really Live? So, for our purpose, although we wholeheartedly follow modern criticism so far as obviously later interpolations are concerned, it is certainly sufficient to refer to Professor Homer Dubs' article 2 on the 2500th anniversary of Confucius' birth. Professor Dubs remarked that this date has been under discussion for more than two thousand years, but that in spite of all the difficulties of finding out who was the historical Confucius and what was the real essence of his teachings, his teachings culminated in Li, i.e., life in accordance with the highest codes of conduct that can be expected of a true gentleman, and his love for others, his human-heartedness. If nothing else remains beyond doubt than Confucius' teaching on Li, i.e., the highest moral conduct on the one hand, and on human-heartedness on the other, we have already ample material from the Confucian texts to justify a comparison with Aristotle's teachings. But we have another modern authority who strongly supports our approach to Confucius. I mean Professor E. R. Hughes who says of the Analects: " This book

1 See (1) Max Hamburger, " Aristotle and Confucius: A Study in Comparative Philosophy," Philosophy (1956), 324-357. Quoted: " A.C."; (2) Max Hamburger, Morals and Law: The Growth of Aristotle's Legal Theory (Yale and Oxford Uni- versity Press, 1951). Quoted: M.L. 2Homer Dubs, Philosophy, XXVI, 96 (Jan. 1951).

236

This content downloaded from 198.11.31.211 on Sun, 05 Aug 2018 09:34:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms ARISTOTLE AND CONFUCIUS: A COMPARISON 237

is a very composite work containing material of very varied authenticity .. . yet the man speaks to us through it with unmistakable per- sonal force." 3 However, quite apart from this scholarly support,4 we should like to emphasize the fact that the Confucian texts for two thousand years have constituted a living body of thought for the Chinese people. It is this living force which we have to consider in the light of the generally acknowledged Confucian ideals of highest morality and human-heartedness. It is from this angle that we shall now devote ourselves to a brief discussion of seven topics which seem to be particularly suggestive for a comparison between Aristotle and Con- fucius: (1) Biographical Comparison, (2) Inseparability of Ethics and Politics, (3) The Doctrine of the Mean, (4) The Measure of Man Is Man, (5) The Principle of Social Order, (6) The Primacy of Education, (7) The Higher Life.

(1) Biographical Comparison Aristotle and Confucius belonged to quite different stages of civilization and culture. Confucius (K'ung Tzu) was born in 551 B.C. in Lu, that part of China which now constitutes part of the Shantung Province, and died in 479 B.C. at the age of 72 years. Aristotle was born in 384 B.C. in Stagira in Macedon and died in 322 B.C. in Euboea at the age of 62. Both men canme from remarkable families, Confucius from a ducal house descending from the house of Shang, the dynasty preceding that of the Chou. Aristotle's father was a physician to Amyntas II, King of Macedon, and a member of an old family belonging to the medical clan of the Asclepiadae, a fact to which Aristotle's interest in biology is usually attributed. Of Con- fucius' youth and education we know hardly anything, whereas Aris- totle is known to have been a pupil and a member of Plato's Academy from 367 to 347 B.C., i.e., until Plato died. Both men were in some way and for some time in close contact with princely or royal houses, Confucius as an adviser and high official to the governing dynasty of Lu, with important responsibilities. Aristotle, after Plato's death in 347, joined the circle of Platonists at the court of Hermeias, the ruler of Atarneus and Assos in Mysia (Asia Minor), where he stayed for three years. After an intermediate stay in Mytilene on the Island of Lesbos, Aristotle from 342 to 340 B.C. became tutor to the Crown

3 E. R. Hughes, Chinese Philosophy in Classical Times (New York, 1950), 12. 4As to the seven main groups of problems which support and indeed suggest a comparison of Aristotle's and Confucius' teachings see "A.C.," 324-357 and its seven main sections: (1) 324-327; (2) 327-330; (3) 330-332; (4) 332-339; (5) 340; (6) 341-353; and (7) 353-57, where the last section (7) only intimates the subject of the present essay.

This content downloaded from 198.11.31.211 on Sun, 05 Aug 2018 09:34:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 238 MAX HAMBURGER

Prince, the future "Alexander the Great." From 340 to 335 B.C. Aristotle lived in his hometown, Stagira, and then returned to Ath- ens where he opened his own school, the Lyceum or the Peripatos, and spent the years from 335 to 323 B.C. in teaching and writing the works which have come down to us in the Corpus Aristotelicum. Confucius likewise was the founder of a school, namely that of the Ju,5 literally meaning literatus or scholar. Confucius himself belonged to the class of the Ju. Out of this class he founded his school (that of the Ju), which in Chinese became synonymous with Con- fucianists and Confucianism.6 But whereas Confucius marked the beginning of Chinese philosophy, Aristotle occupies a central position in Greek philosophy having been preceded by the so-called Pre-Soc- ratics, Socrates, and Plato. But while there is this difference, there is a point of similarity. Confucius was the first private teacher in China to whom history attributed a very large number of students who as Confucianists influenced the Chinese way of life and thought up to the present. Aristotle was the head of a school, the Peripatetics, who contributed so much to the intellectual evolution of the West. From the Confucian School the six Chinese liberal arts originated, while the seven liberal arts of the West, Grammar, Dialectics, Rhet- oric, Arithmetic, Geometry, Astronomy, and Music, were particularly fostered within the frame of ancient rhetorical education for which Aristotle in his Rhetoric provided the basic textbook for subsequent Greek and Roman books. There is a further strange parallel in the fate of the Confucian and Aristotelian texts. In 213 B.C. the Confucian texts, with the exception of books on Astrology (Divina- tion), etc., were burned on the order of the first emperor of the Chin Dynasty, famous for the erection of the great Chinese wall. After the downfall of the Chin Dynasty the Confucian texts " were re- written by Confucian scholars, who in part used some copies that had escaped destruction." ' Aristotle's works, too-with the exception of his dialogues which are now lost-disappeared from the middle of the third century B.C. until their rediscovery in Sulla's time, i.e., the first decades of the first century B.C. At least this is what a certain tradition tells us, both in regard to the Aristotelian and Confucian texts. The interesting additional likeness in this parallelism of the tempo-

5 That Confucius was the founder of the school of the Ju (literati or scholars) is, e.g., expressly stated in: (a) Fung Yu-lan, A Short History of Chinese Philosophy (New York, 1950), 39. "Confucius was a ju and the founder of the Ju school .... ." See also ibid., 30, 31. (b) Liu Wu-Chi, A Short History of Confucian Phi- losophy (Pelican Books, 1955), 13. 6 Fung Yu-lan, A History of Chinese Philosophy (Princeton, 1952), I, 48; see also 21. 7 " A.C.," 339; Liu Wu-Chi, 116-120.

This content downloaded from 198.11.31.211 on Sun, 05 Aug 2018 09:34:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms ARISTOTLE AND CONFUCIUS: A COMPARISON 239

rary disappearance of the Confucian and Aristotelian texts lies in the fact that both traditions are disputed by scholars and in the case of Confucianism entail the complex question of the " Old Text School" and the " New Text School." 8 We need not enumerate the main works of Aristotle belonging to such different branches of learning as Logic, Metaphysics, Ethics, Politics, Economics, Rhetoric, Poetics, Biology, Physics, Psychology, Astronomy, etc. We have already briefly referred to the so-called " Four Books " and " Five Classics " of Confucianism and it may be added that according to the great old master of Confucian scholarship, James Legge, Confucius did not speculate on the creation or end of things, did not trouble to account for the origin of man or his hereafter, did not meddle with Physics or Metaphysics, but confined himself to teaching Ethics, devotion of soul, truthfulness, history, poetry, etc. This very much facilitates our comparison since we can confine ourselves to those parts of Aristotle's teachings which he has in common with Confucius, i.e., Ethics, Political Theory, Sociology, but of course also Rhetoric, in brief, his philosophy of human affairs. We are supported in this selection by three basic concepts of Confucian- ism which all remind one of Aristotle, namely the concept of Chuen Tzu, or the cultured gentleman, secondly, the concept of Li, or living in harmony with the highest code of conduct, and the concept of Jen, 'man-to-manness,' or human sympathy. We shall presently realize how these concepts find their counterparts in Aristotle's teachings and how such Aristotelian concepts as Philia, i.e., civic friendship or social sympathy, furthermore Epieikeia, fairness and humaneness, and eventually To Meson, the doctrine of the mean, at once remind us of Confucius. This introductory and biographical comparison may end with a quotation from Confucius' Analects 19.7: "Mechanics have their shops to dwell in in order to accomplish their work. The cultured gentleman studies in order to conform to his highest principles." Here we have the counterpart of Aristotle's distinction between liberal and illiberal arts and professions, which was made fa- miliar to the West preeminently by Cicero's emphasis on it in his work On Duty,9 and remained traceable in Western civilization through the Middle Ages and up to comparatively recent times. The biographical comparison finally has to stress one peculiar fact. The so-called Four Books of Confucianism, i.e., The Great Learning, the Doctrine of the Mean, the Analects, and Mencius, contain in the

8 Fung Yu-lan, A Short History of Chinese Philosophy (New York, 1950), 209; Liu Wu-Chi, A Short History of Confucian Philosophy (Pelican Books, 1955), 128 ff. 9 Cicero, Off. I, 150 f.

This content downloaded from 198.11.31.211 on Sun, 05 Aug 2018 09:34:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 240 MAX HAMBURGER

last mentioned work the record of the philosophy of Mencius (Meng K'o), an aristocrat of the Lu State, who is said to have lived from 372 to 289 B.C. Mencius, an ardent follower of Confucius, founded the idealistic wing of the Confucian school. His humanitarianism is evi- dent in his belief that man is originally good and that charity is his true nature. Mencius found his counterpart in Hsuen-tze (about 298-238 B.C.), the founder of the realistic wing of the Confucian School and perhaps the greatest and most philosophical of the classical Confucianists. Hsuen-tze held that man's nature is originally evil, but that it can acquire goodness by proper education and habit and above all by Li (the principle of moral and social order) and leg- islation conducive to righteousness. Professor Dubs has called Hsuen- tze the Aristotle of China and at the same time the moulder of ancient Confucianism.'0 If we infer from this that Hsuen-tze, the last and most philosophic of the classic Confucianists, was a sort of Aristotle and at the same time really the moulder of ancient Confucianism, there seems to be indeed some justification for a closer comparison of Aristotle and Confucius as regards their moral, political and socio- logical teachings, or in Aristotle's words, the philosophy of human affairs."1

(2) Inseparability of Ethics and Politics

For Aristotle, Ethics and Politics were inseparable. Moral virtue is, according to Aristotle, the product of habit. The potentiality of becoming virtuous is transformed into the actuality of being virtuous by appropriate training and exercise and here Aristotle remarks: "This truth is attested by the experience of the states; for legis- lators make the citizens good by training them in the habits of right action " (Ethica Nicomachea II, 1103 b 2). Here we see the Aristo- telian conception of the state as a moral and educational institution. Already in the Great Ethics Aristotle expressly declares that ethics is a branch of politics or political science and that the treatment of moral character is a branch of statecraft, wherefore the subject matter of the treatise on ethics should be rather called politics (Magna Mor-

10 Professor Dubs' characterization of Hsiun Tzu as "The Aristotle of China " and as " The Moulder of Ancient Confucianism" is not impaired by the fact that one of Hsiin-Tzu's pupils was Han Fei-Tzu, "the synthesizer of the Legalist School" (Fung Yu-lan, Sh. H., 157), the totalitarian and "Mystic Materialist" (Hughes, op. cit., 254). Hsiun Tzu became most influential in regard to the Con- fucian texts; the Li Chi (Book of Rites) is permeated with Hsiin Tzu's elaboration of Li (ritual, propriety, rules of social conduct, principle of social order); see, e.g., Fung Yu-lan, Short History, 147-150, Hughes, op. cit., 275. In addition, Hsiun-Tzu condemned the basic doctrines of Legalism (see, e.g., H. G. Creel, Chinese Thought: From Confucius to Mao Tse-Tung [Chicago, 1953], 132 last and 133 first line). 11 As to further reasons for a comparison, see Hamburger, " A.C.," loc. cit.

This content downloaded from 198.11.31.211 on Sun, 05 Aug 2018 09:34:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms ARISTOTLE AND CONFUCIUS: A COMPARISON 241

alia I, 1). In his Nicomachean Ethics Aristotle declares that the end of ethics is the supreme good and belongs to the master art, the archi- tectonic art, namely the science of politics (E.N. I, 2). The end of this art is Eudaimonia (see, e.g., E.N. I, 7), i.e., living under a good genius, living well and doing well, usually translated as happiness or felicity. According to the Eudemian Ethics, and in anticipation of the Politics, we have in the household the sources and springs of friendship, of state organization and justice (E.E. VII, 10). Here we already find the life force of all associations, including that of the state, namely Philia, social sympathy or civic friendship, as well as the supreme goal of the state, viz., justice, as conducive to happiness. In addition, we find repeatedly stated that the aim of the individual and that of the state are identical.12 This assertion is supported by the statement that the state secures the good life of the citizens, but that it exists already for the sake of mere life, in which men find a natural sweetness and happiness (Politics, III, 6). Aristotle's definition of the State as the union of families and villages in a perfect and self-sufficing life, his insistence that the state exists for the sake of noble actions, and that he who contributes more to that end has a greater share in it than men of mere wealth or noble birth (III, 9), is rooted in the principle of the inseparability of ethics and politics, whereby ethics is only a branch of political art and rhetoric is only a science auxiliary to politics and ethics. The inseparability of ethics and politics in the Confucian texts first very much reminds us of the Aristotelian approach. According to Analects, XIII, 3, and the Biography of Confucius, attributed to Szema Chien, Confucius was asked by a sovereign how he would be- gin if he was put in power of a country, and answered: " by establishing the correct usage of terminology, since the proper use of language and terms does secure order in the state." This is in line with Aristotle's contention made in the Politics (I. 2) that man is a political animal and the only animal enabled by the gift of speech to set forth the expedient and the inexpedient, the just and the unjust. And in his Rhetoric he remarks that the use of rational speech is more distinctive of human beings than the use of their limbs (I. 1), wherefore the training in rhetoric is an essential part of civic education. The Confucian texts, above all in the so-called Doctrine of the Mean, stress the moral law as the criterion of culture, as ubiquitous. The moral law is the law from whose operation we cannot for one instant escape (D. of the M. I. 1, 1-5). The moral law is closely akin to the subsequent Greek concept of natural and universal law, previsioned by Heraclitus' World Logos. In The Great Learning, another of the

12 See, e.g., Pol. VII, 1 and 2 (see M.L., 173).

This content downloaded from 198.11.31.211 on Sun, 05 Aug 2018 09:34:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 242 MAX HAMBURGER

Four Books of Confucianism, we find the following synthesis: 13 The ancients, wishing to order well their own states, they regulated their families. For this purpose, they first cultivated their persons by seeking to be sincere in their thoughts, an aim attained by first extending their knowledge to the utmost by the way of investigation (Gr. L. I, 1-7). Here we have the most powerful synthesis of the elements of private and political life: The emergence of the state out of its germ cell, the family, and the essence of the state as the highest association combined with the principle of natural law. We may add Confucius' famous formulation of the Golden Rule: When asked whether there was one word which might serve as a rule of practice for all one's life, he answered: "Is not 'reciprocity' such a word? What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others " (An. XV, 23); and if we here remember Confucius' program of government by example: " Go before the people with your example and be labori- ous in their affairs " (An. XIII, 1), we have already ample proof of the inseparability of ethics and politics in classical Confucian thought. This principle is enhanced by the concept of " filial piety," as set forth in the so-called Hsiao King, the classic of filial piety which is traced back to Confucius although it was compiled later by a Han scholar. From the principle of filial piety derives the principle of benevolence towards our fellow men, as well as the principle of discipline and order. Thus, the inseparability of ethics and politics is a feature common to Aristotelian and Confucian thought, although in Con- fucian thought more bound up with mysticism.'4

(3) The Doctrine of the Mean

The Doctrine of the Mean is particularly suggestive of a similarity between Confucian and Aristotelian thought. In the case of Aris- totle we know that the Doctrine of the Mean lay at the root of his whole philosophy of human relations. " The Doctrine of the Mean

13 It may be noted that I have not called Confucian familism a synthesis. My exposition stresses the fact that in the paraphrased and shortened passage from The Great Learning, Chap. I, we have the most powerful synthesis of private and public life. Indeed, the family is expressly characterized as the " germ cell " (and thus the natural and lasting basis) of the state. That the synthesis of Chapter I of The Great Learning is imbued with the principle of natural law is particularly manifest from the whole context of the argument in Chap. I, The Great Learning, as, e.g., reproduced in Hughes, op. cit., 88 and 89. 14As to mysticism in the Confucian texts (including Mencius and Hsuin Tzu) see-apart from many passages of, e.g., the Analects, the Filial Piety scripture, The Great Learning, the Doctrine of the Mean-the argument in Fung Yu-Lan, Short History, 177 (Confucian Mysticism); 77-79 (Mysticism in Mencius); 176-177 (Mysticism of the Doctrine of the Mean); see also Fung Yu-lan, I, 129 ff. and A. Waley, The Analects of Confucius (London, 1949), 64, "The Magic Efficacy of Ritual " (Li)-.

This content downloaded from 198.11.31.211 on Sun, 05 Aug 2018 09:34:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms ARISTOTLE AND CONFUCIUS: A COMPARISON 243

became the core of all his political and ethical thought: all virtues are a mean between two extremes. Of all constitutions, that which represents the mean is best. Of all classes, only the middle class, the class representing the mean, safeguards the state" (as I put it, M.L., 8). We must stress the fact that the Aristotelian mean was never thought of as a mathematical middle point, nor was the discussion of human actions and passions, of moral and political theory, regarded as apt to be subject to scientific, let alone mathematical evaluation and precision.'5 This is clearly recognizable from Aris- totle's definition of virtue as " a state of character concerned with choice, lying in a mean, i.e., a mean relative to us, this being deter- mined by rational principle and by that principle by which a man of practical wisdom would determine it " (E.N. II. 6, 1106 b). In Confucian thought, too, the Doctrine of the Mean played a very important part: one of the Four Books of Confucianism has the title, Chung Yung, usually translated as " The Doctrine of the Mean," or " The Mean in Action." There is, however, a basic difference between the Confucian and the Aristotelian approach. In the case of Aristotle, the doctrine of the mean was only the result of an age-old tradition in Greek thought which can be traced back to the Seven Wise Men to whom such sayings as " nothing in excess " or " the middle course is best," have been attributed. Practicing the mean was a guide to the ways of everyday life (not too little, not too much), a state principle, i.e., the promotion of the right blending of oligarchy and democracy in the form of the polity, and eventually the advance- ment of the middle class as the class between the right and the left wing parties, the poor and the rich, the class which should safeguard the state against extremism. In the case of Confucius, the situation is somewhat different. Al- though he regarded the superior man as the embodiment of the mean, he thought that only the sage was capable of living in the spirit of the mean and he expressed regret that in practical life, unfortunately, " the path of the mean is untrodden " (cf. An., VI, 27). This reserva- tion did much to vitiate the practical value of the Confucian doctrine of the mean and to promote lip service. There is another aspect which marks a basic difference between Aristotelian and Confucian thought, namely, that passage of the Doctrine of the Mean which ad- vises the superior man always to do what is proper to the situation in which he is, and not to desire to go beyond this (D. of the M. XIV, James Legge). This passage implies an essentially static attitude, quite different from the western outlook which did not lead a man to be satisfied with every situation of life, but on the contrary inspired him to reach out for higher goals. It was this idea which inspired

15 See M.L., 152, and " A.C.," 350, and the references given there to five passages from E.N. I, II, VII, and IX.

This content downloaded from 198.11.31.211 on Sun, 05 Aug 2018 09:34:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 244 MAX HAMBURGER

slaves to become freedmen and to fill high positions and callings in the Roman Empire. And finally there is the factor of mysticism, which again marks a basic difference between the Confucian and the Aristotelian approach to the mean in action: The man possessed of all the qualities of the sage never swerving from the mean, is the equal of Heaven (D. of the M., XXX, XXXI). Here the man living in the spirit of the mean in action, which is expressly said to cover such qualities as human-sympathy, government by example, sincerity and higher education, is described as extending to heaven, thus, leav- ing the sphere of ordinary mortals and merging in the unification of the human and the celestial realm."6

(4) " The Measure of Man Is Man"

" The Measure of Man Is Man is a principle which in Greek intellectual history underwent fundamental modifications. Already implied in various sayings of the pre-Socratics, it was given its pro- verbial form by the Sophist Protagoras: " Man is the measure of all things, of the existence of things that are, and of the non-existence of things that are not." This maxim was combined with Protagoras' expression of relativism: "Things are as they appear to you," and entailed his agnosticism: "In respect of the gods, I am unable to know either that they are or are not." This humanism and relativism resulted in the classic antithesis of nature and law, according to which man-made law was often contrary to nature. This antithesis lay at the root of the sophistic acknowledgment of the equality of all

16 The argument in the above paragraph describes the mean as a standard of conduct so much so that it stresses the static aspect of this Confucian standard of conduct. Yet the fact remains that this standard of conduct, when realized in a human being, was regarded as making its possessor the equal of Heaven. It is here that the original harmony between the Confucian and Aristotelian Mean turns into a disharmony, as caused by the "metaphysical " elaboration of the original Con- fucian " practical " standard of conduct. We have stressed the "metaphysical " elaboration of the originally practical Doctrine of the Mean by saying: " The man possessed of all the qualities of the sage never swerving from the mean, is the equal of Heaven " (D. of the M. XXX, XXXI). These passages combined with others, we presently quote, at the same time raise the " good " man, the " human-hearted " (Jen) man into the sphere of the supranatural, into divine and celestial realms. (Cf. D. of the 1Il. XXVI, 1-8; XXXI and XXXII, transl. Legge.) Yet this metaphysical elaboration can be traced back-to Confucius! (So expressly H. Waley, Analects [London, 1949], 28, with reference to Analects, VI, 28: "It appears indeed that jen is a mystic entity not merely analogous to but in certain sayings practically identical with the Tao of the quietists.") It is true that jen (= human- heartedness) is a practical standard of conduct. Yet in its realization it entailed a mystical and metaphysical consequence, even in " the Confucius of the Analects! " Thus when the Doctrine of the Mean is (in Fung Yu-lan, Short History of Chinese Philosophy, 166-177) discussed under the heading Chap. 15, CONFUCIANIST META- PHYSICS, the metaphysical aspect can be traced back to Confucius!

This content downloaded from 198.11.31.211 on Sun, 05 Aug 2018 09:34:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms ARISTOTLE AND CONFUCIUS: A COMPARISON 245

that wear the human countenance, as voiced by the sophist Hippias in Plato's Protagoras (337 C, D). In view of this progressive trend of thought, which was bound up with the primacy of higher education, Plato tried to modify this maxim of Man is the Measure by a religious re-formulation: " God ought to be to us the measure of all things and not man, as men commonly say," he remarked in one of his last works, The Laws (716, C). Aristotle, however, returned to the original maxim and ennobled it by adding an ethical note: " The good man differs from others most by seeing the truth in each class of things, being as it were the norm and measure of them." 17 Thus the maxim, "The Measure of All Things is Man," was modified by Aristotle into the maxim, " The Good Man is the Measure of All Things." Accordingly, Aristotle regarded neither divinity nor bestiality as something within the range of the normal human being,18 and thought justice to be something essentially human (E.N. V, 9 i.f.) and if human, something in harmony with the good and virtuous man. It was in this sense that he regarded the truest form of justice as a friendly quality (E.N. VIII, 1). Consequently his teaching on Philia, social sympathy, resulting in a vast network of mutual obligations and duties between man and man, is permeated with the spirit of the good man (cf. M.L. 148f.). In Confucian thought, the same principle is somewhat modified. It starts from the conception of Jen, i.e., gentleness, humaneness, human-heartedness and culminates in the conception of the good man combined with the principle of benevolence.'9 But the good man in the end is raised to the measure of the universe. Thus, whereas in Aristotle's teaching, " Man is the measure, etc." simply amounts to the maxim, " The Good Man is the measure of all things," and neither divinity nor bestiality was regarded as really a human quality, in Confucian thought, the good man, the human-hearted man passes into the sphere of the supranatural, into divine and celestial realms, as soon as he has reached the stage of being his true self, and of the highest sincerity. This blending of human ethics with mysticism did not really add to the intrinsic value of Confucian thought of Jen, which was so close in its sobriety to subsequent Aristotelian ethics, in its beginning, only to become so remote from it, in the end.

17E.N. III, 4; (ef. x. 5). 18E.N. VII, 1 and 5 (M.L., 86-88). 19 Jen, i.e., "man-to-manness," "human sympathy," etc., is originally exactly coextensive with Aristotle's philia (" social sympathy"), i.e., "the right attitude toward our fellowmen in every situation of life " (M.L., 120, last two lines of that page) and epieikeia (fairness, reasonableness, humaneness); the reciprocal relation- ship of philia: epieikeia and Li: Jen is such that the one concept of each pair is the conditio sine qua non of the other. Again it was the elaboration and elevation of Jen into a property raising its possessor into the sphere of Heaven which divorced the Confucian from the Aristotelian concept.

This content downloaded from 198.11.31.211 on Sun, 05 Aug 2018 09:34:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 246 MAX HAMBURGER

(5) The Principle of Social Order

The Principle of Social Order in Confucian and Aristotelian thought primarily stems from the Chinese term Li and the Greek term Philia which, although in many ways coextensive, in the end finally diverged. In Aristotle's teachings the term philia, civic friendship or social sympathy, simply meant good social behavior towards our fellowmen, and constituted the life force of all human associations, starting from the union of husband and wife and culminating in the state association which comprised all other possible associations of human relationships. This philia of Aristotle's at the same time involved a vast network of mutual obligations incumbent on man as a social and political animal and productive of eudaimonia, human happiness and perfection in a well ordered social life.20 From this basic notion three leading principles of social order emerged, culminating in legalism and constitutionalism, and amounting to the rules that: 1) law and justice are the foundations of the state; 2) law and morals are the end of the state; and 3) law and justice are the rulers of the state. These principles of legalism and constitutionalism were supplemented by the educational ideal of Paideia, as well as by ethical individual- ism. 2.21 In Confucian thought, the principle of social order primarily stemmed from the notion of Li. Li originally meant ritualism in all ways of human life. For this reason Confucianism is often characterized as the religion of Li or ritual and from this point of view Con- fucianism has been described as coming very close to the law of Moses, since in each case particular stress is laid on the performance of me- ticulously prescribed rites. It would, however, be quite wrong to assume that Li exclusively amounted to ritualism. The underlying principles of morals and good social behavior were according to Con- fucius still more important than the external rites which should secure such good behavior. In this connection the fact may be stressed that the Liki, the Book of Rites, which is so much concerned with the thousands of various rites which ruled the Chinese way of life, enu- merates ten basic human duties which lie at the bottom of Li, namely " kindness in the father, filial piety in the son, gentility ill the older brother, humility and respect in the younger brother, good behavior in the husband, obedience in the wife, benevolence in the elders, and obedience in the juniors, benevolence in the ruler, and loyalty in the ministers." 22 Still, Confucianism was so much bound up with ritual-

20 As to philia, see M.L., 111-151. 21 Cf. ibid., 175-179; 171. 22 Lin Yutang, The Wisdom of Confucius (New York, 1943), Lyun, Liki, Chap. IX, translated.

This content downloaded from 198.11.31.211 on Sun, 05 Aug 2018 09:34:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms ARISTOTLE AND CONFUCIUS: A COMPARISON 247

ism that the moral code became more and more petrified in an elaborate system of external rites, the underlying principles of which were often unrecognizable and unintelligible to the ordinary man. In other words, the wood could no longer be seen for the trees. It goes with- out saying that the Confucian conception of Li culminated in the notion of government by example, in the ideal ruler who displayed the virtues of humaneness, benevolence, loyalty, and education.23

(6) The Primacy of Education The Primacy of Education in Confucian and Aristotelian thought again displays basic common features as well as basic differences. The primacy of education is, so far as the western world is concerned, an essentially Greek conception. It can be traced back to the legendary Seven Wise Men, and found its characteristic expression in Thu- cydides' statement that there is no extraordinary difference between men, but that man is best who is educated in the most essential sub- jects (Thucydides, I. 84, 4). We know that the sophists were the originators of the science of education.24 This education aimed at imparting encyclopedic knowledge to the pupils, thus paving the way for the emergence of the universal man, of the uomo universale as manifested in such personalities as the sophist Hippias, the philosopher Democritus, Aristotle himself, as well as members of his school, and of course such universal men of the renaissance as Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo. This education was the prerequisite of the cultured gentleman who was both an Aristotelian and a Confucian ideal. In the case of Confucius' teachings, we also find very elaborate discussions on the primacy of education which in the end prove that Confucianism, too, promoted an all-around education in which, apart from the study of literature, history, ritualism, natural history (cf. An. XVII, 9), ethics, etc., music as a means of education played a particularly important part. Although, according to the Analects (VI, 24), Confucius mainly taught letters, ethics, devotion of soul and

23 Li-originally also coextensive with Aristotle's philia plus epieikeia (see above f.n. 19 on the reciprocity of Li-Jen and Philia-Epieikeia), was one of the most important basic concepts of Confucianism. As to Li= principle of social order, we would refer to our argument concerning An. XIII, 3, where " establishing the correct use of terminology " is adduced in place of the more frequently used term, "Rectification of Names" (Cheng ming). In a general discussion of Li (in an article or a textbook) Cheng ming is the natural and incidental prerequisite of Li (see, e.g., Fung Yu-lan, I, 68, esp. paragraph 4 where the last sentence is almost literally coextensive with the definition of philia in M.L., 120, as quoted in f.n. 19 above; also Fung Yu-lan, Short History, 147, last paragraph; Waley, 67; Liu-Wu- Chi, 98-100, especially 99; Lin Yutang, 10-14) and not expressly mentioned. 24See e.g., (1) Max Hamburger, " Equitable Law: New Reflections on Old Con- ceptions," Social Research, (1950), 441-460, esp. 447 f.; (2) M.L., 180 f.

This content downloaded from 198.11.31.211 on Sun, 05 Aug 2018 09:34:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 248 MAX HAMBURGER

truthfulness, there cannot be any doubt that the education contem- plated in the Confucian texts was far more elaborate: it entailed the six Chinese liberal arts, i.e., ceremonies (Li), music, archery, chariot- eering, study of language and arithmetic (see e.g., J. Legge, The Four Books, footnote to An. VII. 6), and was thus very closely akin to the seven western liberal arts: grammar, dialectics and rhetoric on the one hand, and arithmetic, geometry, astronomy and music on the other. It amounted to what we should call higher education in the modern sense, although, again bound up with a rather excessive amount of ritualism.

(7) The Higher Life The Higher Life in Aristotelian thought ultimately entailed a perfect synthesis of the life of the individual as well as of that of the state. The Greek word eudaimonia, i.e., living under a good genius, which implied the notion of higher life from the earliest pre-Socratics up to Aristotle, was raised by Aristotle to a concept which expressed the ultimate goal of the citizen and the state. Although Aristotle primarily thought of the higher life in terms of a life of contempla- tion, of study and research (cf., e.g., E.N. X, 7), he still ranked a life lived in the performance of the social and moral duties and equipped with some external means as being the second best kind of higher life (E.N. X, 8 [opening paragraph]). The Confucian concept of the higher life finds its most precise and concise expression in a passage of the Analects according to which a man should be first incited by the study of poetry, stand firm in ritual, and find his completion and perfection in music (An. VIII, 8). Thus again the conception of Li constituted the core and focus of the higher life. This higher life found its external expression, or rather its in- carnation, in the person of the perfect gentleman who should combine the requirements of higher education with those of moral perfection culminating in benevolence, righteousness, propriety, and kindliness. This higher life is most elaborately discussed in the discourse on Li in the Book of Rites (Liki); but here again we find a basic difference between the Confucian and the Aristotelian approach. In the case of Aristotle, the concept of the higher life is most convincingly realized in the universal man of encyclopedic knowledge and achievement. It was an ideal which, as Aristotle and his successors proved to mankind, could in a way be put into practice. Not so in Confucian lore. Here the higher life was realized in the sage; but the sages representing the ideal of higher life belonged no longer to this earth. They were placed in the by-gone days of the Golden Age, they were found in the personalities of legendary philosopher kings. Thus the evolution of Li, entailing the principle of social order as well as rationalized higher life, was in the texts of Liki developed from two different angles. On

This content downloaded from 198.11.31.211 on Sun, 05 Aug 2018 09:34:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms ARISTOTLE AND CONFUCIUS: A COMPARISON 249

the one hand by way of pre-historic speculation, it traced man back to his primitive stage of an almost animal-like life, up to his latest cultural achievements, secured and guided by Li.25 On the other hand, the same conception of Li was characterized as being a substitute for the moral and intellectual perfection of the philosopher kings of the Golden Age. Thus we see that Li in the external form of ritualism should guide men in their way of everyday life and above all in the performance of the ten duties of man. This higher life found its most poetic expression in a passage which concludes by saying that " when the emperor rides in the carriage of virtue, with music as his driver, when the different rulers meet each other with courtesy, the officials regulate each other with law, the scholars urge one another by the standards of hon- esty, and the people unite with one another in peace, that is the health of the world. This is called the Grand Harmony."' 26 Sublime as such formulation sounds, it remains remote from the realities of life. In this connection, Aristotle is and remains much more of this earth and his influence as a whole more lasting and de- cisive for the progress of the civilization of the world than Confucius' influence on the Chinese way of life. In my opinion there is no more convincing proof of the lasting influence of Aristotelianism than the fact that his Rhetoric constituted the original source of a system of higher education which remained in force for two thousand years.27 Within the frame of this rhetorical education we find for instance in Quintilian a reference to encyclion paideian 28 which is exactly the origin of our modern term encyclo- pedia. It is in this respect that I find a final basic difference between Aristotelianism and Confucianism. Not that Confucianism aimed at a less encyclopedic education. But as a matter of fact, the prevailing ritualism, the much narrower range of the various branches of Con- fucianism, the lack of systematization, and the progressive petrifac- tion of this whole system of education, philosophy, political theory and way of life proved to be an impediment to a continuous cultural evolution, rather than a stimulus. Nevertheless there is so much of sublime thought in Confucianism that it can still serve as a guide to the historic Chinese way of life. And as to Aristotelianism-in spite of all scientific and technical progress-mankind has still much to learn from Aristotle and his Mesotes or Doctrine of the Mean, his Philia or social sympathy, his Epieikeia or fairness and reasonableness, and his Eudaimonia, human happiness and perfection. New School for Social Research.

25 Lin Yutang, op. cit., Chap. IX, translated. 26 Ibid. 27M.L., XIII, 105, 106, 180 ff.; " A.C.," 356/357. 28 Quintilian, Inst. Or. I. 10. 1.

This content downloaded from 198.11.31.211 on Sun, 05 Aug 2018 09:34:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms