Author Archives: Bill Haines

Analects 2.13

A while back, in the now-vanished Discussions section, I proposed a new idea about Analects 2.13.  Here I’m putting it back on the record.

2.13

子貢問君子。子曰:「先行其言,而後從之。」(ctext.org)

On Tzŭ Kung asking about the nobler type of man the Master said: “He first practices what he preaches and afterwards preaches according to his practice.” (Soothill)

Continue reading →

Question about family and society in the Chinese philosophical tradition

Here are three different ideas:

  1. Having the right attitudes in my family relationships tends to give me the right attitudes in my political relationships.
  2. Where right family attitudes prevail in society, the right political attitudes tend also to prevail.
  3. Differences in family culture from region to region, or from time to time, tend to be accompanied by analogous differences in political culture.

Idea #2 is very abstract, and can be understood simply in terms of order versus disorder, or natural respect versus the lack of it.  Idea #3 contemplates a variety of kinds of stable order, and perhaps a variety of forms of government.

Where might idea #3 appear in the Chinese tradition?

Two Concepts of Roles

There are many images and metaphors that might serve as cores of conceptions of something for which one could use the English word “role.”  One way to look for some is to look at words from other languages.  I’ll look here at two, one from Greek and one from old Chinese.

Continue reading →

Analects 1.6, and how Confucius envisioned moral progress

Confucius’ remark at Analects 1.6 is often cited to show that he thought proper moral development begins with filial piety and then extends that attitude to ever-larger groups of people (ever less intensely).  I shall argue that the remark does not display such a view.  Confucius did not in general envision moral progress as extension.

Continue reading →

Confucius on the family as model

Many hold that for Confucius the family is the model for organized political society in some sense; that Confucius regarded the norms for relations beyond the family as largely based on the norms for relations with kin.  Here I follow Joseph Chan in challenging that view.

Continue reading →

The meaning of Analects 2.21

Someone said to Confucius, “Master, why don’t you engage in government?” The Master said, “The Book of Documents says, ‘Filial! But be filial, and a friend to your brothers, thus contributing to government.’ Why then do that other kind of ‘engaging in government’?”

或謂孔子曰:「子奚不為政?」子曰:「《》云:『孝乎惟孝、友于兄弟,施於有政。』是亦為政,奚其為為政?」

I’ll suppose for the sake of argument that the reported exchange is authentic, and argue that it is not significant evidence of Confucius’ views.  Confucius is not aiming to communicate his views here.

Continue reading →