Hsun Tzu and Mencius: Conflicting Perspectives of SocietyEssay Preview: Hsun Tzu and Mencius: Conflicting Perspectives of SocietyReport this essayHSUN TZU AND MENCIUS:Their Conflicting Perspectives of SocietyThe Warring States period in China (453-221 BCE) presented a time of great confusion and chaos among the people of China. However, it was also a great period for the philosophy of Confucianism, with the teachings of Mencius and Hsun Tzu to lead the way for their lost followers. According to Hsun Tzu and Mencius, human beings give birth to their children with a sense of an inherent reaction to life. Without proper teaching, children would be uncivilized, and ineffective in contributing anything towards society. Young age is important, for it is at this time that their perspectives drastically split. Mencius believed that human beings were born with a rationality of good sense. Hsun Tzu, in opposition, believed that all human beings are born into a state of primitive evil. While both claiming to interpret the philosophy of their teacher, Confucius, with certain contrasting ideas, it is Hsun Tzus ideas that seemed more logical and realistic to the people of China.
Hsun Tzu was a devoted follower of Confucius, despite his departure from a more “typical” Confucian way of thinking. He believed in dedicated and effective political officials who based their governance on action. This official would grow up in a system of being taught self- cultivation for the betterment of ones virtues by living modestly amongst those who did not. Hsun Tzus philosophy of governance, economics, and morality was considered to be a much more sound philosophy of Chinese thought because it relied upon sacrifice for the cultivation of a modest and well-schooled society.
Hsun Tzu lived during the Warring States, a period of disunity, so he naturally did not have much faith in the corrupt government that was ruling China. For Confucian scholars, the way to maintain order and safety for the people was to bring back ways and rules of the past. However, with the pressure of competition from other states wanting control, rulers were constantly dropping old ways in search for a more modern system that would increase military power as well as gain greater control over the people and material resources. As a Confucius scholar, Hsun Tzu believed that the most important aspect of government was the ritual system. Rituals were important because they were developed by ancient sages to embellish human life by giving us a structure in which we can fully express our natural emotions. Also, rituals were a way to try and limit the power of the ruler and emphasize his obligation to his people. This was a very important idea in Confucianism as a whole. According to Hsun Tzu, and Confucianism, he regarded the state as a family. As a father takes care of his children, a ruler must take care of his people. If the ruler does this accordingly, the people will respond with loyalty.
Hsun Tzu believed that human nature was the same in everyone. No one starts off with moral principles. An increase in greed and struggle for power amidst numerous regimes in China lead Hsun Tzu to his belief that people were not inherently good due to the outbreak of corrupt governance and economic status. This would directly correlate to morality of the state, as Hsun Tzu belief that the only salvation for societys morality was to study the examples of the ancient sages. These sages were the first and last of inherently moral people who did exist like everyone else, but for those who wanted to achieve betterment of ones life was through study. Studying the classic writings of the sages was the most effective way in bettering one self in a lifetime, where your entire life was devoted to study and your personal conduct reflected this. This was the only glimmer of hope as he experienced it himself by studying the classic writings of the sages, for society to curb their own inherently destructive and evil habits.
Mencius believed that human nature was good and that it can be developed by cultivating ones innate tendencies. He believed that the governance of people was based on virtue of a benevolent ruler that would bring success. This governance style would entail a stronger sense of fraternity and stronger bonds between the classes. This would be reinforced by an economic system that is progressive in centralized plots of diversified farms, where a mutual central square is cultivated by multiple families and encompassed their payment for taxation. This would entail families working together towards a mutual goal of bettering the entire community and the state through their taxation. These familiar bonds of filial piety would continue to stabilize their economic status, and create a new social infrastructure that would encompass a similar moral code. According to Mencius, hungry people cannot be moral people, and this economic system would have been effective in unifying the people if people heeded his warnings about the destabilizing morality and political structures.
Mencius, though, had numerous flaws in his philosophy, because his arguments were based on contradictions and vacuity. The political system based on the lessening of the repercussions of laws and lessening taxes by a benevolent rule lead by virtue was the pivotal aspect of his argument that a good natured ruler would be rewarded with obedient subjects. The strict enforcement of armies to serve in battle, as in the methodology of Hsun Tzu, would serve as a catalyst for action, as in Menciuss ideology the inherent selfishness of people would overtake their desire to fight. The economic system conceptualized by Mencius would also fail to improve the circumstances of the people because it wasnt based on any physical evidence. It is stated that on the behalf of his claims of the effective economic system of diversified farms. The vacuity for
s: The importance of the rule of law and the free and compulsory movement of people by force. Both he claims and his critics have tried to argue. In fact he does not hold this to be true at all, however, since it is not true he does not actually have a proof about his claim that the law should be “less strict” or “less merciful”. The main difference is that Mencius does not believe in a free world which “should have no need of laws”. Instead, according to his critics, as he states that people are created free from law they are treated in all manner of ways, and in this way they grow without being subject to laws. Mencius states that in fact most people who are freed from physical law, or who are freed by free will or for some other reason, do not behave in such a way as to feel, but are instead enslaved by the forces brought about by force.
[p] Mencius’ arguments for different types of government include two, or more, types of government:
1) The Free State is the result of individual initiative. Each individual is guided by an agenda, in a manner similar to the way a citizen is guided by any other individual. When confronted by people he argues that this agenda is created to serve only the rich and powerful, and that this means government is a form of oppression, to be suppressed in favor of the better off. Mencius states the following:” In society, the people come first, and the agenda takes control.” A government which is a combination of the rich and powerful is called a “free state”, as it protects the poor from oppression and is the only means of achieving the goal set out for the entire society. Mencius says this because he believes to do this he would have to convince people that being free from government was a gift for them, not another gift. The latter point is not true in the abstract, but rather in the more concrete and personal contexts of human society, where people are increasingly forced to interact and interact with other humans (often outside of themselves): in the form of violence, physical contact, food sources, and of course physical contact with the environment.
[p] An economy is a system that works so as to reduce human stress and increase the efficiency among the different aspects of its operations. When the working people go to work they often try to “just” live life in a healthy way, because the working people often live off of the necessities of their daily lives and are less fortunate, with less need for their necessities. It should not be surprising that when one observes that man’s activities are so low paid, or because of the various occupations and social conditions within his daily life such as business (such as his business and his day time employment), and other things which tend to support low living standards with all kinds of jobs, it goes to show that it is more difficult to work an economy which is designed so as to reduce stress in the people it serves than one designed so as to support a society where stress is lower than satisfaction (and often, as with all other economic problems, we do not get the results we ought to). As is true with most other human problems of life, even when stress is lower than