Humanity and Nature in Chinese Thought

University of Hong Kong - 'Humanity and Nature in Chinese Thought'

Please write a concise argument (more than 300 words and less than 500 words) for or against one of the following proposition:

'Chinese 天 tian (nature:sky) is the same as the “God” of the Middle East and Europe.'

“To man belongs a moral nature, conferred on him by Heaven or God, by which he is constituted a law unto himself. But as he is prone to deviate from the path in which, according to his nature… sages have appeared, to explain and regulate this, helping all by their instruction to walk in it.” – James Legge, Zhongyong, 1861.

 

‘Tian’ is not an equivalent term for the Judeo-Christian, theologically saturated concept of God. The Western notion of divine authority, of an omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent (personal) being who created humankind, directs and hands down laws as moral codes, pursues and maintains a direct relationship with His creatures is altogether alien to the Chinese philosophical, natural tradition.

 

“Tian’ is not a God, but a force of nature. In terms of the use of metaphors in Chinese language the term ‘tian’ can be effectively translated as meaning ‘heaven’ or ‘sky.’ Perhaps the first conception, and articulation of this came from Duke Zhou as ‘Tian Ming’ (Mandate of Heaven) as a philosophical doctrine of political theory. The ‘Tian Ming’ concept was an important weapon used to discredit the reigning Shang dynasty, remove their authority and replace it with a natural order, in essence a rival theory to oppose the standard appeal to human authority as a source of legitimacy.

 

The foundation of Duke Zhou’s doctrine of ‘tian’ rests upon its power of guidance with reference to normativity. ‘Tian’ is not conceived of as a personal being (like God) but natural form of guidance. Duke Zhou further develops this as ‘tian-xia’ (Everything under Heaven), meaning that ‘tian’ (Heaven) and its influence permeates all aspects of existence, all living things. No human being can escape its influence. In contrast to a set of ideals handed down from an official self-appointed hierarchy that relies on bonds of respect and fidelity, Duke Zhou is pointing toward a ‘dao’ metaphor – paths as patterns within and under Heaven which can be learned. In essence, Duke Zhou has established a system of natural laws, intricately expressed by a universal force.

 

Confucius adopted the concept of ‘tian-ming’, - taking it from Duke Zhou however, as a humanist and self-professed agnostic he conceives of it as part of his social theory. Under the philosophy of Confucius, the Mandate of Heaven is merely the backdrop behind which human normativity occurs. For the most part, Confucius never discussed ‘tian’ in any substantial detail, much to the annoyance of his disciples. We can certainly conclude that Confucius certainly never regarded ‘tian’ as being equivalent to a divinity, it is reported that he said ‘Tian does not speak - it simply reveals through deeds and affairs.’

 

Mozi regarded ‘tian’ as an all-encompassing beneficial natural power, his discussion and depiction of ‘tian’ almost categorizes it as a personal divine power, however we may be mistaken for assuming that Mozi intended to portray a God. Mozi is more concerned with the total social human benefits in the form of utilitarianism that, in his theory, result from ‘tian’ than on meditating on the possibility of it as part of a heavenly hierarchy. ‘Tian Ming’ surfaces in the thought of Yang Zhu – but his system of ethical egoism places the power of the natural mandate’ firmly within the life of individual. In Yang Zhu’s philosophy human life, constitution and effort comes directly from ‘tian’ as ‘sheng-ming’ or vitality. Mencius ascribes ‘tian’ as the ultimate source of natural morality and guidance, but emphasizes that this morality is specifically channeled through the ‘heart-mind’ of humans, evolving from seeds within.

 

I conclude with the firm resolution that ‘tian,’ according to evidence in the early traditions of Chinese philosophy is contrary to the concept of God.

All Rights Reserved & Copyright David John Drew 'Lord Carville' 2015

Please write a concise argument (more than 300 words and less than 500 words) for or against one of the following proposition. 

 

'Shen Dao shows that commitment to natural dào entails lacking any 是非 shi-fei (this-not that) commitments.'

In opposition to Mencius who maintained a distinction between human beings and other things, stressing the importance of ‘this not that’ qualifications, Shen Dao’s ‘Great Dao Monism’ rejected such distinctions and concentrated on the notion of universal unification of all natural things. To establish this doctrine Shen Dao disposes of knowledge, language and ‘shi and fei.’ The complete focus of his idea is that the ‘Great Dao’ embraces all things irrespective of distinctions. In embracing the ‘Great Dao’ one need not worry about the self or possessing a name – these qualifications only present complex problems of identity. Thus, if one discards knowledge and follows the ‘Great Dao’ then whatever one knows or performs in action in accordance with the dao cannot be wrong. In this context, according to Shen Dao, nothing that one does can be wrong. 

 

In making this claim for the ‘Great Dao Monism’ Shen Dao creates a fatal paradox with regard to guidance. In making the pronouncement “Know not to know” as an example of guidance he does not actually offer any meaningful advice with regard to practical decision-making. The paradox however, is that in taking his advice to abandon knowledge we are actually taking his advice – his knowledge and acting upon it. To take Shen Dao at his word would be to completely ignore him, and thus his observations are completely meaningless. In addition, this attitude forms a deterministic fatalism in the sense that no matter what we intend or perform in terms of our actions everything appears to be pre-ordained with regard to the concept of a universal existence. In simple terms we lack choice, freedom or the capacity to differentiate or make distinctions – all of these conditions have been decided for us.

 

Lao Zi adopts the concept of abandoning knowledge but suggests that knowledge itself is a form of social conditioning, or cultural domination. He therefore discards the sense of fatalism and determinism that plagues Shen Dao’s ‘Great Dao Monism’ of rejecting knowledge and the paradox it contains. Lao Zi suggests that we should abandon that knowledge by which our character has been formed in terms of social conventions, and not being controlled or following the ‘rules’ of society – rather aiming to be guided on a natural dao. 

 

In conclusion, Shen Dao’s advice with regard to abandoning knowledge requires us to completely surrender our free will. His theory will not permit us to make distinctions or identify alternate positions that exist simultaneously. In order for us to be truly whole we must possess the capacity to make the basic distinction between knowledge and ignorance. We are thus immediately in a position were we can consult opposites and their respective values. Only then can we come to a reasoned decision and be confident that we are on the correct path – not merely on a ‘path’ and possibly making errors that could in themselves be considered (by Shen Dao) acceptable.

All Rights Reserved & Copyright David John Drew 'Lord Carville' 2015