[MUSIC] The American philosopher, William James, described Mencius as a tender minded philosopher. I don't know whether you would agree with his description or not and perhaps you can discuss this with your peers on our discussion forum. But the reason I'm raising this, is that tender mindedness suggests a contrast with someone who is tough minded. For William James the tough minded philosopher in Confucianism is Xunzi. Xunzi arrived on the Chinese scene roughly fifty years after Mencius in the third century B.C.E. Now the name "Xunzi" or "Master Xun," of course, is a title of respect. His given name is "Kuang" and he was also known as "Xun Qing," another honorific title referencing the political office he once attained. Like Mencius, Xunzi was well known and respected by his contemporaries as a great teacher and thinker. At that time, in the state of Qi, there was an academy where philosophers would gather and debate their views. And Xunzi was there and he was recognised as a leader of the academy. In his writings you will see how he criticised the other currents of thought vying for attention at that time and how he vigorously defended the Confucian tradition. In his defense of Confucianism he also criticised what he took to be erroneous interpretations of the teachings of Confucius. In fact, an early biography of Xunzi describes him as someone who detested the corrupt politics of his age and also the disgraceful and petty scholars, who were just as much to blame for the rampant disorder that was tearing the country apart. Eventually, he had to leave because of slander and he took up an official post in a neighbouring state to the south, where he worked for about eighteen years, during which time he also settled down to write and teach. Among his students were two notable individuals by the name of Li Si and Han Fei, who became influential figures, not in Confucianism however, but in the so called school of Legalism. And they helped the state of Qin to conquer the other warring states and eventually unify China. Now, this may predispose us to thinking about Xunzi's teachings in a particular way. But let's not jump into any conclusions yet, we should always, always be guided by the textual evidence itself. Xunzi visited the state of Qin according to the available historical records. And he was apparently impressed by the efficiency of the government there. However, he complained that there was no attention given to Confucian teachings. The king of Qin was entirely skeptical whether the way of Confucius was of any use to him in governing his state. Xunzi of course tried to persuade him otherwise, but without success. His one time student, Li Si, who became the Prime Minister of Qin later, said that the state of Qin was able to grow strong, and was able to dominate the other states not by abiding by the Confucian doctrines of Humaneness and Rightness, but simply by doing what is most expedient and effective. The philosophy of Xunzi is preserved in a book that now bears his name. The book Xunzi, now contains 32 chapters or books or essays. It is very well organized and reflects the development, the growing maturity of philosophical discourse in early China. They are still dialogues, but the writing is predominantly in the form of discursive essays. Each book addresses a particular theme, for example, book one addresses the importance of learning. Book 7 is titled "On Confucius," which presents Xunzi's interpretation of Confucian political philosophy especially. Book 6 is entitled "Against the 12 Masters or Master Thinkers." So the Xunzi is also an important document for an understanding of early Chinese philosophical debates. And this list of 12 includes Mencius. Now for us, let's make this clear at the outset. The issue is not whether Xunzi or Mencius was right. The fact that Mencius and Xunzi, both great thinkers in their own right, came to understand the teachings of Confucius in significantly different ways, only serves to attest to the richness of Confucian philosophy. Confucian philosophy demands reflection and constant self-examination. There is, at its core, a spirit of critical questioning, one might say. Confucian philosophy would be of little use to those who do not want to think for themselves. And Confusion masters like Mencius and Xunzi realised that the basis of Confucian learning lies in trying to understand why we do what we do, why we believe what we believe, and to determine what is right and what is wrong. While they may differ on important points of interpretation, they are in complete agreement with respect to the spirit of Confucian philosophy. Book 23, or chapter 23 of the Xunzi is entitled "Human Nature is Bad." And this will form the starting point of a discussion of Xunzi's philosophy. The essay begins with this important assertion and I quote, "The nature of human beings is bad. The goodness of people is due to dedicated effort." By human nature or Xing in Chinese, Xunzi means and I quote, "That which is formed by heaven and as such it is not something that can be learned or acquired through effort." Elsewhere in the Xunzi, nature is defined as what constitutes a human being or that which is endowed in every human being at birth and that by which human beings come to be as they are. From this definition, Xunzi then argues that human nature may be described in terms of certain basic drives, desires or natural tendencies. Such as the desires of the ears and the eyes which is to say, all sensory desires. Even more fundamentally, human nature is seen to be driven by the desire for profit or that which benefits oneself. And conversely, the innate tendency to dislike what disagrees with or causes harm to oneself. According to the philosopher Gaozi, you recall as we have seen in our discussion of Mencius earlier, human nature should be understood in terms of natural desires, such as those for food and sex. For Gaozi, it would follow that human nature should be understood as morally neutral. Say my dog ate my lunch because of his desire for food. I might be very upset with him, very angry with him, but I wouldn't say that he is morally bad. In Xunzi's view however, the argument here does not quite give the full picture. And this is because desires always demand gratification, this is simply part and parcel of the nature of human beings. Take the desire for profit, again the concept of profit here should be understood broadly in a sense that human beings naturally like what pleases them, what agrees with them or what brings benefits to them. Following its natural course in a social context, the desire for profit will inevitably lead to people fighting over it either to make sure that one does not lose it or to forcibly take it from others. Consequently Xunzi says, any sense of regard for others or giving way to the wishes of others, the very, very basis of social harmony will surely fail to develop. Following the inborn tendency then of disliking what displeases oneself or what is disagreeable or what causes harm to oneself in the social context will lead to an equally, if not more disastrous end. Dislikes may have deep psychological or neurological basis, but the result is the same, anxiety, frustration or anger arises leading to aversion or even hatred. What is more, is that personal dislikes may be amplified at the social level. Think of it this way, let's say I perceive someone behaving in a disagreeable manner and that person is of a particular ethnicity, I then amplify that perception to the entire ethnic group. Personal dislikes in other words can grow like a cancer into potent prejudices, distorting our judgement, infecting relationships with distrust and animosity. Difference threatens one's sense of self interest according to this view. Consequently, conflict and violence become the norm and one can say goodbye to any sense of trust or respect in good faith. The desires of the ears and the eyes are driven by this deep sense of liking and disliking. If unchecked, excesses, corruption and disorder will inevitably follow. Which is also to say the end of proper conduct, righteous behavior, and reason. The argument is not just that conflict will arise because of the scarcity of resources. Rather, even if there are ample resources, order and harmony based on mutual regard and trust will not be possible if the inborn tendencies and the constant desiring that constitute human nature and set the direction of the heart are given free reign to dictate human life and action. It is in this sense that human nature is said to be bad. That is, it does not on its own lead to goodness. On the contrary, if it is not brought under control, it will lead to conflict and disorder. This does not mean that human beings are born murderers. But tyranny of desire will lead to conflict and violence. The kind of control needed will be discussed later. At this point it is important to understand the logic of Xunzi's argument, how he comes to assert that goodness cannot be traced to nature, but can only be attributed to human effort. To Xunzi, Mencius was perhaps not entirely wrong in identifying an emotion like love to be inherent in human nature. As love can be seen to stem from the more basic sense of liking or being drawn to another person or object. Where Mencius went overboard is that he considered love in its noblest form, which involves giving up one's interest for the sake of others to be inherent in human nature. Like any other emotion, love will also have to be shaped and trained, so that this disruptive tendency is transformed into nobility of character. It's like a piece of wood that is crooked as Xunzi draws an analogy. It cannot become straight by itself, but has to be treated strenuously with the right tools and methods before it can become straight. A piece of metal that is blunt will not become sharp on its own. Sharpness comes only with the application of effort. So what do we need to do to straighten our human nature as it were? The tendencies or predispositions of nature are transacted through the workings of the mind and heart. Should we be then aiming for a mind that is empty of desires? On this question, Xunzi's answer is clear. Desires cannot be eliminated, for they are basic to being human, but they can be checked, controlled and even transformed. How can this be achieved? This will be the topic of our next discussion.
