The ancient people who desired to have a clear moral harmony in the world would first order their national life; those who desired to order their national life would first regulate their home life; those who desired to regulate their home life would first cultivate their personal lives; those who desired to cultivate their personal lives would first set their hearts right; those who desired to set their hearts right, would first make their wills sincere; those who desired to make their wills sincere would first arrive at understanding; understanding comes from the exploration of the knowledge of things. When the knowledge of things is gained, then understanding is reached; when understanding is reached, then the will is sincere; when the will is sincere, then the heart is set right; when the heart is set right, then the personal life is cultivated; when the personal life is cultivated, then the home life is regulated; when the home life is regulated, then the national life is orderly; and when the national life is orderly, then the world is at peace. From the Emperor down to the common man, the cultivation of the personal life is the foundation of all. It is impossible that when the foundation is disorderly, the superstructure can be orderly. There has never been a tree whose trunk is slender and whose top branches are heavy and strong. There is a cause and a sequence in things, and a beginning and end in human affairs. To know the order of precedence is to have the beginning of wisdom.
Confucius
(qtd. Lin Yutang)(bold mine)
Posts
3 comments:
This quote brought to mind, one obviously previously immersed in the study of psychology,of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. It seems that Mr. Maslow ripped off Confucius.
How the psychology of a citizen affects sociology of a society. The time and energy available due to status in this world (money or power)allows us to contemplate such issues as self-actualization or the cultivation of the personal life. Oh, intelligence! Oh, wealth and control! Such a sugar coated curse! I recently picked up this book (halfway read) called How I Became Stupid, by Martin Page. This whole idea completely contradicts Confucius. I, educated and financially secure, find it hard to side with one or the other. But with that in thought...then I guess I've been forced by my privilege to analyze my own "personal life." It comes back to psychology and the theory of Acceptance. One must not only have knowledge about one's self, but accept themselves as well. That's the tough part. Now if you are "stupid" like the character attempts to become in my book, you don't have to accept anything because you are unaware of yourself. HMMM.
" 5) Cognitive: to know, to understand, and explore;
6) Aesthetic: symmetry, order, and beauty;
7) Self-actualization: to find self-fulfillment and realize one's potential; and
8) Self-transcendence: to connect to something beyond the ego or to help others find self-fulfillment and realize one's potential;." Malsow
I hope to find myself either stupid or self-transcendent. It seems inherently lazy to be stupid. But reality is it's probably easier to become self-transcendent. Easier to learn than to forget, so to speak (and only for myself).
"He envied them all that they did not know." - Oscar Wilde, "Lord Arthur Savile's Crime." Quote taken from my book :)
I hope to be a part of your journey of either becoming stupid or self-transcendent "To know the order of precedence is to have the beginning of wisdom." as much as you have become an ignition to my own.
You move between a lot of ideas here, Tess. I would challenge your first idea by saying: Confucius proves just the opposite. You're looking at things from a modern point of view. You see Maslow's hierarchy in terms of priviledge (ie luxury to explore the self, time to discover oneself), but for Confucius, I don't think the two go hand in hand. The concepts and words that the Chinese philosopher uses are so broad that I don't think they imply the same thing as Maslow. Confucious says, "explore the things of the world". Do you have to have priviledge to do that? Or "understanding"? Or "setting one's heart right"? None of these concepts imply priviledge to me. In fact, I think Confucius is offering just the opposite, a system for all human beings; that all humans regarless of wealth or status can live up to. Confucianism, the way I understand it, is almost like a religion. By applying atwentieth century "social conciousness" perspective, you lose the original context. Were there inequalities back then? Undoubtedly. But Confucianism, which every child in China had to study for centuries and centuries, and still does today, seems to have a transcendent value, a spiritual value. It's a sort of idealism. Something to yearn toward and order one's life by. The two hierarchies are similar, but they are also very different. It's an interesting connection to make however and I'm glad you did spur this conversation. I just don't know if I agree with you about the money power thing. I can see that aspect in Maslow. But I don't know if I see it in Confucius. Confucius presents an ethical hierarchy. Maslow's is psychological. I can relate to the Confucious because, to me, his system is a deeply personal way of becoming a complete human being. As for the book you mention, I'm not sure I understand the connection to these issues.
Problems is there are too much conclusions of knowledge to be made.
The world is not at peace because everyone fights over these seemingly subjective conclusions.
I think anyway.
Post a Comment