This paper examines Confucianism as a philosophical and cultural tradition, situating it against Western, Judeo-Christian, and modern scientific worldviews. It explores the distinctive characteristics of the Chinese worldview — particularly its monistic emphasis on harmony — and contrasts these with Western dualism. The paper then investigates whether Confucianism constitutes a form of humanism and how Confucian humanism differs from secular humanism. It analyzes the "one thread" running through the Analects and its parallels in other religious traditions. The discussion of uprightness (chih/ji) connects Confucian moral philosophy to broader questions of justice. Finally, the paper explains the two pillars of Confucian teaching — humanity (jen/ren) and propriety (li) — and their role in the process of self-cultivation.
Several authors define "worldview" in different terms. According to Fritjof Capra, a social paradigm is a particular vision of a community in which values, perceptions, concepts, and practices are shared among the members of that community. The vision of the community is the foundation upon which the community organizes itself (Capra, p. 34). According to Bowers, a worldview is that which brings about a sense of legitimacy and coherence to society, to the norms present in society, to its institutions, and to individual experience, as well as to the moral concepts of individuals (Bowers, p. 52). He gives three examples: original sin, rational thought leading to empowerment, and intellectual authority determined on the basis of data. In this way, a worldview can be considered a pair of glasses through which we see our experiences. While looking through it, some issues come into focus, others become blurred, and still others disappear entirely. There are also issues that cannot be seen even through these glasses — something beyond them altogether. A worldview helps the individual decide about the environment around him, to judge what is right and wrong, and by this means society is organized through the judgments of individuals.
By making a distinction between nature and man, between mind and matter, and between subject and object, Western philosophy — which had its origins in Hebrew and Greek thought — took a dualistic approach toward reality. Christian philosophy, rooted in the Hebrew tradition, believed in a complete separation of God from the universe. Chinese philosophy, on the other hand, believed in the unity of God and the universe. Thus, while Western dualistic tendencies emphasized the opposition of man with nature, Chinese monism emphasized the unity of man with nature. The Western division led to treating nature as an object, with its study becoming science, while the study of the human subject or spirit led to logic, epistemology, and the study of human psychology and freedom. The Chinese emphasis on monism and harmony led to the study of aesthetics more than logic, searching for deeper meanings rather than the falsification or verification of propositions. This resulted in less tension in Chinese philosophy compared to that found in Western philosophy.
An explanation is required for how and why Greek and Hebraic traditions succeeded even outside the regions of their origin, and why they were accepted and flourished in Europe, Great Britain, and the New World. These Western societies, having entirely different environments and conditions from the places of origin, nonetheless accepted and were shaped by Greek and Hebraic thought. The conditions in Western Europe were similar to those in China, and both had agriculture as their backbone — yet the West took the Greco-Hebraic way of thinking and not the Chinese one. Dynamism developed from the contrasts in the West, while a more static worldview resulted from the harmony of the Chinese outlook, its respect for traditional values and customs, and its search for knowledge. There is some connection between the physical characteristics of a country and the thinking that develops within it, but cause-and-effect links must be carefully found and demonstrated rather than assumed.
The environment and conditions in the Roman Empire were entirely different from those of its predecessors, yet Christianity flourished there — something that environmental theory alone cannot explain. Chinese thought, as it developed in later China, can be traced to original roots and the influence of tradition, and this theory of growth from original roots might explain Greek philosophy in later Greece as well. However, the reason other countries adopted these traditions, lost ground for a time, and then saw them flourish again is beyond the reach of this explanation. We see both the rationalism of Plato and the empiricism of his student Aristotle emerging in Greece, and they held different views on the relation of man and nature even though they grew up in the same society and geographical environment. This demonstrates that natural environmental conditions alone do not determine the way of thought. Origin and validity are different things; one is not fully dependent on the other, nor can one fully explain the other.
The logical consistency, coherence, comprehensiveness, and strength of both Greek and Hebraic traditions in accounting for human experience may partly explain their domination in Western European countries. As the history of Western thought demonstrates, worldviews can be — and in fact are — evaluated, changed, discarded, or exchanged for others. Environment and socio-cultural conditions alone cannot explain the development and power of Christianity and the Judeo-Christian traditions. Christianity, which initially was a religion of slaves in the Roman Empire, subsequently grew into the religion of the Empire itself — a development far beyond the reach of geographical or cultural explanation. The notion of transcendence upheld by the Judeo-Christian traditions, and its connection to ethics, has had a strong human appeal, both logically and emotionally.
The rise of modern science and of modern economics went hand in hand, each requiring a degree of political freedom for its growth. The development of science requires viewing nature as an object, while also requiring a degree of human freedom, which in turn depends on viewing man as a subject. Human freedom developed alongside the notion of human beings as moral persons with rights. The question then arises whether Western and Chinese views of nature and man can be combined, and if so, how. The attempt to introduce Marxism into China as a means of integrating Western and Chinese thought remains a puzzle. The Chinese worldview promotes an ever-evolving nature without any set beginning or end; Chinese analogical and correlative thinking accepts change and process as having priority over rest and permanence, and posits no ultimate agency responsible for the order of things in general. This philosophy sees history as more dialectical or cyclical than linear, and it has implications for international relations, affecting understandings of relationships, time, and agreements.
A philosophy concerned with human beings, their interests, and their achievements — rather than with purely abstract or religious questions — is characteristic of Confucianism. According to Confucianism, man is the center of the universe, and man must live with other human beings because he cannot live alone. The eventual aspiration of human beings is individual satisfaction, and peace is the essential requirement for realizing it. Based on love and duties, Confucius identified five human relationships through which peace can be obtained. To develop the Great World Unity, war has to be eliminated. Confucius and his followers viewed jen (pronounced ren), or humanity, as the most important virtue. Confucius did not explicitly define jen, even though it is the essence of his teaching (Huang, p. 30).
When a student asked whether a certain individual or a certain kind of behavior demonstrated jen, Confucius replied that the individual or behavior in question fell somewhat short of it. Confucius noted that not many people are able to keep jen constantly in mind, yet he also insisted that jen is very close to us. Because "humanism" deals with ren or humanness, humanism is the core of Confucianism. This is specifically emphasized by the Mencian wing of the Confucian tradition and was elevated to a metaphysical level by later Neo-Confucian schools of the Song-Ming period. Confucianism appears to stand as an open counterpart to Chinese communism, since twentieth-century Confucian scholars credited the word "humanism" to Confucianism; this new understanding must itself be "historicized" as a metacommentary (Huang, p. 32).
The distinctive characteristics of Confucian humanism are evident in the teachings of Confucius himself. He taught that a person cannot bear difficulties for long, nor enjoy success, if he is not a man of humanity (ren). The man of knowledge develops humanity and simplicity, and is free from vices if he sets his mind on humanity. Riches and honor are what every person desires, said Confucius, but these do not endure if obtained through treachery and immoral acts. Every person dislikes poverty and disgrace, but if these are avoided only by immoral means, they must still be accepted. A person who drifts from kindness never rises to the level of a superior man (Huang, p. 33). According to Confucius, a man of knowledge delights in water, while a man of kindness delights in mountains; the man of intelligence is active, while the man of humanity enjoys long life. A learned and kind man will never harm the human race and would rather give up his life to realize humanity. Confucius explained to Tzu-Chang that a person who can follow five things — sincerity, charity, honesty, meticulousness, and kindness — in any place is a man of humanity. If a person is sincere, he will be respected; if charitable, all will praise him; if honest, he will be relied upon; if careful, he will succeed; and if kind, others will help him (Huang, p. 35).
Confucianism differs fundamentally from secular humanism. Secular humanism is among the most systematic of non-Christian philosophies, and it came under intense scrutiny from evangelical Christianity in the early 1980s. Its ethical foundations draw from the philosophers, scientists, and poets of classical Greece and Rome, from ancient Chinese Confucian society, from the Carvaka movement in India, and from other intellectual and moral traditions. Secular humanism is focused on reason, facts, and methods of inquiry as means of solving human problems. It stands against faith and is based on human understanding, intelligence, and outlook toward life. It is a philosophy grounded in the search for political and social principles of ethical conduct, aimed at achieving the well-being and progress of human beings through reason and science. It does not look to supernatural elements — considered outside this universe — to solve human problems; rather, history, individual experience, and reason are its resources.
Every religion generally contains the following components: (1) a Creator who gives rise to the world, organic life, and human intelligence — associated with a cosmology, even if unaccepted by science; (2) a metaphysics that clarifies the relationship between the Creator and human life, the significance of human life, and the emergence of moral laws; and (3) a community of people who order their personal lives, society, and government according to those principles. With these considerations, Confucianism can be considered a great religion of mankind, though it has no visible institution or a concretized God. Confucianism provides a cosmology that explains the rise of the universe and organic life: Wu-Chi leads to Tai Chi, which gives rise to Yin and Yang; Yin and Yang form 8 Kwa (Trigrams) and 64 Kwa (Hexagrams) (Taylor, p. 66).
"Arguments for and against religious classification"
"Zhong and Shu as the golden rule"
"Chih, moral rectitude, and political order"
"Humanity and propriety in social harmony"
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.