Exceptions to Confucian ‘Xiao’
This essay was written for Prof. Hyun’s Morality, Justice, and the Good Life class (AH111) at Minerva University in April of 2022.
The Chinese philosopher Mencius preached the Confucian virtue of ren. The character for ren is composed of the symbol for human (人) and the symbol for two (二), and literally means ‘co-humanity’ or ‘humanness,’ but is commonly referred to as ‘benevolence.’ It denotes the good quality of a virtuous human when being altruistic—basically the care and concern with which two people should treat each other—and is exemplified by an adult's protective feelings for children, and a good ruler’s fair treatment of his subjects (Eno, 2016, p.146). Chinese Emperors were required to show moral conduct and fair treatment towards their subjects (displaying ren), else they would lose the ‘Mandate of Heaven,’ or the divine right to rule (Dubs, 1951).
Mencius also preached the virtue of xiao (filial piety). In essence, xiao calls for the proper ordering of relationships within a social hierarchy, referring specifically to the dutiful conduct of a child towards his parents. The character for xiao (孝) fittingly shows a younger man supporting an older man. However, it is implied that this relationship should be somewhat reciprocal[1]: just as parents look after children in their infancy and nurture them (displaying ren), so the young are supposed to look after parents when they are in old age—to revere them, to bury them well, and to sacrifice to them after their death (Chan, 1963). One of the standard beliefs of Confucianism is that xiao is the basis of ren, and that obedience, devotion, and deference to one’s parents and elders leads to family harmony and wellness, as well as sociopolitical stability within a collectivist culture. In accordance with xiao, one must put the needs of parents and family elders over self, spouse, and children, submitting to parents’ judgment, and observing toward them certain prescribed behavioral proprieties, known as li (Britannica, 2022). For a rough example, if a poor man was given a large sum of money, in accordance with xiao, it is moral that he should first spend it on his parents and elder family members before buying himself a large house, thereby contributing to his family’s overall ‘good life.’
So important was xiao to Mencius that he considered it the most fundamental of cardinal virtues, “without which none of the other virtues is possible” (Eno, 2016, p.143). For example, Mencius writes, “When it comes to duty, what is of greatest importance? Duty to one’s parents” (4A.19), and “the substance of humanity is serving one’s parents; the substance of right is obeying one’s elders. The substance of wisdom is unswerving awareness of these two. The substance of ritual is the measured embellishment of these two” (4A.27). Mencius even goes as far to say that “one is not fully a man when one cannot please one’s parents, and one is not fully a son when one cannot obey them” (4A.28).
I will respond to Mencius’s claim that xiao should be consistently followed. In a similar fashion to the ‘Mandate of Heaven’ (albeit on a smaller scale), I believe that parents and elders have an obligation to show ren towards their child to deserve xiao. I will use Shun’s story and real-world examples to argue that in cases of non-reciprocity (when the parents do not exhibit adequate ren towards their child), the child has no moral obligation to exhibit xiao. My normative argument is as follows:
1. It cannot both be true that:
(a) a child should consistently serve his/her parents to achieve a ‘good life’ for themselves and their family
(b) a child consistently serving his/her parents will harm the ‘good life’ of themselves and their family
2. If the parents do not display adequate ren towards their child (for instance, in situations of abuse and neglect), then the child’s consistent serving of their parents will interfere with the child’s physical and mental health, thereby harming their ‘good life.’
3. Therefore, if the parents do not display adequate ren towards their child, the child should not have to consistently serve his/her parents in accordance with xiao.
One assumption in my philosophical argument is that the child wishes to contribute towards the ‘good life’ for themselves and their family. I believe this is a fair assumption to make, since there are only a few cases (for instance, extreme psychopathy or other mental disorders) in which this is not true. It is also important to point out my use of the phrases “consistently serve” and “adequate ren.” By “consistently serve,” I denote the Confucian ideal that, to the best of their ability, the child strives to uphold xiao through consistent practice of reverence, deference, and obedience to the older members of their family. “Adequate ren” is tougher to define. Through this term, I roughly mean that the parents treat their child with enough respect and care to deserve reciprocal treatment (that is, they do not purposefully harm the child’s ‘good life’). This does not necessarily imply that the parents are saints, but rather strive to provide their child with a healthy life full of opportunities. For instance, Mencius’s own mother displayed ren when she decided to move houses three times to give Mencius the best environment to grow up in, inspiring a common saying in China, “Mencius’ Mother, Three Moves” (Butina, 2022).
For evidence to support premises 2 and 3, I will use Mencius’s recount of the legend of the ancient Emperor Shun, as well as a real-world example. I will then respond to possible objections.
The Case of Emperor Shun
Mencius writes in 5A.2 that when he was young, Emperor Shun’s parents forced him to do all the hard work in the family and gave him only the worst food and clothing. They also participated in a plan to kill Shun, which included burning down a building and attempting to trap him in a well. Shun’s story stands out because it is an example of a non-reciprocal child-parent relationship, in which the child (Shun) loves and cares for his parents, despite their hatred and homicidal acts. In doing so, he is respected and revered throughout the village. Mencius uses this story to display Shun’s character as exceptional and ideal (Eno, 2016, p.90). In fact, on the basis of Shun’s filiality alone, he was worthy of being designated to rule the world, despite having no other qualifications (Eno, 2016, p.143).
However, there is one important detail in Shun’s story. Mencius describes how Shun disobeys his parents and takes a wife without telling them. If Shun had told his parents about the wife, he would not have been allowed to marry her, thereby “discarding this fundamental relationship [between a man and a woman]” and “harboring bitterness against his parents.” Therefore, Mencius writes, his choice was justified.
This story seems to contradict itself. On the one hand, Mencius praises Shun for turning the other cheek and loving his parents despite their failure of reciprocity; on the other hand, Mencius justifies Shun’s disobedience to his parents, defying his previous teachings of xiao (which pushes for submission to authority).
Though Shun’s story is minor in the overall text, it reveals a key point—that Mencius concedes there exist some exceptions to xiao when its practice interferes with the child’s ‘good life.’ In this case, Shun’s ‘good life’ required him to craft a fundamental relationship with his wife; when his parents’ lack of ren towards their son prevented him from doing this, it was justified to disobey them. It is evident that Shun’s story provides strong evidence for premise 2 of my argument, especially since it is from the words of Mencius himself.
The Tochigi patricide case
There are many real-world examples exhibiting the tension between parental ren and xiao; here I will focus on the 1968 Tochigi patricide case. Chiyo Aizawa was systematically raped by her alcoholic father, Takeo. She became pregnant 11 times by Takeo and had five daughters. In 1968, Chiyo fell in love with a 22-year-old man, which angered her father. Takeo threatened to kill Chiyo and her children, so Chiyo strangled him. The Utsunomiya District Court acquitted Chiyo because the crime originated in self-defense (Satoh, 2008).
This is a severe example of a father not treating their child in accordance with ren and causing serious harm Chiyo’s ‘good life.’ When submitting to parental authority undermines a child’s own physical and mental health, it creates a hostile environment and interferes with the child’s ability to live a “flourishing” way of life in line with one’s nature (Van Norden, 2003). If Chiyo had obeyed the rules of xiao and acted in submission to her father, she or her children could have been killed. In breaking the rules of xiao and killing Takeo, Chiyo acted in the only way she could to ensure a ‘good life’ for herself and her family. Though the Tochigi patricide case is an extreme example, it helps to illustrate the existence of certain situations in which xiao should not be followed, thus supporting premise 2 of my argument.
Responding to Objections
A possible objection is that my argument is vague. What are the limits of ‘adequate ren’ in premise 2, one may ask? For example, if a parent uses physical punishments to teach their child a lesson (such as yelling or spanking), does it count as harming the child’s ‘good life’ and thereby exempts the parents from xiao? In the same vein, it could be argued that some parental admonishments/punishments may not display ren short-term, but contribute to long-term ren by guiding a child’s moral conduct. For example, a boy may feel that his mother does not have his best interests in mind when she tells him to wash the dishes after each meal; however, this repeated behavior helps to teach the boy responsibility and hospitality.
I confess that I cannot perfectly respond to these objections in such a short amount of space. However, I believe it is possible to differentiate between good-intentioned behavior and outright abuse in most cases. This distinction is important because it helps us determine whether xiao should be consistently followed in a relationship. In the case of Chiyo Aizawa, it is obvious that obedience to the father would be detrimental to Chiyo’s ‘good life,’ but I concede that other situations (as described above) are more difficult to discern.
Conclusion
The tension between submitting to the wishes of one’s parents and elders and working towards one’s own ‘good life’ is seen across many cultures. It constitutes a part of a larger debate between individuality vs. collectivity—what should we value more, one’s individual passions and ‘good life,’ or the well-being of the entire family (or nation, for that matter)? The implications for ren and xiao on family and state dynamics are great, which is why Mencius’s writings continue to be studied and remain topical to this day.
[1] I use the word ‘reciprocal’ here to mean that love and care flows in both directions in a filial relationship, albeit associated with different duties. This is different from ‘reciprocity’ as referring to the Golden Rule, but both have ties to the good life.
Bibliography
Butina, B. (n.d.). Mencius Mother, Three Moves. Ruist Association of America, Inc. Retrieved April 21, 2022, from https://ruistassociation.org/mencius-mother-three-moves/
Chan, W.-T. (Ed.). (1963). A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy. Princeton University Press. http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/at/conf_teaching/ct02.html
Dubs, H. H. (1951). The Development of Altruism in Confucianism. Philosophy East and West, 1(1), 48–55. https://doi.org/10.2307/1396935
Eno, R. (2016). Mencius: A Teaching Translation. https://scholarworks.iu.edu/dspace/handle/2022/23421
Satoh, J. (2008). Judicial Review in Japan: An Overview of the Case Law and an Examination of Trends in the Japanese Supreme Court’s Constitutional Oversight. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 41(2), 603.
Van Norden, B. (2003). Mengzi and Virtue Ethics. Journal of Ecumenical Studies, 40(1–2), 120–136. https://course-resources.minerva.edu/uploaded_files/mu/00259245-9798/mengzi-and-virtue-ethics.pdf
Xiao. (n.d.). In Britannica. Retrieved April 21, 2022, from https://www.britannica.com/topic/xiao-Confucianism