Theory of Evil Human Nature
| Theory of Evil Human Nature | |||||||
| Traditional Chinese | 性惡論 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Simplified Chinese | 性恶论 | ||||||
| |||||||
Natural evilness（traditional Chinese:性惡論; simplified Chinese: 性恶论 ）is a view of human nature. It says that human nature tends to be evil, and it is easier to do evil than to do good. It was first proposed by Xunzi against Mencius' Theory of Good Human Nature.[1]
Xunzi says that all human goodness comes from active efforts from humans.[2]
Xunzi
[change | change source]"Human Nature is Evil" is a part of a book written by Xunzi. He was arguing against Mencius about human nature. The term "xing" (性) means "human nature" and refers to the way people are born. Mencius thought that human nature was good. Xunzi disagreed and believed that human nature was evil.[1]
Both believed in human nature and both believed it was possible to become better, but some people refused it.[1] Mencius saw Xing as more related to an ideal state and Xunzi saw it more as a starting state.[1]
Even though Mencius had already died when the book was written, the chapter is written like a conversation between the two philosophers. Xunzi's ideas about becoming a good person were more complex than Mencius's. He believed that people needed to change their nature, not just give up on it. Some people thought Xunzi's ideas were strange, but new discoveries suggest that it might have actually been Mencius who had unusual ideas about human nature.[1]
The chapter is called "Human Nature is Evil," but that's not the whole story. Xunzi thought that people could improve themselves by learning good habits and manners, which he called "artifice." (偽) He believed that people needed to transform their nature to become good. This could be done by learning from a teacher and following rituals and morals.[1]
Even though some people doubt if the chapter is real, it's an important part of Xunzi's philosophy. People still talk about it today and think about the differences between Xunzi and Mencius's ideas about human nature and how to become a better person.[1]
Reading
[change | change source]Xunzi believed that nature is inherently bad, which was the first idea about human nature to emerge in Chinese thinking. These writings are the most important ones to understand his beliefs:[3]
- Human Nature is Evil (性恶篇, Xìng È Piān)
- Rectification of Names (正名篇, Zhèng Míng Piān)
- Eliminating Obscurity (解蔽篇, Jiě Bì Piān)
- On the Institutions of the Legendary Kings (王制篇, Wáng Zhì Piān)
Implications of Xunzi's Theory of Evil Nature
[change | change source]Xunzi defines goodness and evilness based on their consequences (order or chaos), rather than based on the motives of human beings.[4] In other words, his theory of evil human nature is a consequentialist theory, where the actual observed consequences determine whether the nature is good or evil.
In Xunzi's theory of evil nature, "Evil" is the natural nature, which happens naturally when people put in no effort.[5] An artifice (偽) is something that can be achieved by learning and working at it.[6] Artifice (偽) has two meanings: one is the aspect of action, that is, human behavior; the other is the aspect of result, the personality cultivated by human behavior.[7]
The nature of evil: "The nature of man is evil, and his good is artifice (偽). The nature of human beings is born with the desire for profit, and in obedience to this, the competition is born and the resignation dies; born with the desire for disease and evil, and in obedience to this, the cruelty of thieves is born and the faithfulness dies; born with the desire of the ears and eyes, and the desire for sex, and in obedience to this, the obscenity is born and the rituals of justice and literature die. Then, from the nature of people, obedience to human feelings, must be out of the competition, in line with the violation of the division of chaos, and return to the tyranny, so there must be the teacher of the law, the way of ritual and justice, and then out of the resignation, in line with the rationale, and return to the rule. In this view, then, the human nature of evil, clear. The good is also artifice."
— Xunzi, Human Nature is Evil (性恶篇, Xìng È Piān)
He said that human nature is the natural nature or natural nature of human beings in the true sense, and it is the animal nature of human beings. For example, he believes that human nature is born to care about their own interests . Following this human nature, there is only the virtue of fighting for and giving up. will perish, not the essence of man. His theory of evil nature means that when people only obey their natural nature, bad results will be caused, while "goodness" is acquired through learning and hard work. It can be seen that Xunzi is an empiricist who sees the evil of human nature from the theory of consequence.
He said that man-made methods should be used to change the evil results. The nature of Mencius' theory of good nature takes the essential meaning, that is, the difference between human beings and animals, the inner morality of human beings, that is, the four virtues, human beings have the nature of being good, and the internal source of value. And Mencius should not object to the natural nature of man, because this is clearly observed in experience. The definition of evil nature theory is that if people follow the natural nature, it will cause evil results; while goodness is acquired through learning and hard work. The implication is that although the nature of nature is not evil, it is the source of evil effects. It can be seen from the argument given by Xunzi at the beginning of Xing Evil, although Xunzi failed to explain the root of value, but this definition is tenable, because we can correct the problem of the root of value in his theory, such as the root of value is external to man, such as religion.
Xunzi also used a lot of arguments to prove the theory of natural evil in "Xing Evil":
- The curved wood can only be straightened after being planted;
- Metal that has bluntness needs to be polished before it can be used.
- "Human's natural nature" can only be "good" after "learning from culture" and "the way of etiquette".
Explaining that goodness can be done by the "false" of the future (teaching culture, etiquette) does not explain why people with "evil nature" can have "human-made goodness", nor can it explain why imitation and etiquette can be produced.
The theory of evil nature as a problem with the theory of human nature?
[change | change source]Mou Zongsan, Lao Siguang and other scholars believe that Xunzi’s theory of evil nature has the following problems:
The biggest problem with Xunzi's theory of evil human nature is that it lacks a moral value foundation,[8] and ultimately leads to the development of authoritarianism.[9]
Xunzi only stated that the "heart" can observe reason, that is, it can distinguish between right and wrong, good and evil,[10] but it is not the source of value. So where does the standard come from? According to Xunzi's theory of evil human nature, morality will ultimately become a tool of external value used to maintain social stability and appeal to authoritarianism. Mencius' theory of good human nature, on the other hand, states that humans are inherently good and we have an internal value foundation (the Four Beginnings).
A Comparison Between Confucius, Mencius and Xun
[change | change source]According to Fu Ssu-nien, Xunzi's ideas are more aligned with Confucius than Mencius. Confucius believed that people are born with the potential to become good, but they still need to learn and cultivate themselves to reach their full potential. This is different from Mencius' belief that everything necessary for self-improvement is already within oneself.[11]
Xunzi is a great Confucian who believed that people can become good and that the best kind of person is a saint. Some say he is as great as Confucius and Mencius. However, he only observed how people behaved empirically and didn't find where goodness comes from. This is a big problem with his idea that people have the idea of natural evilness. Some people think this happened because he was focusing on Mencius too much.[12] But others believe that when Xunzi said "nature is evil", he meant that people can be good, but also have a tendency to be bad.[13]
Buddhist point of view
[change | change source]According to Buddhism, there is no inherent good or evil in human nature. These qualities are shaped by past karma and habits, like a candle lighting another candle. Mahayana Buddhism believes that everyone has the potential to become a Buddha, which is the basis of all beings' perfection, except for one exception: Icchantika. Master Zhiyi of the Tiantai school in the Song Dynasty proposed the idea that "Buddha nature is inherently good and is always good in its expression," implying that there is no inherent evil in Buddha nature.
European point of view
[change | change source]Many western philosophers, such as Machiavelli, Schopenhauer, and Hegel, believed human nature was evil.
Traditions such as liberalism and democracy have often been advocated by people who wanted to keep human nature in check, not by people who thought human nature was good
Schopenhauer's point of view
[change | change source]Schopenhauer said
Original sin is already carried in the newborn baby, but it is not revealed until he grows up. Adam was unfortunate, and we are all unfortunate in Adam. In fact, original sin (the affirmation of the will) and emancipation (the denial of the will) are the great truths that constitute the core of Christianity, and everything else is mostly just the outer skin and shell or appendages of this core
— Arthur Schopenhauer, The World as Will and Representation
The will to live is directionless and cannot be measured, making life meaningless, and everything that follows is painful.
Related pages
[change | change source]- Original sin
- Human nature
- Theory of Good Human Nature
- Hamartiology
- Sin
- evil
- Total depravity
- Radical evil
References
[change | change source]- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 Goldin, Paul R. (2018), "Xunzi", in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2018 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, retrieved 2023-04-14
- ↑ http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/ps/cup/xunzi_human_nature.pdf
- ↑ 可以參考《孟子·告子篇·上》公都子列舉當時的性論當中，並沒有包括性惡的理論。
- ↑ 性惡篇：「凡古今之所謂善者，正理平治也；所謂惡者，偏險悖亂也。是善惡之分也。」
- ↑ 性惡篇：「不可學，不可事，而在人者，謂之性」
- ↑ 性惡篇：「可學而能，可事而成之在人者，謂之偽。是性偽之分也。」
- ↑ 正名篇：「心慮而能為之動，謂之偽；慮積焉，能習焉而後成，謂之偽。」
- ↑ Many followers of Mou Zongsan hold this view.
- ↑ This is a misunderstanding of the text of Xunzi by Lao Siguang. See Lao Siguang's "A New History of Chinese Philosophy".
- ↑ "Exposing the Hidden Chapter": "Therefore, the human heart is like a bowl of water. If it is level and not stirred, then the muddy sediment will settle at the bottom and the clear water will rise to the top. Then one can see the eyebrows and observe reason. If a gentle breeze passes over it, the muddy sediment will be stirred up from the bottom, and the clear water will become turbulent at the top, and then one cannot obtain the correct form of the big picture. The heart is also like this. Therefore, take it away with reason and nourish it with clarity. Nothing can incline it, and it can be used to determine right from wrong and resolve doubts."
- ↑ 傅斯年《性命古訓辯證》，139頁；收錄於《傅孟真先生集》第三冊，臺北，國立臺灣大學出版，1952年。
- ↑ 傅斯年《性命古訓辯證》，164頁；收錄於《傅孟真先生集》第三冊，臺北，國立臺灣大學出版，1952年。
- ↑ 胡適認為：「孟子又以爲人性含有『良知良能』，故說性善。荀子又不認此說。他說人人雖有一種『可以知之質，可以能之具』，但是『可以知』未必就知，『可以能』未必就能。……例如『目可以見，耳可以聽』。但是『可以見』未必就能見得『明』，『可以聽』未必就能聽得『聰』。這都是駁孟子『良知良能』之 說。依此說來，荀子雖說性惡，其實是說性可善可惡。」《中國古代哲學史（三）》，36頁，商務印書館，臺北，1961年臺二版。
Sources
[change | change source]- 勞思光. 《新編中國哲學史一卷》. 桂林: 廣西大學出版社.
- 方世豪. 《性惡和性善有什么不同—荀子人性論》.
- 李滌生. 《荀子集釋》. 臺灣: 學生書局.
- 馮耀明 (July 2005). "《荀子人性論新詮:附{榮辱}篇23字衍之糾謬》" (第十四期): 169-230頁.
{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires|journal=(help) - 商務印書館辭典研究中心 編 (2003). 《古今漢語字典》.
- 何淑靜. 《孟荀道德實踐理論之研究》. 台北市: 文津出版社有限公司.