MAKING CONNECTIONS
How do Plato's arguments about erotic love compare with the sociobiological arguments advanced by Edward O. Wilson in "The Fitness of Human Nature" (p. 356)? Does modern evolutionary science support or contradict the notion that we have a deep-seated longing to form attachments with other people? How so?
Compare the use of a mythical "state of nature" in the "Speech of Aristophanes" with that found in Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan (p. 94). What do philosophers gain by presenting human beings in a mythical past and drawing conclusions from their fictional portraits?
WRITING ABOUT THE TEXT
Use the "Speech of Aristophanes" as the basis for an essay about the nature of masculinity and femininity. Discuss whether or not the assumptions at the basis of the allegory can be used to derive valid points about human gender.
Compare Aristophanes's creation myth with another creation narrative or origin myth. Analyze the power of a narrative from the past to explain things about the present.
Explain, in your own words, the underlying argument about human nature at the heart of the "Speech of Aristophanes."
mencius
Man's Nature Is Good
[CIRCA 300 BCE]
OF THE HUNDREDS OF GREAT Chinese philosophers, poets, novelists, and statesmen whose works have been read in the West, only two have been given Latin names: Kung Fu Tzu (551-479 bce), who is known in the West as Confucius, and Meng Tzu (circa 371-circa 289 bce), who is known as Mencius. After Confucius himself, Mencius is the most important figure in the development of Confucianism, a system of rites, rituals, and social observances that was the official state religion of China for nearly two thousand years.
Mencius lived and wrote during one of the most spectacular eras of social upheaval that the world has ever known: the Period of Warring States (475-221 bce). During this period, the area now known as China consisted of numerous smaller states—all remnants of the great Chou Empire—that were constantly at war against each other. Confucianism, Legalism, Moism, and Taoism all emerged during this time as different ways to answer the most important question of the day: what is the best way to ensure political stability? The general Confucian answer to this question is that good government requires good leaders, and good leaders must be good people—people who honor their ancestors, observe the ancient rites, and act toward others with a spirit of rectitude and benevolence.
During Mencius's lifetime, Confucians were split on the question of human nature. Confucius had been puzzlingly vague on this matter, insisting only that all people had a duty to observe the rites and rituals handed down by their ancestors. Some, such as Mencius, took this to mean that humans were inherently good and, with proper training, could become perfect. Others, such as Hsun Tzu, believed that the Confucian rites were necessary because humans were inherently evil and required rites to keep them in check. Mencius's arguments ultimately prevailed and influenced future generations of Confucians.
The excerpt here is drawn from Chapter 21 of Mencius's major work, called the Mencius, and consists of a series of conversations between Mencius and the philosopher Kao Tzu and his disciples. Kao Tzu believed that human nature was neither inherently good nor inherently evil but a "blank slate" that could be conditioned in both directions. In Kao's philosophy, the love that people feel toward their relatives stems from internal human nature, but the respect that people show for strangers— and for the rites and traditions that were so important to Confucianism—must be conditioned by external forces. Mencius and his disciple Kung-tu refuse to make this distinction and insist that both love and respect proceed from internal feelings that form part of human beings' nature.
Mencius's rhetorical style is somewhat confusing at first because, like Plato in the "Gorgias," (p. 166 ), he advances his own arguments in a dialogue with others. Mencius adds an additional layer of complexity to this dialogue form by filtering Kao's arguments through a student, Kung-tu, who listens to both Kao and Mencius and tries to determine which of them speaks the truth.
1
Master Kao said: "The nature of things is like willow wood, and Duty is like cups and bowls. Shaping human nature into Humanity and Duty is like shaping willow wood into cups and bowls."
"Do you follow the nature of willow wood to shape cups and bowls," replied Mencius, "or do you maul it? If you maul willow wood to make cups and bowls, then I guess you maul human nature to make Humanity and Duty. It's talk like yours that will lead people to ravage Humanity and Duty throughout all beneath Heaven."
2
Master Kao said: "The nature of things is like swirling water: channel it east and it flows east, channel it west and it flows west. And human nature too is like water: it doesn't choose between good and evil any more than water chooses between east and west."
"It's true that water doesn't choose between east and west," replied Mencius, "but doesn't it choose between high and low? Human nature is inherently good, just like water flows inherently downhill. There's no such thing as a person who isn't good, just as there's no water that doesn't flow downhill.
"Think about water: if you slap it, you can make it jump over your head; and if 5 you push and shove, you can make it stay on a mountain. But what does this have to do with the nature of water? It's only responding to the forces around it. It's like that for people too: you can make them evil, but that says nothing about human nature." . . .
6
Adept Kung-tu[31] said: "Master Kao said: Human nature isn't good, and it isn't evil. There are others who say: Human nature can be made good, and it can be made evil. That's why the people loved goodness when Wen and Wu ruled, and they loved cruelty when Yu and Li ruled.[32] And there are still others who say: Human nature is inborn: some people are good and some evil. That's why a Hsiang could have Yao as his ruler, a Shun could have Blind Purblind as his father, a Lord Ch'i of Wei and Prince Pi Kan could have the tyrant Chou as their nephew and sovereign.[33]
"But you say: Human nature is good. Does that mean all the others are wrong?" "We are, by constitution, capable of being good," replied Mencius. "That's what I mean by good. If someone's evil, it can't be blamed on inborn capacities. We all have a heart of compassion and a heart of conscience, a heart of reverence and a heart of right and wrong. In a heart of compassion is Humanity, and in a heart of conscience is Duty. In a heart of reverence is Ritual, and in a heart of right and wrong is wisdom. Humanity, Duty, Ritual, wisdom—these are not external things we meld into us. They're part of us from the beginning, though we may not realize it. Hence the saying: What you seek you will find, and what you ignore you will lose. Some make more of themselves than others, maybe two or five or countless times more. But that's only because some people fail to realize their inborn capacities. "The Songs say:
Heaven gave birth to humankind, and whatever is has its own laws: cleaving to what makes us human, people delight in stately Integrity.
Of this, Confucius said: Whoever wrote this song knew the Way well. So whatever 10 is must have its own laws, and whenever they cleave to what makes us human, the people must delight in stately Integrity."
7
Mencius said: "In good years, young men are mostly fine. In bad years, they're mostly cruel and violent. It isn't that Heaven endows them with such different capacities, only that their hearts are mired in such different situations. Think about barley: if you plant the seeds carefully at the same time and in the same place, they'll all sprout and
successor. Blind Pureblind: Shun's wicked father also called Ku-Sau. Lord Ch'i of Wei: a wise man who refused to serve the wicked tyrant Chou, who killed his own uncle Prince Pi Kan. The point of all these examples is to refute Mencius's major claim—that human nature is essentially good and made bad by environment—by showing that the same environments that produced some of the most righteous people in history also produced some of the worst.