text. On the one hand Confucius says that virtue is inborn in every human being and all he needs to
do is call it out, “Is benevolence so far away? I wish for benevolence, and benevolence is attained”
(Baird & Heimbeck, 314), which essentially means that he believes that human nature is intrinsically
good. From the political point of view, Confucius seems to propagate the idea that traditional
ethiocracy, which required the most virtuous to be ruler because virtue was in line with human
nature, was a political ideal. “Just desire the good yourself and the common people will be good.”
(Baird & Heimbeck, 328) Confucius also emphasized the inner-relations of man’s self with virtue.
“…the practice of benevolence originate from self and not from others.” While on the other hand,
he also suggests that men must be molded in order to become Junzis, “Like bone cut, like horn
polished, / Like jade carved, like stone ground.” (Baird & Heimbeck, 298), which in essence means
that men are not born with all the qualities and virtues required of a Junzi but must be worked on to
be brought to that position. Considering that this, in fact, is the basis on which the Confucian
project is founded, it is evident that Confucius’ view on human nature has not been either clearly or
distinctly supplied in the Analects. “…one of his disciples complained that ‘one cannot get to hear
his view on human nature’ ” (Lau, 36)
Two Confucian disciples, Mencius and Xunzi, took up the question on human nature and
delved deeper into the riddle that Confucius had posed in his Analects and other texts, regarding the
intrinsic nature of human nature. In an attempt to derive meaning from Confucius’ writings, these
two disciples charted completely different courses for their theories. Mencius, who was, in fact
Xunzi’s teacher, believed that human nature was intrinsically good and quoted several of Confucius’
works in an attempt to legitimize this belief. “There is no man who is not good.” (Baird and
Heimbeck, 353) Xunzi, on the other hand, despite being Mencius’ disciple, decided to explore a
completely opposite theory that established that Confucius, in fact believed that human nature is
intrinsically bad. “The nature of man is evil; his goodness is the result of his activity.” (Chun, 128)
In my opinion, Mencius seems to hold an almost Aristotelian view of why human nature is
intrinsically good i.e. he believed that in order to determine what a thing is, it is essential to know its
essence (genus plus the difference of species). Mencius seemed quite aware of the sameness within
mankind, “Now things of the same kind are all alike. Why should we have doubts when it comes to
man? The sage and I are of the same kind” (Baird & Heimbeck, 355) and realized that it was the
essence of an individual that made him different. Mencius went as far with his theory as to say that
there is rarely much of a difference between a man considered virtuous and another considered evil.
“Slight is the difference between man and the brutes. The common man loses this distinguishing
feature, while the gentleman retains it. Shun understood the way of things and had a keen insight
into human relations. He followed the path of benevolence and righteousness. He did not need to
pursue benevolence and righteousness” (Mencius. IVB, 19.) Clearly, the essence or the
distinguishing feature of man must be understood through the "slight difference" between man and
the brutes. The statement about Shun is an example that benevolence and righteousness are the
interior path of man, following which will have a great effect. Concerning human nature, Mencius
presented a “four heart” theory that clearly established the goodness of human nature and how the
common man could lose it. In this theory, Mencius stated that “…whoever is devoid of the heart of
compassion is not human, whoever is devoid of the heart of shame is not human, whoever is devoid
of the heart of courtesy and modesty is not human, and whoever is devoid of the heart of right and
wrong is not human” (Mencius. IIA, 6) Thus, the goodness of human nature, according to Mencius,
resided in the goodness of the heart. However, this goodness could not be put into practice without
awareness. “…that goodness exists only in the state of germ and needs to be retained, nourished,
and developed”(Fu, “Human Nature and Human Education”, Par. 17) The theory of “four hearts”
was the main theory that Mencius based his belief in the goodness of human nature in. On several
occasions, Mencius also references Confucius in order to strengthen his theory of goodness of
human nature.
“The Odes say,
Heaven produces the teeming masses,
And where there is a thing there is a norm.
If the people help on to their constant nature,
They would be drawn to superior virtue. (Ode #206)
Confucius commented, ‘The author of this poem must have the knowledge of the Way.’
Thus when there is a thing there is a norm, and because the people hold on to their constant nature,
they are drawn to superior virtue.” (Baird and Heimbeck, 355)
It is thus, very evident, that Mencius believes that human nature is basically and intrinsically good
but may be tainted by outward forces, circumstances and even lack of focus and desire on the part
of the individual.
“There was a time when the trees were luxurious on Ox Mountain, but as it is on the outskirts of a
great metropolis, the trees are constantly lopped by axes. Is it any wonder they are no longer
fine...there is certainly no lack of new shoots…but then the cattle and sheep come to graze upon the
mountain. That is why it is as bald as it is…A man’s letting go of his true heart is like the trees and
the axes…if one does not give his whole mind to it, one will never master it…” (Baird and
Heimbeck, 356)
Mencius is adamant about the latent goodness that lies in every human being that can grow and
flourish if developed but can just as easily die out and turn evil if neglected. “Confucius said, ‘Hold
on to it and it will remain; let go of it and it will disappear. One never knows the time it comes or
goes, neither does one know the direction.’ It is perhaps to the heart this refers.” (Baird and
Heimbeck, 356)
Xunzi seemed to regard human nature as something that every individual is born with. He
also claimed that "the nature is that which is given by Heaven; you cannot learn it, you cannot
acquire it by effort" (Dubbs, 23:290). According to this, Xunzi seemed to assume that man’s instinct
was equivalent to his nature. In this case, the obvious stance for him to take would be that human
nature is essentially neutral, neither swaying toward good or evil but instead, Xunzi argues that if
man followed his instincts without restriction, it would result in “strife and rapacity, combined with
rebellion and disorder, ending in violence.” (Dubbs, 23:289) Undoubtedly this is a sure sign of the
fact that Xunzi believed that human nature was, in fact, basically evil. Xunzi did not believed that the
ability to make distinctions and have a sense of righteousness was a part of human nature or that
developing these would essential lead to li and ren. Instead, Xunzi proclaimed that li and ren were
developed through artificial activity and human effort.
“Crooked wood must be heated and bent before it becomes straight. Blunt metal must be ground
and whetted before it becomes sharp. Now the nature of man is evil. It must depend on teachers
and laws, man is unbalanced, off the track and incorrect…the sage kings…created the rules of
propriety and righteousness and instituted laws and systems in order to correct man’s feelings,
transform them and direct them so that they all may become disciplined and conform with the Way
(Tao).” (Chun, 128)
He explained this link between evil human nature and artificial activity through his own theory of
the heart.
Xunzi’s theory of heart is not a consistent one but has many varied forms. First, the heart
constitutes an element of man’s emotional nature. “In this sense, the heart always tends toward
profit, just as ears to sound and eyes to color.” (Fu, “Human Nature and Human Education”, par.
22) Second, the heart is higher than the other senses. “The heart occupies the cavity in the center to
control the five organs. This is called the natural ruler.” (Dubbs, 17:206) Thus, the heart has the
power to distinguish and command, according to Xunzi. Therefore, the heart can control the way an
individual’s nature changes from evil to good through his/her actions and activities while
distinguishing between those very characteristics.
To put it bluntly, Xunzi suggests that even though man’s nature is intrinsically evil, he can
put effort and action into changing that reality and forcing a state of goodness to prevail. He also
states that superior morality lies in the sage kings of the time who are not different in nature but
vastly different in action in comparison to the common man.
“…the sages transformed man’s nature and aroused him to activity. As activity was aroused,
propriety and righteousness were produced, laws and systems were instituted. This being the case,
propriety, righteousness, laws and systems are all products of the sages. In his nature, the sage is
common with and not different from ordinary people. It is in effort that he is different from and
superior to them.” (Chun, 130)
In conclusion, it seems very evident that both Mencius and Xunzi were firm in their beliefs
of the opposite. While Mencius held that human nature is intrinsically good and tried to prove it
with his theory of heart, Xunzi opposed this very idea and posed his own theory of heart to defend
the idea that human nature is essentially evil. Confucius, however, refrained from directly
commenting on this issue which formed the basis of all great debates in China over the basic leaning
of human nature. Confucius maintained that in order to have a harmonious, balanced society, man
must be virtuous and moral which meant he would need to have a good nature. He did not,
however, make it clear as to whether this goodness would be intrinsic to humans or simply a
developed ideal.
“To put the world in order, we must first put the nation in order; to put the nation in order, we
must put the family in order; to put the family in order, we must cultivate our personal life; and to
cultivate our personal life, we must first set our hearts right.” (Legge, 189)
Work Cited
Baird, Robert E. and Raeburn S. Heimbeck. Philosophic Classics Volume VI Asian Philosophy.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall 2006.
Lau, D.C. Confucius, The Analects. London, England: Penguin Classics. 1979.
Chun, Wing-Tsit. A Sourcebook in Chinese Philosophy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
1963.
Lau, D.C. Theories of human nature in Mencius and Shyuntzi. Bulletin of the School of Oriental
and African Studies. Volume 15, Part III. 1953.
Legge, James. The Life and Teachings of Confucius. Cosimo Inc. 2006.
Dubbs, Homer. The Works of Xunzi. London: Arthur Probsthain. 1928.
“Good Or Evil?, Revival Of The Tradition And The Study Of Principle” Humanity - Asian
Thought - Human Nature. 2009. <http://science.jrank.org/pages/7767/Humanity-Asian-
Thought.html>
“Chapter II: Human Nature and Human Education on Human Nature” Council for Research in
Values and Philosophy. February 7, 2009. <http://www.crvp.org/book/Series03/III-
2/chapter_ii_human_nature_and_huma.htm>