Now as aforementioned, they are they are the virtues that hold dominion over the defining characteristic of “the gentleman” have no precise definition, thus some verses from the Lun Yü must be observed. First, it is to be established that the Confucian “Gentleman” practiced the following: self-respect, generosity, sincerity, persistence, and benevolence (Zukeran, 2002). Confucius had also said: “He who in this world can practice five things may indeed be considered man-at-his-best.
What are they?
They are humility, magnanimity, sincerity, diligence, and graciousness. If you are humble, you will not be laughed at. If you are magnanimous, you will attract many to your side. If you are sincere, people will trust you. If you are gracious, you will get along well with your subordinates. It is this type of man who can transform society into the peaceful state it was meant to be.” (McDowell & Stewart, 2006).
The following verses from the Lun Yü also provide further insight into the Confucian “gentleman”:
12:2—Chung-kung asked about perfect virtue. The Master said, “It is, when you go abroad, to behave to everyone as if you were receiving a great guest; to employ the people as if you were assisting at a great sacrifice; not to do to others as you would not wish done to yourself; to have no murmuring against you in the country and none in the family.” Chung-kung said, “Though I am deficient in intelligence and vigor, I will make it my business to practice this lesson.” (Velasquez, 2005)
12:1—Yen Yuan asked about perfect virtue. The Master said, “To subdue one’s self and return to propriety, is perfect virtue. If a man can for one day subdue himself and return to propriety all under heaven will ascribe perfect virtue to him. Is the practice of perfect virtue then from a man himself or is it from the other?”
Yen Yuan said, “I beg to ask the steps of the process.” The Master replied, “Look not at what is contrary to propriety; listen not to what is contrary to propriety; speak not to what is contrary to propriety; make no movement which is contrary to propriety.” Yen Yuan then said, “Though I am deficient in intelligence and vigor, I will make it my business to practice this lesson.” (Velasquez, 2005)
With those, the gentleman is seen as said, a man-of-manness, living bounded to reciprocity and expressing the virtues in which one can not only move himself closer to the “gentleman” status, but which can also benefit those around himself with the altruistic mind set which the said Confucian “gentleman” would carry about himself in the search and keeping of perfect virtue; Confucius stating, “A gentleman needs to have three basic characters, which I have not lived up to. Be benevolent with no worry; be wise with no bepuzzlement; be courageous with no fear” as well as “being unlike an implement,” bringing aid by his benevolence and with the wisdom he has attained, fearing no situation or obstacle in his path despite the place he is visiting or living in(Csymbol, 2001).
With such strict yet admirable standards, the Confucian “Gentleman” could have not possibly survived over the centuries with all the change in cultures and thinking.
Ancient Men and Their Values
As the metaphysical was being analyzed and commented on in the East, so was it in the West. The world-renowned Greek philosophers had also warped the thoughts of virtue; the philosophers in question being Plato, Aristotle, Alcinous, Plotinus and in a far hedonist realm, Epicurus.
To begin, the following is from Alcinous’ handbook on Platonism, Alcinous displaying not only his views but also those of his predecessors, having Plato’s thoughts written. Plato (427—347 B.C.) had deduced what the Highest Good and Happiness were in the primal good, which can be termed God and the primal intellect. The Greeks had been, not necessarily obsessed with the thought, but infatuated with the likeness to a “god.” Plato sees that good can come from an objects primal entity, or its essence, and sees good through intellect and reason, and thus our good is “fine, noble, divine, lovely, [and] well proportioned;” whereas those things that are also called good such as wealth, health, beauty and strength are only truly good if connected with virtue, otherwise they are just “mortal goods” susceptible to evils (Dillon, 1993). Thus the one is only truly good if abiding by absolute virtue, but anything but that is only as good as the connection between them. And reconnecting to the “God-like complex” Plato states “For, by the gods, that man will never be neglected who is willing and eager to be just, and by practice of virtue to be likened to God so far as that is possible for man,” and goes further that the truly blessed and the happiest of all men practice self-control and justice for their own virtues (Dillon, 1993).
Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) on the other hand had different views on virtue. One of which was that he, unlike his teacher, thought that one could achieve happiness in the present world, and not an otherworldly concept dealing with mimicking God like characteristics, yet still dealt with the ultimate goal of finding happiness and thus eudemonism, the view that the goal of life is happiness- that is, a complete, long-lived kind of well-being; from the Greek eudemonia, happiness, is speculated and to that end, he states that there are but three “goods” in life, the “pleasant, the beautiful and the beneficial or advantageous;” the third good relies on the first two and then the said choice will have to fall under either category. Now to achieve happiness within those goods, virtue is then questioned and Aristotle reasons, “To have virtue or excellence, a thing (1) must be good and (2) must be able to carry out its function well. For example, if the eye has virtue, then it must be a good eye and must be able to see well… Consequently, the proper virtue or excellence of man will consist of those habits or acquired abilities that (1) make him a good man and (2) enable him to carry out his activities” (Velasquez, 2005). Aristotle then goes on how virtues aim at the mean and moderation of a man such that the field which the act is virtuous can be observed; as for the specific virtues that both Aristotle and his teacher believed, they are presented by Alcinous.
Alcinous, a Middle-Platonist (Thought to live in the 2nd century B.C.) adds an axiom for virtue, “virtue is a divine thing, being the perfect and most excellent state of the soul, which makes a man, both in speech and in action, graceful, harmonious, and firm, both in relation to himself and to others. There are two species of it, the rational, and those (virtues) which are concerned with the irrational part of the soul, to wit, courage and self-control…the perfection of the rational part, then is wisdom; of the spirited part, courage; and of the appetitive, self-control.” (Dillon, 1993). Those three are the virtues that in turn were thought of as the summit in Alcinous’ book and by those three, exercising them to the max, one would achieve happiness.
Epicurus (341-270 B.C) is then analyzed on his hedonist views of ethical philosophy, hedonism being the view that pleasure is intrinsically worthwhile and is the human’s good (Velasquez, 2005). Epicurus doesn’t delve into the virtues as much as do the Platonists aforementioned but with the ideal set by his Hedonistic philosophy, Epicureanism: the theory that happiness is the greatest good and that happiness is to be achieved living a life of moderation in which the contemplative pleasures are preferred to the sensuous pleasures. With that brings one of the most common pleasures in life, love. Other than knowing love through emotion, great care for someone can show love through reason, and that is one of the star virtues that Epicurus throws out, especially the importance of friendship; “Epicurus held that a wise man would feel the torture of a friend no less than his own, and would die for a friend rather than betray him, for otherwise his own life would be confounded (Konston, 2009).
The Ancient philosophers had set up their own thoughts and beliefs creating postulates that would be continued to be inherited and studied upon on the subject on virtues, and although Western and Eastern philosophy are not only geographically separated from one another, similar aspects are found. The five virtues in which the Confucian “gentleman” is to possess are humility, magnanimity, sincerity, diligence, and graciousness. The virtues that have been created by the Platonists and Epicurus are courage, wisdom, self-control, and of course, love. In wisdom one is knowledgeable of the right and the wrong, the good and bad in society and thus acts upon it, falling under the acknowledgement of any of the Confucian virtues can be realized from the act of humility to then be humbled as well as implementing the others. Courage is imbued within humility as well through acceptance; In magnanimity as the courage to forgive and forget and holding no grudge; in diligence where one would not fail at supporting their beliefs and thoughts, upholding their own “justice” as well as other virtues. Self-control is blatant in diligence as well as humility and sincerity, having one not speak too highly of oneself. And finally love takes place for magnanimity and graciousness. And to recreate the Golden rule, it would be courage, wisdom, self-control, and most importantly love that would allow it to be enacted.
To return to “perfect virtue,” to propriety, is done so with the Greeks, but that can be accounted for the few centuries between the philosophies of virtue. The “true man,” “the gentleman,” is still pursued in Ancient Greece, but it is now to be seen whether it can survive a millennia more and impacting those thoughts and beliefs of old.
The Middle Man
Hastening to the Middle Ages, the sole philosopher which will be analyzed is none other than Thomas Aquinas (1214-1292) himself. His cardinal virtues are Prudence, defined by Aquinas, as “wisdom concerning human affairs,” seeing how to interact with others and needing to know how to judge and regulate behavior; “For actions are about singular matters: and so it is necessary for the prudent man to know both the universal principles of reason, and the singulars about which actions are concerned” (Floyd, 2006); Temperance, for moderation of specific virtues that would be seen as overly presumptuous as well as physical pleasures; Courage, to augment the “irascible appetite,” which is the desire for that which is difficult to attain or avoid; and Justice, being used to govern relations with others, and not within ourselves as the previous virtues hold, to have a willingness to give others what they deserve (Floyd, 2006).
With Aquinas’ thinking, it can nearly mimic the Confucian “gentleman’s” characteristics. A prudent man would be humbled by humility when granted and when to be gracious, with temperance a man would be diligent in his chosen areas of desires as well as the subjects which could be boasted upon; with courage not only would diligence be amplified but it would also take courage to forgive as well as to accept humiliation and learn, and justice would govern whether a person would be forgiven. Reciprocity fits with Aquinas’ mind set on the virtues, establishing the Golden Rule in his own doctrines as the back bone behind the implications of his philosophy.
Enlightened Virtue
Finishing at the time around the Age of enlightenment, the virtues are once again analyzed with d’Holbach and Kant.
Paul-Henri Thiry (Baron) d'Holbach (1723-1789) a French Enlightenment philosopher valued perseverance above the rest in order to attain happiness; keeping one’s interests in mind, especially the act of seeking morality due to what it bears, and their own moral code in light of the ignorance a person expresses when they are immoral. And through that, temperance is also valued for keeping moderation of the vices in life, such as wine and good food.
Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is one of the most influential philosophers in the history of western philosophy and will not be analyzed for what virtues he sought after, since he had no blatant ones. Kant systemized nearly all he could with his thinking and anything from courage to happiness can’t be on the same terms as another person would have, and virtues are to be set in stone with what they are dealing with and in time immemorial. Thus it all comes down to two things; the good will which is constant for any person when expressed and Kant’s ethical formula, the Categorical Imperative: act as if the maxim (general rule by which you act) could be willed to become a universal law; the belief that what is right for one person is also right fore everyone in similar circumstances. It is then applicable with good will backing the formula. And if a virtue would need to be stated, Kant’s defining virtue would be wisdom, seeing the bad and good in all things, but even more so, his formula is applicable to nearly any action as a more sophisticated “Golden Rule” with a scientific mindset.
The Enlightenment was chosen for the fact that the age was the rise of scientific thinking, its true rebirth. With that, it would be considered contradictory to a pure philosophical search, though that thought would be wrong, seeing how talk of virtue and of man was indeed present. d’Holbach speaks of perseverance as the ultimate virtue only being limited by temperance in accordance with that which is right and would be used to gain true happiness; both virtues are the same which the Confucian “gentleman” holds. Continuing with d’Holbach, a moral code is then set by the person implicating his ways and with that an ambiguous case is formed concerning the “gentleman” based on the person’s moral code which they’d establish. As for Kant, he understood the values of virtue, as well as knowing that there are different methods in attaining the virtues, and thus his Categorical Imperative along with a man’s good will, virtue can be attained.
Present Virtues
Contrary to the previous methods of analysis, for the present to be viewed and understood in the “current” time, interviews will be taken instead of information from texts or sites, in order to truly get a grasp on the present day characteristics of “man” in the present society of the day.
Q1: A virtue is defined as "a conformity of ones life and conduct to moral and ethical principles; uprightness; rectitude." With knowing that, what are your DEFINING virtues? Then list 5 virtues you’d wish to have.
Out of all ten interviews, 16 different virtues were generated; the virtues with the most appearance being honesty, love, respect, integrity, dependable, loyal, honorable, prideful and courage. The virtues that were unique in answer were that of charisma (M., Muscai, personal communication, November 12, 2009) and Patience accompanied with dedication (H., Ismail, personal communication, November 12, 2009).
Q2: What should a man do to attain happiness?
A variety of answers were given with only one answer being repeated multiple times, that being to work diligently at 100% at all times, seeing how one gains happiness through hard work and struggle (C., Rosario, personal communication, November 12, 2009, & J., Ordaz Sr., personal communication November 13, 2009). Another answer that was unique was “love and be loved in return,” seeing the link between this and Confucius’ reciprocity (J. Gonzalez, personal communication, November 13, 2009).
Q3: What non-materialistic thing do you value above the rest? Such as a feeling or characteristic.
Love, friendship and honor were the answers across the board, the most to the least respectively.
Q4: What would you be willing to sacrifice for the aforementioned non-materialistic thing to keep it?
Each interviewee was willing to sacrifice all material possessions, with a few of them being wiling to sacrifice their own lives, one such person willing enough for the sake of remembrance in the light of the answers in question 3 (J., Ordaz Sr., personal communication November 13, 2009).
Q5: List the characteristics, morals, values and virtues that you think a "gentleman" has or should have.
A variety of answers were generated; the ones which appeared the most being loving, honorable, humble, honest, loyal, well spoken, compassionate, trustworthy, generous, respectable and willing to sacrifice. Another unique answer was made, “a gentleman follows the Golden Rule” (M., Antillon, personal communication, November 13, 2009).
The present day “man” is charismatic for upholding his integrity, loyalty, pride and honor; delivering respect where respect is due; he is a man that can be depended on to weather through almost any problem. Through hard work and diligence along with a heart to love and be loved in return, he is able to achieve happiness; it is that same love, as well as friendship and honor, that is valued the most; and any, if not all, material possessions would be sacrificed for those sine qua nons, those essentials to a man’s life, and even if the materials aren’t enough, his life would be willingly given. And above all, he must follow the Golden Rule. That is the “Gentleman” of the present day.
Conclusion
The in depth perception of virtue and the entity which encompasses all the best virtues to be considered the ultimate state for man, the Confucian “Gentleman”, was first derived over two millennia ago in the East by Confucius. Since then the ideas of virtue had stretched outward in the metaphysical world and other philosophers were able to make of it what they wanted and walls were built slowly. The earliest successors of the philosophical world heading westward were the Platonists, their virtues the same as Confucius’ without the term of “the gentleman” being implemented as much in the East. To uphold their virtues through an accepted justice to reach happiness for their love of knowledge and the world and help those amongst them learn and persevere, controlling themselves in their desires and wanting to reach near perfection as man.
A “True Man” was then questioned in the middle ages, and Aquinas deduced that the “man” should be prudent in nature, limited by his temperance with all things worldly and show courage in all areas, from forgiving to acceptance and uphold justice.
The scientific era then saw “man” in a more general sense, acknowledging that each man is an individual and to reach virtue through the exact same methods would be preposterous yet in the end, it was reasoned by both Enlightenment thinkers, that by the strife for personal happiness, one must show good will towards others and implicate the Categorical Imperative to set what is right as right in accordance to the virtues which are set in stone as being thus. Although a formula needed to be exercised, that “man” can be achieved.
The Confucian “Gentleman” after two millennia, through time altering stages within the world, has indeed survived. Each era believed the man to be in accordance with integrity, generosity, sincerity, persistence, benevolence, humility, magnanimity, diligence and graciousness. Be it achieved through lectures, doctrines, or formulas, it has survived despite the barriers between the two different societies, cultures and multiple philosophies.
And though that is said, it must be stated that the interviews for the present were composed of a majority of males, with only two women contributing to the questions, thus it must then be speculated to whether the “Gentleman” in the yes of a woman still exist to present day, as well as analyzing philosophies from women in the past and see that view point as well. Also, Confucius admitted to not being on the same caliber as the “Gentleman” he described, and the question arises if the philosophies of virtue and the essence of what a man should be, given by the men of old, were able to state their definitions and for that to be taken critically and as the truth to become a “True Man/Gentleman.” Even then though, the Confucian Gentleman isn’t set in stone; every man tries to sculpt himself in that image; and despite time, the same slab of marble remains chiseled but unfinished, with the Muse of the Gentleman changing in form too.
Bibliography
Aarweb. (N.D.) Glossary of Chinese Philisophical Terms. Retrieved on August 14, 2009, from
Brians, P., Gallwey, M., Hughes, D., Hussain, A., Law, R., Myers, M. & et al. (1999). Reading About the World, Vol. 1. Washington: Harcourt Brace Custom Publishing.
Brickhouse, T. & Smith, N.D. (2009). Plato (427-347 BCE). Retrieved on September 26, 2009,
From
Clear Harmony. (2006). Stories from Ancient Chine: A Gentleman Should Be Amiable but Not
Drift With the Current. Retrieved August 10, 2009 from
Csymbol. (2001). Chinese Gentleman. Retrieved August 14, 2009, from
Dillon, J. (1993). Alcinous The Handbook of Platonism. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.
Floyd, S. (2006) Thomas Aquinas: Moral Philosophy. Retrieved September 20th, 2009, from
Gerson, L.P. (2005). Aristotle and Other Platonist. New York: Cornell University press
Jordan, J.N. (1987). Western Philosophy From Antiquity to the Middle Ages.
New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
LeBuffe, M. (2009). Paul-Henri Thiry (Baron) d'Holbach. Retrived on September 26, 2009,
From
Lord, J. (N.D.) Confuciu Sage and Moralist. Retrieved August 10, 2009, from
Confucius.org. (N.D.) The Lun Yü in English. Retrieved June 15, 2009, from
Konston, D. (2009). Epicurus. Retrieved October 17, 2009, from
McCormick, M. (2005) Kant: Metaphysics. Retrieved October 17, 2009, from
McDowell, J. & Stewart, D. (2006)) Handbook of Today’s Religions: Confucianism. Retrieved
August 14, 2009, from
Nadler, S. (2008). Baruch Spinoza. Retrieved October 17, 2009, from
Philosophy Professor. (N.D.). Confucius. Retrieved August 10, 2009, from
Sachs, J. (2005). Aristotle: ethics. Retrieved September 26, 2009, from
Sponville, A.C. (1996). A Small treatise on the Great Virtues.
New york: presses Universitaires de France, Paris.
Velasquez, M. (2005). Philosophy a text with readings. California: Thomson Wadsworth.
Zukeran, P. (2002). Probe Ministries Confucius. Retrieved August 10, 2009, from