Recall...

Discussion so far

1. Nature of Evil
2. Reality of Evil

Nature of Evil

Multiple options for characterization.

Qualities:

Different from mere badness/wrongness.

Detestable.

Involves a breakdown in “normal” moral functioning.

The Reality of Evil

Reasons to deny the reality of evil:

1. Doubting the existence of universal moral norms
2. Doubting the existence of true moral responsibility
3. Doubting the usefulness/coherence of the concept

Reasons to accept the reality of evil:

Arguments against seem to undermine all morality.

(not just concept of evil)

Respects moral categories that help us make sense of our experiences

Example: respects the phenomenology of moral horror

What to make of all this?

So, we've kind of asked:

Evil, What?

That is we've asked “what's the nature of Evil”?

Evil, Whether?

That is we've asked whether Evil is real.

Time for a new question

Evil, Why?

That is: Why is there evil?

What explains the presence of evil in the world?

Where does it come from?

The Origin of Evil

Our sources for beginning this discussion:

Mengzi and Xunzi

Mengzi

Lived in China during the Warring States period, 400-290 BCE: Period of unrest and changed, chararacterized by conflict between the seven warring states.

The “Second Sage” of Confucianism

Advisor to policians and generals, advocating for ethical persuasion over force.

Held that human nature (xìng) was fundamentally good.

Xunxi

Lived a generation or so after Mengzi, probably born around 310 BCE

An unorthodox Confucian; influential but controversial.

Today, one of the most popular philosophers in East Asia.

Held that human nature (xìng) was fundamentally evil.

Is this “evil” in our sense?

What is Human Nature?

For both Xunzi and Mengzi, human nature is a constraint on ethical theorizing.

Against the Mohists, who held that human nature was infinitely changable.

Xunzi and Mengzi agreed that some ethical objectives (like getting everyone to treat others with absolute impartiality) conflicted with human nature.

Does [The Mohist] truly hold that one's affection for one's own nephew is like one's affection for a neighbor's baby?

Mengzi emphasized, in particular, the moral authority of our nature, against the Mohist who thought that our natures should be changed.

Heaven, in giving birth to things, causes them to have one source, but [the Mohist] gives them two sources”

Makes sense, if you think ethical theorizing is a tool for being a good ruler or leader.

Mengzi on Human Nature

We have various innate virtues.

Each virtue is associated with having the right emotional response to a certain kind of situation.

Benevolence — ren

The virtue associated with the emotion of compassion. Also includes dispositions to recognize suffering and to respond appropriately to the recognition of suffering.

Benevolence is manifested in a critical confucian concept: shu, likening-to-oneself:

Zigong asked, 'Is there one teaching that can serve as a guide for one’s entire life?' The Master answered, 'Is it not shu, sympathetic understanding? Do not impose upon others what you yourself do not desire.' Analects, 15.24

Righteousness — yi

Associated with the emotion of disdain/shame. Includes a disposition to regard dishonorable behavior as shameful.

Wisdom — zhì

Associated with the emotion of approval/disapproval. Wisdom leads one to understand and commit to the other virtues. Includes a disposition to engage in high quality means-end reasoning, and to successfully find the correct action for each situation.

Propriety — lĭ

Associated with the emotion of respect. Includes a disposition to respect elders and other authorities, especially when it comes to social ceremonies and etiquette.

Question:

If we have these innate virtues, why do people act wrongly?

Answer:

The virtues are innately present as sprouts.

To reach full development, they need to be cultivated, in the proper environment.

The process of cultivation is by extension.

People all have things that they will not bear. To extend this reaction to that which they will bear is benevolence. People all have things that they will not do. To extend this reaction to that which they will do is righteousness. If people can fill out the heart that does not desire to harm others, their benevolence will be inexhaustible. If people can fill out the heart that will not trespass, their righteousness will be inexhaustible.

What is extension?

In extension, we recognize that an emotional response that we have automatically, to one situation, is appropriate to another morally analogous situation.

The King and the Ox

The king asked again, “Is such an one as I competent to love and protect the people?”

Mengzi said, “Yes.”

“How do you know that I am competent for that?”

“The king,” said Mengzi,

was sitting aloft in the hall, when a man appeared, leading an ox past the lower part of it. The king saw him, and asked, Where is the ox going? The man replied, We are going to consecrate a bell with its blood. The king said, Let it go. I cannot bear its frightened appearance, as if it were an innocent person going to the place of death.”

… The way in which the ancients came greatly to surpass other men, was no other but this—simply that they knew well how to carry out, so as to affect others, what they themselves did. Now your kindness is sufficient to reach to animals, and no benefits are extended from it to reach the people—How is this? Is an exception to be made here?”

By weighing, we know what things are light, and what heavy. By measuring, we know what things are long, and what short. The relations of all things may be thus determined, and it is of the greatest importance to estimate the [weight of reasons]. I beg your Majesty to measure it.”

Why does virtue fail to develop?

A failure to meet basic physical needs.

Mengzi holds that almost no one can be virtuous under conditions of starvation or terror. So, if a state wants virtuous citizens, it needs to look to their needs.

A failure of proper socialization

People need access to information about human roles and relationships in order to develop correct lĭ.

A failure to reflect

Extension of emotional responses requires active reflection.

Reflection takes effort.

But I thought it was supposed to be natural?

An innate ability may still require effort to develop.

Suppose you told [a go master] to teach two people go, and one focuses his heart and applies his intention to it, listening only to [the master]. The other, although he listens to him, with his whole heart thinks about hunting swans, reflecting only upon drawing his bow to shoot them. Although he learns together with the other person, he will not be as good as he. Will this be because his intelligence is not as great? I answer that it is not.

Another example: persistence hunting.

Humans have sweat glands, little hair, bipedal locomotion.

Makes us ideal persistence hunters

(wolves and dogs are good at this too).

But that doesn't mean running a marathon is easy, even if it’s part of our biological nature.

Mengzi on Evil

Evil, for Mengzi, is a departure from our nature, a failure of the natural course of moral development.

There is something special about this kind of failure.

When men’s possessions are lost, they know to seek for them again. But when men lose [their benevolence], they no longer know to seek for it.

Compare with Augustine, reporting in the confessions on his adolescent shame at not being shamelesss:

The very limit of blindness is to glory in being blind. Confessions III

The remedy?

The great end of learning is nothing else but to seek for the lost heart.