In traditional China, Mencius (c371-289 B.C.) was often haled as China s !"a#e $o.2%, second onl& to Confucius hi'self.

(e was connected to Confucius throu#h his stud& under the disci)les of *+e-,er, the #randson of Confucius. -'on# other thin#s, he was fa'ous for his .iew a/out the in/orn nature of 'an. -ccordin# to hi', the in/orn nature of 'an is #ood. In the followin#, I shall follow the 'ain thrust of his ar#u'ent and show where it has fallen short.

Mencius on The Inborn Nature of Man

-n e0cer)t fro' The Six Patriarchs of Chinese Humanism -uthor1 2eter M.3. Chan -ll ri#hts reser.ed
==========================================================

In the Analects, if readers recall, it is said that Confucius had not said anything about the inborn nature of man and the Way of Heaven. ( Analects, 5:13) But he was also re)orted to ha.e said that human beings are born inevitably upright regardless of circumstance. ( Ibid. 6:19) 4id he 'ean to sa& that e.er&one is /orn 'orall& u)ri#ht5 In .iew of his other usa#e of the word !u)ri#ht% ( or strai#ht) elsewhere in the Analects, it could /e ar#ued that it was so. 6or instance, he said that to elevate the upright can also influence the crooked to become upright; ( Ibid, 12:22 ) that one should repay in ury !ith !hat is upright" but repay virtue !ith virtue; ( !! #bid. 14:34) and that to relish uprightness !ithout learning !ill be blinded by dishonesty. (""#$%&' Ibid, 17:8) *he trou/le with this inter)retation, I should li7e to )oint out, is that Confucius was also 7nown to ha.e said that

concealment of !rong by father for son or son for father does contain !hat is upright. ( ( ) * ) ( * + $ , - Ibid. 13:18) (ow could conceal'ent of wron# /e considered 'orall& u)ri#ht5 -nd when he said that those !ho are born kno!ing are the best" those !ho kno! by !ay of learning are second best" those !ho learn because of difficulties is less good" and those !ho do not learn even in the face of difficulties is the least e$uipped of them all; [./'#.0' 1#2$01#34)5-Ibid. 16:9] is it not alread& rather clear that as far as Confucius was concerned, the in/orn nature of 'en is not one and the sa'e5 Besides, he also said that riches and honors are !hat men desire% !hile poverty and lo! status are !hat men hate. (6789: ... ;<= Ibid. 4:5) 8nder this li#ht, could it not also /e ar#ued that what Confucius had in 'ind is that #enerall& s)ea7in#, the nature of 'an is that of an inferior 'an5 9ell, accordin# to Mencius, this is not so. *he in/orn nature of 'an is #ood. To be humane is &the nature of' man. (> Book of Mencius, Chapter 3) But so'e of his listeners did not a#ree. 6or instance, (ao)*i said+ inborn nature is neither good nor evil. ( ? @ A B A B Ibid. Chapter 11) #t is like !ater. #f you let it flo! east" it !ill go east. #f you let it flo! !est" it !ill go !est. (CDEFGHIGJFKHIKJ ; Ibid. ) 6urther, accordin# to 3on#du-+i, it could also be said that inborn nature is capable of both good and evil. This is !hy !hen (ing Wen and (ing Wu &good kings' !ere in po!er" people relished goodness" and !hen ,u and -i &!icked kings' !ere in po!er" they relished violence. (L?@MBM
B 8NOP QRI3"BSP TRI3"U 8NOP QRI3 "BSPTRI3"U Ibid.) -nd that is not all. There are still

others !ho say that some inborn natures are good" !hile others evil. That is !hy under a good ruler like ,ao &a sage) king'" there !as such an evil man as .iang; and for a bad father such as (u)sou" there !as such a good son like Shun &another sage)king'. (L?@VBVB8NWMXVY
Z M(V[ Ibid.)

Co''ent1 It is to /e o/ser.ed that three contendin# )ositions were ta/led for consideration. *he first is that inborn nature is neither good nor evil ( ABAB Ibid.) -nother is that inborn nature is capable of both good and evil ()B)B Ibid.) -nd the third is that some inborn nature is good" !hile others evil ( VBVB Ibid.) 9hat was not 'entioned (or dee'ed a/surd at the ti'e) is the )ossi/ilit& that the inborn nature of man is evil. (istor& had to wait for :un-+i (the third )atriarch of Confucianis') /efore this last entered the fra&.

9ith res)ect to the first contendin# )osition, Mencius was )re)ared. #t is true that !ater does not distinguish bet!een east and !est. /ut is !ater not predisposed to go do!n rather than up0 The goodness of man1s inborn nature is like the do!n!ard tendency of !ater. 2s it is the nature of !ater to go do!n!ard" it is also the nature of man to be good. 6urther, !ater is able to splash !hen hit" flo! violently through a creek" or forced to stay in the hills &by a dam'. #t is the nature of !ater to yield to external forces. This is also true of man1s inborn nature )) it could be pushed into doing !rong. (E\A]
^GKA]^/5_`BCEa5 ;AVBEAV 5bcE@defghi+j8kEl $mIn MB$oC8 Ibid.)

*hat is wh& in years of good harvest" young kids are la*y and dependent. #t is only in years of bad harvest that many of them have become violent. Such changes in behavior are not dictated by the Son of Heaven &or emperor'. #t is due rather to the influence &of environment' brooding in their minds. (6
pqrs pqU :tuvwx$9yz${n Ibid.)

9hat this shows is that !hen a person does evil" it is not because of his natural endo!ment. (|)Btv} Ibid.) #f he follo!s his natural temperament" he is able to do !hat is good. This is !hy # say that the inborn nature of man is good.
(~|$I)B-~9B Ibid.)

-s to how he 7new that this is reall& so, Mencius re)l& is that all human beings do have a mind that cannot bear to see the suffering of others. (V{ Ibid. Chapter 3) ;ne case

in )oint is that no one is able to bear and see that a child is about to fall into a !ell. (b^V*{' Ibid.) "uch a concern for the hel)less, accordin# to hi', is not due to the fact that one has any dealing !ith the child1s parents. 3either is one driven by the desire of !anting to enhance one1s reputation in the community" or for fear of criticisms by one1s friends. (t9 ^(t9 ^ t=$n Ibid.) It is due rather to his ina/ilit& to /ear seein# the sufferin# of his fellow-/ein#s. 6urther, accordin# to Mencius, the ha.in# of this unbearing mind ( { ) is also attested /& the fact that when it co'es to slau#hterin# ani'als for food, 'an& would rather see them alive than stand to !atch ho! they die . 2nd if one hears their screams" one is not able to bear eating their meat. This is !hy a kingly person !ould rather stay a!ay from the kitchen.
( $ $ ' $ $ @ 8 X Ibid. Chapter 1) 4or the above reasons" # say that all humans have a mind that cannot bear to see the suffering of others . (9 V{@ Ibid. Chapter 3)

9hat 'ust also /e 'ade clear, said Mencius, is that this feeling of commiseration is found in all men; the feeling of shame and disgust &about !hat is !rong' is also found in all men. So is the feeling of respect and reverence" as !ell as the feeling for !hat is right and !rong. ( *{V'=
{V'{V'8t{V Ibid. Chapter 11) -s a 'atter of fact, or so he further )ointed out, the feeling

of commiseration is the ground of humaneness. The feeling of disgust and shame is the ground of righteousness. The feeling of humility and deference is the ground of propriety" and the feeling of right and !rong is the ground of !isdom. (*{
>'={' Ibid. Chapter 3) {'8t{

9hat this 'eans, accordin# to Mencius, is that humaneness" righteousness" propriety and !isdom are not forced upon us from the outside. They pertain rather to !hat

is already in our possession" even though they have not been thought of in this !ay. (*{>'={'{
'8t{ >P P P tVp - Ibid. 11) In short, to have these four basic feelings is like

having four limbs. He !ho claims not to have them is cheating himself. (V8C$VV8--
Ibid. Chapter 3)

-s to how he 7new that all hu'an 'inds are a/le to feel in the sa'e wa&, Mencius re)l& is that if our mouths are able to taste the same flavors" our ears are able to hear the same sounds" and our eyes are able to see the beauty of the same colors" it !ould be most unreasonable to think that only human minds are not able to feel in the same !ay. (N?@^
V'^V'^V^{ A9n_` Ibid. Chapter 11)

6urther, as to what e0actl& is co''on to the hu'an 'ind, his answer is that it is called rationality also kno!n as righteousness. This commonality shared by human minds !as discovered by the sages before !e do. This is also the reason !hy !e all relish rationality and righteousness" as our mouths have relished the meat of grain)eating animals. ( {9n
`'{9nN{C Ibid.) #t is one of those inherent abilities that need not

be learned and kno! !ithout having to think. #t is the conscience of our minds. This is !hat enables infants that still have to be carried to kno! ho! to love their parents; and !hen they gro! older" to kno! ho! to respect their elder brothers. To be affectionate to one1s parent is humaneness. To be respectful to one1s elder brother is righteousness. This is the same !ith people all over of the !orld. (9#$
9.$. A.$ $A . $ Ibid.) > A 5 Ibid. Chapter 13)

9hat this shows, or so he further ar#ued, is that humaneness is the mind of man" and righteousness is his path.

2nyone !ho abandons this path rather than follo!s it" or to let go of this &un)bearing' mind and does not kno! ho! to find it" is pitiful indeed5 (>{'$${ .@l Ibid. Chapter 11) This is so because not to have a mind that feels for the suffering of others is not a human being; not to have a mind that feels ashamed and disgusted &!ith !hat is !rong' is not a human being; not to have a mind that kno!s humility and deference is not a human being; and not having a mind that kno!s right and !rong is also not a human being.
( 8A*{t'A={t'A 'A8t{t Ibid. Chapter 3) {t

"o, it is on the /asis of the a/o.e line of reasonin# that Mencius was to conclude that the in/orn nature of 'an is #ood. It is e0ternal )ressures and circu'stances that ha.e lured and notched )eo)le into e.il. It further follows that to be humane is indeed &the inborn nature of' man. That is also to say" humaneness is the Way &of man'. (>
Ibid.)

Co''ent1 9hat should not /e allowed to esca)e notice is that des)ite the insi#ht and elo<uence of Mencius, the three contendin# )ositions )osted earlier were actuall& sideste))ed rather than refuted. In the first instance, /efore a child co'es into its own, i.e., with 'e'or& and the sense of self that it entails, it is not at all sill& for 3ao-+i to ha.e characteri+ed it as neither good nor evil. "econdl&, the facts to which Mencius alluded are rather one-sided. If the 'ore undesira/le of childish tendencies (such as an#er, #reed, =ealous&, selfishness, and the li7e) are also ta7en into account, it could also /e ar#ued that the in/orn nature of 'an is both good and evil. *hirdl&, what Mencius had not reall& answered is !hy under a good ruler like ,ao" there !as such an evil man as .iang; and for a bad father such as (u)sou" it is possible to have a good son like M(V[ Ibid. Chapter 11) *hat is to sa&, Shun. (WMXVYZ if the in/orn nature of 'an is #ood, and that it is en.iron'ental factors that ha.e )ushed )eo)le into e.il, how are such counter e.idences to /e e0)lained5 In .iew of all these difficulties, it 'ust /e said that the e.idence to which Mencius referred were in fact less than circu's)ect. 9hen all rele.ant facts are ta7en into account, it is )erha)s 'ore

reasona/le to thin7 that the in/orn nature of 'an is neither good nor evil, and that it is also capable of becoming both good and evil.

*his is also a #ood )lace to return to Confucius sa&in# that man is born inevitably upright &or straight'. It 'a& not /e too late to su##est that what he had in 'ind was )erha)s the idea that the in/orn nature of 'an is 7ind of li7e an u)ri#ht /a'/oo tree. It is /ound to swa& one wa& or the other de)endin# on the wind. *hat is to sa&, whether a )erson is inclined toward #ood or e.il is indeed contin#ent u)on a host of en.iron'ental factors, the 'ost i')ortant of which is the 7ind of 'oral nurture one is #i.en. -s readers can see, this wa& of dia#nosin# the word !u)ri#ht% is also consistent with Confucius o.erridin# 'essa#e. It is that the onl& wa& for an&one to /eco'e hu'ane and do what is ri#ht 'ust necessaril& co'e /& wa& of learnin# how to /eha.e )ro)erl& in accordance with the rules of )ro)riet&. *he <uestion is therefore this. 9h& had Mencius o)ted to i#nore the reasona/leness of the first two contendin# )ositions as well as what is i')licit in the Analects5 ;ne )ossi/le reason, if I 'a& so sur'ise, is that it is 'ore at ho'e with hi' to thin7 that what (ea.en confers has #ot to /e hu'ane and #ood. -s such, it is out of the <uestion that (ea.en would also i')re#nate the hu'an7ind with tendencies that are detesta/le. In this connection, it is )erha)s not too late to note that in the o)enin# )ara#ra)h of the Doctrine of the Mean, it is clearl& stated that !hat Heaven decrees is called inborn nature. To follo! this nature is called the Way &of Humanity'. Cultivating the Way is called education. That !hich is called the Way is not separable from man for an instant. What is separable is not the Way. (
'''t Doctrine of the Mean, Section 1) *he author of this )assa#e, if

readers recall, was *+e-"er, the teacher of Mencius teachers.

Co''ent1 *his is not to sa& the Mencius had not done an&thin# .alua/le. >.en thou#h his idea that e.er&one is inherentl& endowed with 'oral sensiti.it& is not necessar& so'ethin# that Confucius would ha.e endorsed, the fact re'ains that he was the first to ha.e ar#ued that the

Confucian i')erati.e of hu'aneness and ri#hteousness is actuall& #rounded in the in/orn sensiti.ities of 'an. -s such, there is no e0cuse for an&one not to tr& and /eco'e 'oral. ;u#ht i')lies can, so to s)ea7. ?et 'e also add that it was this ro'antic .iew of hu'an nature (and its )olitical i')lications) that had i#nited fer.or and interest in the Confucianis' of Mencius for #enerations to co'e.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

2eter M.3. Chan is the author of The 6ystery of 6ind ()u/lished 2AA3), and Soul" 7od" and 6orality ()u/lished 2AAB). Cecentl&, he has co')leted another wor7 titled The Six Patriarchs of Chinese Humanism (a.aila/le in e/oo7s /ut not &et in )rint). 6or details re#ardin# the a/o.e, )lease .isit http://pmkchan. oo !epa es.com/home https://sites. oo !e.com/site/patriarchsofchinesephi!osoph"/home http://###.!u!u.com/spot!i ht/petermkchan