Write an essay on Confucian Rationality, Moral Rule, Human Rule and Rule of Law

, "Rule of Man", "Rule of Rites" and "Rule of Virtue" (Moral Norms)

"The difference between the so-called rule of man and the rule of law does not lie in the words "man" and "law" but in the power used in maintaining order and the nature of the norms on which it is based." The understanding of the "rule of man" as meaning that people in power are free to regulate the relationship between people in society according to their own likes and dislikes, and that there are no certain norms to abide by, this kind of "rule of man" is, in fact, impossible. According to Mr. Fei Xiaotong's point of view, what is practiced in the traditional Chinese society is a kind of "ritual order". Of course, those "founding emperors" would have a certain degree of "mobility" in formulating the norms of the new dynasty, more or less with some "rule of man" colors. But they were also bound by traditional social norms and could not do as they wished.

Some scholars believe that traditional Chinese society practiced the "rule of etiquette" through the power to implement the "rule of law", and the "rule of law" in Western society as the two legal systems in opposition to each other. However, with the court official "rule of law" and (community gentry) "rule of etiquette" corresponds to, should be said that in China's traditional society, there is also due to the civil moral norms constraints in the people's lives actually occurring in the "rule of virtue" (to "virtue" for the purpose of the law of good and evil retribution), or the existence of folk for the general behavior of the universal ethical norms. Of course, this reference (called "rule of virtue" and "rule of law", "rule of man", "rule of etiquette" and juxtaposed) needs further proof, but only "rule of etiquette" can not fully cover all of the moral norms of the folk in our country. China's traditional society in the "rule of etiquette" has its own specific meaning, "etiquette and righteousness by the sage out" ("Mengzi - Liang Huiwang next"), "etiquette" is a specific culture by the sages to formulate a code of conduct, but different from the folk of the simple ethical norms (folk of "virtue").

In a sense, the "rule of man," "rule of etiquette," and "rule of law," all of which are listed in the scriptures and associated with political authority, can be categorized as what anthropology calls "major traditions," while some of the simple ethical norms prevalent in folklore (the folkloric "rule of virtue," which exhorts people not to "commit sins") can perhaps be categorized as "minor traditions.

Mr. Fei Xiaotong mentioned "law", "etiquette" and "morality" in "Native China": "Etiquette ...... is obviously different from law, and even from what is commonly called morality. The law restricts man from the outside, and the penalty for non-compliance with the law is imposed on the individual by a specific authority. People can escape from the net of law, and if they do, they can be proud of themselves and be pleased with themselves. Morality is maintained by the public opinion of the society, and it is bad and shameful to do immoral things and not to be seen by others. Ritual is even more than morality: if one fails to do so, not only is it bad, but it is also wrong, inappropriate, and impossible. ...... Ritual is ...... a habit that becomes active and obedient to tradition through the process of indoctrination." This quote from Mr. Fei Xiaotong illustrates the difference between "law", "etiquette" and "morality". Law" is the criminal law enacted by the imperial government, and "Rites" is considered by the traditional society as the moral norms that must be followed by the scholars, but it is the orthodox, top-down norms advocated by the rulers for the maintenance of the "Three Principles and Five Constant Rules" and the "differentiation between the inferiority and superiority of the people" social order and "indoctrination" of the people. The folk morality, however, originated from the people more or less spontaneously, such as "virtue", "goodness", "compassion", "do not do unto others as you would not want them to do unto you" and these simple concepts.

So, the "rule of etiquette" and the "rule of virtue" are not exactly the same thing." The rules of behavior of "rule of etiquette" are to safeguard the interests of the ruler, the clan, the father, the husband and the gentry, and the movie "Home" based on the novel of Ba Jin vividly illustrates the "cannibalism" and immorality of "rule of etiquette". In some social scenes, the "rule of etiquette" suppresses the simple morality of the people. For example, the "Three Principles and Five Norms" upheld by the "Rites of Passage" promote the "martyrdom of a woman", and a young widow who commits suicide and martyrs herself to her husband will be honored by her family, her community, and even the imperial court by erecting the "Plaque of Chastity", but the common people will sigh and weep behind their backs, saying that this is "sinful". Although the "observance of rites" promoted by Confucianism and the "accumulation of virtues" popular among the people overlap in some behavioral norms (such as filial piety and respect for parents), there are also many examples of conflict between the two (such as the widow's martyrdom for her husband), so the "rule of rites" is not the same as "rule of virtues" to regulate people's behavior with a simple concept of morality. The "rule of virtue" here does not mean the "art of governance" implemented by the ruler, but only a kind of behavioral norms and the corresponding formation of civil society order with more or less spontaneity.

China's traditional rural areas, almost every village has a temple, including Buddhist temples and Taoist temples, but more is the city god, land, dragon king and the local "spirit" of the local gods 癨\. People would go to the City God Temple to ask for divination and to cry out their grievances. The people's fear of "being punished by heaven for their sins" formed the spiritual foundation and cultural atmosphere of some kind of "moral rule" for their self-restraint in thought and behavior. But this kind of simple folk "moral rule" has disappeared with the cleansing of successive political movements since the liberation.

The persecution of others (including relatives, colleagues, neighbors, teachers, etc.) in the "Cultural Revolution" in the 1960s, in the "name of the revolution", physical insults, martial arts battles, etc., which were "sinful" from the point of view of traditional morality, became the most revolutionary and fashionable behaviors that were promoted and supported by the government. The "fight against selfishness and criticism of cultivation" can be said to be the "ritual" of the "Cultural Revolution", and this "red ritual" implemented "in the name of the revolution" has the same "sinful" aspect of violating the basic human nature in practice as the "ritual" of feudal society.

At the same time, the "Four Olds" campaign since liberation, especially during the Cultural Revolution, has directly and comprehensively attacked folk religions, which in a sense also destroyed the folk belief system of "accumulating virtues" and "committing sins" that would lead to retribution. Except for those who live in isolated villages in remote mountainous areas, grandparents and young parents nowadays are no longer likely to tell their children moral admonitions such as "don't commit sins", and I am afraid that the most frequently repeated admonition to children is the utilitarian admonition, "Study hard to earn money and become an official in the future, and you will have a good career". The word "sin" is used less and less in people's daily lives. Is this a sign of social development?

Or is it some kind of moral degradation?

While emphasizing the law, is it possible that the general diminution of the sense of "sin" in society, the lack of consideration of whether there will be "retribution" for doing "bad deeds" or the denial of the existence of "retribution" at all is one of the reasons for the decline in the moral standard of people's behavior nowadays? Durkheim (E. Durkheim) believes that "if the moral force has lost its social authority, it must be a state of chaos in which might is right".

Can the traditional moral norms of Chinese folklore (e.g., "sins") be regarded to a certain extent as some kind of folklore resources that can be adapted and utilized to regulate social behavior in China? In today's sorting out of the essence and dregs of our traditional culture, and in the process of re-cognizing our own culture and achieving "cultural self-awareness," this may still be a question worth pondering.

Crimes and Sins: An Overview of the Rule of Law and the Rule of Virtue in China

This is the first time I have read a book about the rule of law and the rule of virtue in China.