Dao De Jing Leadership Philosophy

One may consider the leadership philosophies, found within the Analects and the Dao De Jing, as being both demonstrably ineffective as well as surprising efficacious. Context and subjectivity are front and center when dealing with textual ideologies and the use of either of these philosophies is no different. While the two require a grueling amount of self-restraint, both diverge when explaining the position of where a ruler should be. Take for instance, a battle between two opposing forces. The Analects deems that the Junzi, or the exemplary person, must take direct control of the fighting. The Junzi must lead through his own actions and must directly facilitate his men through observance of ritual propriety while maintaining respectfulness to both his elders and juniors (Ames and Rosemont, Jr. 80 ). In stark contrast to this, the Sage ruler found in the Dao De Jing does not lead …show more content…
Nevertheless, the flaws found within the philosophy of the Dao De Jing does not prevent it from succeeding were the Analects could not. The most prominent success over the Analects of course is the Dao De Jing's ability to negate the creation of or the utilization of disenfranchisement. The Junzi, required by the Analects, rewards anyone under his care that has proven themselves as it is both appropriate to do so and it shows he has manners (Ames and Rosemont, Jr. 152). Because he must reward benevolence with acknowledgement he creates a rift were there are the haves and the have nots (Ames and Rosemont, Jr. 179). The Sage Ruler on the other hand does not create rifts within his army. Unlike the Junzi, compelled to reward exemplary services, the Sage ruler opts to stripe away the earthly desires of his soldiers (Moeller, 9). He does not reward excellence as to do so would create discontent and give rise to thieving from those who have immaculate things (Moeller