Pros And Cons Of Mencianism

Philosophers have debated this age-old question for centuries, and there are very well-supported arguments that are backed by good examples on both sides; historical examples as well as theoretical ones. Each of the books have approached this question in a different way, such as Plato’s use of an allegory or Euripides’ use of a play. Ultimately, however, humankind has an inclination to be good. Mencius offers up a now classic example of a child falling into a well in an effort to prove his point that “No man is devoid of a heart sensitive to the suffering of others.” His hypothesis is that, if a man were to see a child fall into a well, he would be compassionate. Mencius is sure that the man is pure in his compassion and is not so due …show more content…
He argues that “to make morality out of human nature is like making cups and bowls out of the willow” (11). Mencius responds by pinpointing the flaws in his metaphor. He points out that the only way to make cups and bowls out of the willow is to harm it in some sort of way, typically by cutting it down. It follows, then, that the only way to make a man moral is to harm him in some type of way. According to Kao Tzu’s metaphor, the only moral men are the ones that have been hurt or injured. If men desired to be moral, then they have to hurt each other. Mencius goes on to say that his reasoning behind the metaphor will lead to men using it to bring “disaster upon morality” (11). In other words, men would destroy humanity and righteousness if they were to follow his line of …show more content…
Using a Mencius example, if a man were to see a child falling into a well, the natural reaction, regardless of the circumstances, would be compassion and action in an attempt to save the child or assist in getting the child out as quickly as possible. As Mencius argues, humans are naturally able to become good, they are not naturally able to become bad or evil. To become evil, humans must endure some type of experience that is unrelated to his or her “native endowment”. The swirling water theory exemplifies this belief the best. It goes that water doesn’t have a preference in going east or west, but it does naturally flow downwards and does not flow upwards, and the only way to get it to upwards is to splash it (forcing it to go upwards). Humankind is naturally able to become good, but not naturally able to become bad, the only way to get to humans to be bad is to force them to be. Some may argue that Medea proves that some people are naturally evil, and while her acts may be evil, the reasoning behind them, rebelling against the status quo in attempt to gain equality for women, was not