who can, for the space of a single day, simply devote hisefforts to Goodness? I have never met anyone whose strength was insu(cient forthis task. Perhaps such a person exists, but I have yet to meet him.”
Non-substantive: Does he include himself in this?
In any village of ten households there are surely those whoare as dutiful or trustworthy as I am, but there is no one who matches my love forlearning.”
I take it that the virtue of ignorance of Humility is Kongzi is not burdened with xD
I do not know about that
I don't follow the basis of inference from action to judgement in the system. It's at least seemingly acting like a non-monotonic system from 1.11 as reiterated in 4.20, from 4.6, 3.17, 3.11 and 3.8 but also we are withholding judgement, denying inference from action as though the non-monotonic evaluator is aware of its own inferential non-monotonicity? How does this work?
Standing in his proper place at court with his sash tied, Zihua could beemployed to converse with guests and visitors, but I do not know whether or nothe is Good.
I don't follow
Zigong asked, “What do you think of me?”!e Master replied, “You are a vessel.”“What sort of vessel?”“A precious ritual vessel.” 46
Logic: from 5.4 and 2.12, Zigong is not a gentleman/junzi
One who makes no changes to the Ways of his father forthree years43 after his father has passed away may be called a $lial son.”
Language: This is a repeat of 1.11, is there any particular reason for that?
d follow their lead dili-gently without resentment
This seems inconsistent with 4.10, Why wouldn't your duties to the good/ "be on the side of the right" supervene on filial duties. Clearly the good on account of its categorical binding should have priority. Filial duties are only bound hypothetically right?
With regard to the world, the gentleman has no predispo-sitions for or against [any person]. He merely seeks to be on the side of [those heconsiders] right.”
Remark (non-substantive)/Clarification: Duties to the good supervene on all other duties
“If a person is able to govern the state by means of ritualpropriety and deference, what di(culties will he encounter? If, on the other hand,a person is not able to govern the state through ritual propriety and deference, ofwhat use are the rites to him?”
Clarification: The rites themselves are not the Virtues, but the care you show for them are indicative of appropriate sensitivity to the Virtues.
People are true to type with regard to what sort of mistakesthey make. Observe closely the sort of mistakes a person makes—then you willknow his character.
Remark (non-substantive): Going back to 2.3 and 2.12, reiterating that all relavent knowledge pertaining to Virtues are embodied, the factive knowledge is immaterial and the Akratic suffering from weakness of will and those that do not know what the Virtuous action is are undistinguished insomuch that their embodied knowledge are identical
To live in the neighborhood of the Good is $ne. If one doesnot choose to dwell among those who are Good, how will one obtain wisdom?
Comparative: Kinda similar to Aristotle's thing about imitating the Phronemos in your pursuit of Eudaimonia
have never failed to obtain an audience with the gentlemen who havepassed this way.” Kongzi’s followers thereupon presented him.
I am unsure what purpose this vignette serves?
You regret the loss of the lamb, whereas I regret theloss of the rite.
Miiight be a reach: Rites and economics- the rite is a canary in the coalmine. Sacrificing the lamb requires having lamb to spare and the absence of lamb to spare could indicate a decline in the prosperity within the society. As a ruler, you can face the retreat of the mandate of Heaven if you fail to deliver your denizens prosperity and your incapacity to spare the lamb can mark the retreat of the mandate. If we do away with the ritual, it would be harder to clock the retreat of Heaven's mandate potentially?
gazes down upon the two dynasties that precededit.34 How brilliant in culture it is! I follow the Zhou.”
Language/Clarification: Is this meant to be sardonic/sarcastic? "gazes down upon" is the same as "look down upon"? The Zhou dismiss their heritage and history and so the Master dismisses the Zhou?
as if the spirits
Language/Metaphysics: focussing on the: "as if", are the spirits known to be not present? Are the Spirits actual objects that exist that are potentially just not there? What might preclude the spirits from being present? How do we know they are thus precluded
“I can talk all day long with Yan Hui21 without him once dis-agreeing with me. In this way, he seems a bit stupid. And yet when we retire and Iobserve his private behavior, I see that it is in fact worthy to serve as an illustrationof what I have taught. Hui is not stupid at all.
Logic: Is this a case of non-monotonic inference?
Owing to the lack of epistemic access into Hui, the complete absence of disagreement is difficult to distinguish from stupidity. Those that disagree on some things but not all. In their lack of disagreement on some fronts is proof that they are in agreement not blindly opposed, and disagreement in some shows they have been thinking/engaging about the things enough to form a different, if albeit, flawed opinion However, Hui unlike the stupid also lives as per the teachings meaning the agreement is a result of the endogenisation of the teachings
Non-monotonicity: The agreement on all fronts alone make the inference to stupidity permissible in a way that one who agrees on most but disagrees on some is inferably non-stupid The addition of new information- the way Hui behaves alters the direction of conclusion. The inference to stupidity is no longer justified. Rather this new information means that Yan Hui has taken the instruction to hear better than those that disagree because he has seen why the instruction was right to begin with
Someone asked for an explanation of the di sacri$ce.32 !e Master said, “I donot understand it. One who understood it could handle the world as if he had itright here,” and he pointed to the palm of his hand.
I can't seem to follow the inference. Is it just that Honouring the earliest known ancestor of the dynasty is honouring the person who received the Mandate of Heaven for the lineage? So the Honouring of them requires one to reflect on their own Mandate and its alignment with the will of Heaven? So in this reflection you are in closer contact with Heaven and/or Virtue?
Logic: Is this supposed to be an enthymeme?
It is you, Zixia, who has awakened me to the meaning ofthese lines! It is only with someone like you that I can begin to discuss the Odes.”
Metaphysics(?): This means that the Virtuous is not all-knowing or instantly knows all the right answers right? It just means that the Virtuous is appropriately moved/contemplative in the face of uncertainty/questions. They are just sensitive to the right considerations
Later ritual texts describethe “eight rows of dancers” as a ritual prerogative of the emperor;
From the last 4 lines of the Pg3 in the introduction, Rituals mark Virtue, so a shift in ritual, I imagine, marks a shift in presentation of Virtue. However, under our Moral and Ritual monism this should not be possible right? Also, 2.2 is explicit so why would ritual be permitted to change?
ey have eight rows of dancers performing intheir courtyard. If they can condone this
Wait, what's wrong with dancers? This does not sound like misogyny/purity culture stuffm so what's the issue with having dancers?
!us, in being a $lial son and good brother one is already taking part in govern-ment. What need is there, then, to speak of ‘participating in government’?
Metaphysics(?):
Governance is enmeshed with life in society This denies the gap Classical Greek life between the Public and Private lives of a citizen that Arendt asserts. Your Virtuousness, or lack thereof presents itself within the home as well as in public
think without learning,
I am confused, what is the axis that differentiates thinking from learning? I would have thought that $$\forall x$$, $$Learnable(x) \implies Thinkable(x)$$ ?
e Master said, “!e gentleman is not a vessel.”
Metaphysics: The knowledge of the Virtuous is not factive understanding, it is embodied
Where can he hide?Where can he hide?”
Language: The sentence is repeated presumably for emphasis. Worth noting that this is also the only case of this in the reading. Also 2.10 is notably vaguer than than most of the other entries, I am not certain what it means
If you are not respectful, wherein lies the differ-ence?”
Non-substantative Remark: this contrasts in an interesting way with Malthusian models within Economics
at seventy I could follow my heart’sdesires without overstepping the bounds of propriety.
Love this in the context of 1.2! Of course in your 70s you can do as you please, in the hierarchy reading of it especially, you are not the superiors that others defer to and now you lack your own superiors that demand your deference so you are free to desire with abandon? No because 2.3 still supervenes on you, it just takes till your 70s for the values to truly become endogenous, till you learn to want the right things!
$fty I understood Heaven’sMandate;
So even the Virtuous should only take up the mantle of rulership in their 50s?
, “If you try to guide the common people with coercive regu-lations and keep them in line with punishments, the common people will becomeevasive and will have no sense of shame. If, however, you guide them with Virtue,and keep them in line by means of ritual, the people will have a sense of shame andwill rectify themselves
THis is actually super cool! Regulation is not done via an incentive theory of behaviour! That would make behaviour contingent on incentives and incentives are hard to control constantly Instead, the regulation is an alteration of endogenous preferences! You now want to do the right thing
Bit of a reach, but this seems somewhat similar to Russeau's: Replace the church/the gods with the State and worship the State instead
“!e Odes number several hundred, and yet can be judgedwith a single phrase: ‘Oh, they will not lead you astray
Metaphysics: Moral Monism? The odes must all converge to a singular set of acceptable/virtuous actions right?
!e Master said, “One who rules through the power of Virtue is analogous tothe Pole Star: it simply remains in its place and receives the homage of the myriadlesser stars.
Metaphysics: So is Virtue just something like a "divine" or Heaven-ordained "role" for you? Your assumption/taking up of the role itself determines the good. You are not distinct from your role/what you do. Your positionality is indistinguishable from your degree of Virtue?
poor and yet joyful, rich and yet loving ritual.”
Language: I understand why poor and yet joyful, the lack of wealth can impinge on objects that make happiness easier, but why rich and yet loving ritual? What about wealth breeds a lack of love for ritual
Also, going back to an earlier annotation on the virtue of Ren, if the Heavens bless the VIrtuous with beauty, do they not also bless th Virtuous with wealth? or do they withhold wealth because wealth can impinge on one's capacity to love ritual and there is no virtue without love for ritual If yes, wouldn't that mean one lacked Virtue to begin with, one never truly loved ritual to begin with?
superiors
Metaphysics(?)/Language: What is the sence in which "superiors" is used, seems like a heave word. Do we mean a moral superiority? One gained via an access to the Virtues? Is this a metaphysical superiority by greater proximity to the Heavens? Or is this just a superiority of hierarchy? Older people have had greater time to reflect on the Virtues and thus, in expectation are morally superior as well and thus should be deferred to
effortless action”
Comparative: is this effortless action in the same way that for the Phronemos, the right course of action is self-evident?
strong and hand-some appearance of a noble warrior
Metaphysics(?): So the Heavens bless the Virtuous with beauty? Virtuous=>beautiful
jūnz ǐ
Language: The presence of the suffix "Zi" is interesting. If it is meant to be translated as master/sage, must the gentleman necessarily be some sort of teacher? If so then there are fascinating requirements for the Virtuous necessarily being pro-community. This would also mean that the Virtuous must lead active public lives and are disallowed from living solitary lives, cloistered from the public
!e scopeof the rites was quite vast, including everything from grand state ceremo-nies to the proper way to sit or fasten one’s lapel—details that we mightthink of today as issues of etiquette. In return for such formal obedienceto Heaven in all matters great and small, the Zhou royal line was rewarded
Metaphysics(?): Why is the heaven satiated by the rituals? Also this then requires some degree of ritual monism? So long as the Heaven is unchanging and rewards adherence to the rituals, are the rituals and their practice also disallowed from changing?