home
themes · focus   
themes literature agenda archive anthology calendar links profile

Joseph Chan

Making Sense of Confucian Justice

 
Summary

I argue that Confucian justice is primarily based on the idea of 'gong', which can be understood as 'impartiality'. This idea requires government to care for people without favoritism or discrimination. The good life of people is understood in terms of the extent to which they develop moral virtues and engage in valuable human relationships. Government has a responsibility to promote the conditions that are necessary to the good life. The idea of impartiality implies that the government should create or foster these conditions impartially for all so that each person is in the position to lead a good life. A just society therefore has the following features. (1) Sufficiency for all – there is state provision to ensure that each citizen enjoys a level of material goods sufficient to live a good life. First priority would be given to the poor and needy. (2) Universal education – there is publicly sponsored education for all. (3) Meritocracy – social positions and offices are distributed, and hence differential rewards justified, on the basis of individual merit. Confucian justice differs from egalitarian justice in that the former does not seek to equalize life chances as such. It does not see natural inequalities (such as unequal natural talents) or social inequalities (such as unequal family background) as inherently unjust. When it comes to matters about people's well being, material welfare, and life chances, Confucian justice seeks to promote sufficiency for all and not equality between individuals.


Content

español  

1. Introduction
2. Confucian principles on distribution of resources
2.1 Priority to the worst off: helping the destitute
2.2 Improving the economic well being of all
2.3 Meritocracy:
       public offices and differential rewards are based on individual merit

3. Are they principles of justice?
4. Justice and equality
4.1 Equal educational opportunity?
4.2 Equal material welfare?
5. Confucian justice: historical reality and contemporary relevance
5.1 Historical reality
5.2 Is it still attractive today?



 1. Introduction

James Wang:
The Confucian Filial Obligation and Care for Aged Parents.
Paideia World Philosophy Conference Paper.
1998.
external linkArticle


George F. McLean (ed.):
Tradition, Harmony and Transcendence.
Washington 1993.
(Cultural Heritage and Contemporary Life Series III, Asia, Vol. 5)
external linkBook

1

  Confucian notion of justice (yi) has different meanings, the most primary of which refers to a person's righteousness or the appropriateness of one's action. To act in accordance with yi is to act according to the ethical norms associated with one's social role – for example, a son's yi is to be filial to his parents. Most analyses of yi in contemporary scholarly literature focus on this primary meaning. However, the theme of the present issue of this journal is on 'social justice', which I take it to mean the justice of distribution of resources (or, more generally, benefits or burdens). Social justice, or distributive justice, has seldom drawn the attention of students of Confucianism. One reason for this is that 'social justice' is not a prominent concept in Confucianism, as it receives little systematic, explicit treatment in Confucian texts. It is difficult to tell whether Confucianism has a theory of social justice. The reasons are partly conceptual – what 'social justice' means is not very clear; partly interpretive – traditional Confucian concepts are quite different from modern social and political concepts and hence difficult to be interpreted in modern languages; and partly historical – the historical conditions in which Confucianism evolved are very different from those in present times.

2

  The strategy of this short essay is, therefore, to start with some (relatively) uncontroversial elements in Confucianism and then proceed, step-by-step, to more controversial ones. Part 2 outlines three basic Confucian principles of distribution of resources. Part 3 discusses whether these principles can be regarded as principles of justice (for brevity sake, 'justice' will mean 'social justice' from now on.) Part 4 tries to determine whether Confucian justice implies equality. Part 5 discusses the extent to which Confucian justice was realized in pre-modern China. It also compares Confucian justice with modern egalitarian theories of justice.



 2. Confucian principles on distribution of resources

»In Confucianism, the acceptance of social hierarchy exists side by side with a strong moral commitment to the well being of people, especially commoners and the poor and needy.«

3

  Ancient China, like many other ancient societies, was marked by a clear and deep social stratification. At the top level of society was the ruling group: the emperor and his most senior ministers. Below it was the level of aristocrats, who were relatives of the emperor, or political elite who climbed up the social ladder through many years of civil service, or hereditary heads of prestigious clans. Slightly below it was the level of lower ranked civil servants and the intelligentsia, who were well educated people equipped with moral and literary capacities to serve in government, education, religion, and other civil matters. At the lowest level were the commoners, who received little education and were expected to follow the lead of political elite in social and political affairs.

4

  Confucianism as a tradition of thought began life in China more than two thousand and five hundred years ago, and its core ideas can be traced back to the teachings of Confucius (551 - 479 BC) or even before. Confucianism didn't fundamentally challenge the kind of hierarchical society in which it originated. To most people in ancient times, social hierarchy was just as natural as human society itself. It would be anachronistic to expect Confucianism to be able to envision an egalitarian society in which every individual enjoys an equal starting place and equal access to social opportunities. Yet, Confucianism was not without its "progressive" elements. In Confucianism, the acceptance of social hierarchy exists side by side with a strong moral commitment to the well being of people, especially commoners and the poor and needy, and a strong recognition of individual merit rather than heredity as the most fundamental basis of public offices. These commitments are reflected in the following three basic distributive principles in Confucianism.



 2.1 Priority to the worst off: helping the destitute

Sanderson Beck:
Confucius, Mencius and Xun-zi.
1998.
external linkArticle


Jennifer Leslie Torgerson:
The Relation Between Metaphysics and Ethics in Mencius and Plato.
1999.
external linkArticle


Henry G. Skaja:
"Philip J. Ivanhoe: Ethics in the Confucian Tradition: The Thought of Mencius and Wang Yang-ming".
In: Philosophy East and West 44.3 (1994), 559-575.
external linkReview


Chen Huazhong:
Confucius Educating Humanity.
Paideia World Philosophy Conference Paper.
1998.
external linkArticle


David Jones:
"Teaching/Learning Through Confucius: Navigating Our Way Through The Analects".
In: Education About Asia 5.2 (2000).
external linkArticle

5

  Classical Confucian thinkers all share the view that the most basic task of government is to relieve people's suffering. Those who are unable to help themselves and have no family to turn to for assistance should be given direct help from the government.

6

  Mencius: »Old men without wives, old women without husbands, old people without children, young children without fathers – these four types of people are the most destitute and have no one to turn to for help. Whenever King Wen put benevolent measures into effect, he always gave them first consideration  1 

7

  Mencius (approx. 379 - 289 BC), a Confucian master, says that these four categories of people are the most destitute and have no one to turn to for help. They should be given first consideration from the government. In modern terminology, these are "the worst off" to whom the government should give first priority.  2  Similarly, Xunzi (approx. 340 - 245 BC), another Confucian master, says that the government should support and care for the handicapped and »give official duties commensurate with their abilities and employment adequate to feed and clothe themselves so that all are included and not even one of them is overlooked«.  3 



 2.2 Improving the economic well being of all

8

  Another basic task of government is to promote the economic well being of people. For Confucians, economic well being even has priority over education in governing people.

9

  Confucius: »Ranyou drove the Master's carriage on a trip to Wey. The Master remarked, 'What a teeming population!' Ranyou asked, 'When the people are already so numerous, what more can be done for them?' The Master said, 'Make them prosperous.' 'When the people are already prosperous', asked Ranyou, 'what more can be done for them?' 'Teach them', replied the Master.«  4 

10

  There are two points that merit our attention. First, in stressing the importance of promoting the economic well being of people, Confucius's concern is not restricted to the ruler or the noble but extended to the whole population. More will be said on this latter. Second, the emphasis on securing material welfare for the people does not imply a nanny state that takes care of every aspect of people's lives from the cradle to the grave. For classical Confucians, the conditions for material sufficiency are not difficult to be had. The most important of them are light taxation and proper distribution of land.  5  For example, Mencius believes that poverty is largely caused by political misrule – heavy taxation, tight economic control, improper distribution of land, and confused land boundaries. When mal-administration is redressed, people will make a good living out of their laboring; and when they have gathered enough material support for their families, they will have the free time to learn virtues and take care of their family members and the elderly.  6 



 2.3 Meritocracy: public offices and differential rewards are based
      on individual merit


11

  All Confucian thinkers stress the need to select the virtuous and capable to serve in government irrespective of their social and economic background. This idea was adopted by dynasties one after another and became what is now widely known as the traditional Chinese competitive examination system for civil service. This system proved to be the most important channel for social mobility in China. Xunzi is the classical thinker who most forcefully advocates a neatly organized and differentiated society in which distinctions of social status and authority are held to be necessary to social stability. Yet he is also the thinker who most strongly argues that social classes should not be fixed but organized by the principle of individual merit.

12

  Xunzi: »Although they be the descendants of kings and dukes or knights and grand officers, if they are incapable of devotedly observing the requirements of ritual and moral principles, they should be relegated to the position of commoners. Although they be the descendants of commoners, if they accumulate culture and study, rectify their character and conduct, and are capable of devotedly observing the requirements of ritual principles and justice, they should be brought to the ranks of a prime minister, knight, or grand officer.«  7 



 3. Are they principles of justice?

»'Justice' is about fair distribution of benefits and burdens in society. The idea of gong, or impartiality, gives one interpretation of "fair distribution" – a law or policy is fair or just only if it impartially treats the subjects who would be affected by it.«

13

  It is one thing to claim that there are Confucian principles on distribution of resources, but quite another to claim that they are principles of justice. I want to argue that the second and third distributive principles, and possibly the first one too, can be regarded as principles of justice. Let us start with the second principle. Promoting the welfare of all is often described in Confucian texts as a requirement of gong, which can be translated as "impartiality" in many contexts. The link between gong and justice may be understood in the following way. 'Justice' is about fair distribution of benefits and burdens in society. The idea of gong, or impartiality, gives one interpretation of "fair distribution" – a law or policy is fair or just only if it impartially treats the subjects who would be affected by it. The popular traditional Chinese saying that "the world (tian xia) is not of one person but of the entire world", which appears in Lushi chunqiu (which is an important text in the Confucian canon), clearly expresses the idea that political rule should be impartial or fair (gong) to everyone – by that it means political rule should promote the good of everyone without prejudice or favoritism. In other words, it would be a violation of fairness or justice (gong) if the ruler were selectively concerned about some people only.  8  Similarly, the notion of tian xia wai gong, (literally, "the world is for all") which appears in Liji (a major text in the canon), portraits an ideal in which politics exists for the good of everyone. So one can indeed take the principle that the well being of all should be promoted as an expression of the idea of gong or impartiality, which is a conception of justice.

14

  As for the third principle, Confucians believe that it is only fair that public offices be distributed on the basis of individual merit, and not on the basis of his class background or family connection. Promoting people who clearly do not deserve an official position would create public discontent.

15

  Confucius: »Duke Ai if Ku inquired of Confucius, asking: 'What does one do to gain the allegiance of the people?' Confucius replied: 'Raise up the true and place them over the crooked, and the allegiance of the people will be yours; raise up the crooked and place them over the true, and the people will not be yours.'«  9 

16

  In many places of Xunzi, the fairness of distributing offices and making policies and laws is seen as the basis of rightful rule and social peace and stability.

17

  Is the first principle – giving priority to the worst off – a principle of justice? The texts do not seem to give a clear affirmative answer. Government's moral responsibility to care for the needy may be justified by either a humanitarian ideal such as the Confucian ethics of benevolence or a paternalistic conception of the state in Confucianism, rather than by justice. Yet, one could perhaps draw on the notion of gong or impartiality to support the principle. Suppose there is no shortage of material resources in a society but the government chooses not to use them to help the starved, then one may rightly accuse the government of favoring one class over another. The government seriously violates the requirement of gong by not giving any due concern to the starved. (Mencius even says that in this situation the ruler's non-action – letting them starve to death – is equivalent to killing them, for which he should be held fully responsible.)  10 



 4. Justice and equality

 

18

  To sum up our discussion so far, it seems that Confucian justice is based on the notion of impartiality. Such a notion requires that public offices be distributed on the basis of individual merit, that the government should care for the well being of all, and that government should give first consideration to the destitute. But does Confucian justice require more? Does it require substantive equality? For example, does it require educational opportunity be made accessible to all children regardless of their financial ability or social background? Does it require an equal distribution of wealth or material welfare?



 4.1 Equal educational opportunity?

»In instruction, there is no such thing as social classes.«

Confucius
(Note 12)

19

  Confucian thinkers do advocate that government- and community-sponsored education be made available to all.  11  Confucius especially stresses: »in instruction, there is no such thing as social classes«.  12  A justification for universal education usually consists of two parts. First, why should the government provide for schooling and education? Second, why should education be offered to all? The Confucian answer to the first question is clear: education, not law or punishment, is essential to the development of people's virtues and moral lives.  13  The answer to the second question is less obvious and requires a bit of reconstruction. A possible answer is this: Confucians see no good reasons for not allowing certain social class from receiving education. Another possible answer is that since the ruler should help everyone to live a good life (the idea of gong), and since education is indispensable to the good life, the ruler should provide education for all.



 4.2 Equal material welfare?

 

20

  Confucian thinkers are not committed to the idea that wealth or material welfare should be equally distributed. Neither do they find inequality of wealth in itself unfair or unjust. The idea of impartiality requires the ruler to treat its subjects impartially. But in Confucian texts it seems that this idea is never used to condemn material inequality as such. An explanation for this is perhaps that, on the Confucian view, material goods are important to people's ethical lives only up to a point. Beyond that, wealth neither necessarily hinders nor promotes people's ethical lives. Only when the level of enjoyment of a particular good is important to people's ethical lives would that good be subject to the requirement of impartiality. For example, Mencius insists that each person should have certain degree of property (land and wealth) in order to live an ethically good life – a large component of which is to care for one's parents and family members.  14  The importance of helping the poor and promoting the material welfare of people can be seen from this angle: without an adequate level of material support people cannot live a good life. Above this level of adequacy, or sufficiency, inequality of wealth ceases to be a concern for Confucian justice. (Of course it may still be a concern for other reasons. For example, extreme inequality of wealth might upset social harmony and stability, which Confucians also treasure.)  15 



 5. Confucian justice: historical reality and contemporary relevance

A just society has the following features:

(1) Sufficiency for all

(2) Universal education

(3) Meritocracy

21

  We are now in a position to describe and elaborate on the nature of Confucian justice. I argued that Confucian justice is based primarily on the idea of gong, which can best be understood as 'impartiality'. The Confucian idea requires government to care for people without favoritism or discrimination. The good life of people is understood primarily in terms of the extent to which they develop moral virtues and engage in valuable human relationships. Government has a responsibility to promote the conditions necessary to the good life. The conditions include health, an amount of material goods sufficient to live a good life, and education, which enhances their knowledge and moral capacities. The idea of impartiality, then, implies that the government should create or foster these conditions impartially for all so that each person is in the position to lead a good life.

22

  According to this conception of justice, then, a just society has the following features: (1) Sufficiency for all – there is state provision to ensure that each citizen enjoys a level of material goods sufficient to live an ethically good life. First priority would be given to the poor and needy. (2) Universal education – there is publicly sponsored education for all. (3) Meritocracy – social positions and offices are distributed, and hence differential rewards justified, on the basis of individual merit.



 5.1 Historical reality

Alan Fox:
The Aesthetics of Justice: Harmony and Order in Chinese Thought.
external linkArticle


Henry Rosemont:
Individual Freedom vs. Social Justice: A Confucian Meditation.
external linkArticle


Joseph Chan:
Human Rights and Confucian Virtues.
In: Harvard Asia Quarterly 4.3 (2000).
external linkArticle

23

  To what extent was this conception of justice turned into reality in the long history of China? For reason of space I can only give a very brief and partial answer to this large question. The principle of giving special priority to the needy and poor was put in practice for more than a thousand years. Chen Huan-Chang, author of an important but neglected book published in 1911 with a title The Economic Principles of Confucius and His School  16 , wrote that in the Song dynasty (960-1279), the central government established a granary in each district for the storing of rice which came from the public land as a rent. The poor and needy were given rice and sometimes food and clothes. In the Ming dynasty (1368-1644), there were decrees to support the destitute. For example, in 1386, a decree was made to the effect that: »Among poor people, if the age was above eighty, five pecks of rice, three pecks of wine, and five catties of meat were given to each of them monthly. If the age was above ninety, one roll of silk and one catty of cotton were added to this amount annually. Those who owned some farmland were not given rice. To all the four classes – widower, widow, orphan, the solitary – six bushels of rice were given annually.«  17  Similarly, in the Qing dynasty (1644-1911), every district had an almshouse maintained by the government. Officials who failed to fulfill their welfare responsibilities would be punished. »According to the Law Code of the Tsing [Qing] Dynasty, if the officials do not support the four classes, the very sick person and the infirm and superannuated who need public support, they shall be punished with sixty blows of the long sick.«  18  So the Confucian idea that government has a fundamental responsibility to help the needy and poor »has been put into actual law, and its effects differs only because of the efficiency of administration«.  19 

24

  Universal education has become part of the shared Chinese political ideal since the Han period (202 BC - 220 AD). The ideal »is set forth in two classic texts, the Record of Rites and the Rites of Zhou, generally considered to have been compiled in the Han period«.  20  However, the limited administrative and financial capacities of the central government have prevented the ideal from being fully implemented. The lack of political will and determination was another factor. As a result, schools were often sponsored and run by community organization and private charities, in addition to those run by local administrative units. It has been speculated that »there were enough private and charitable schools by the late Qing to teach basic literacy to between one-third and one-half the males of school age«.  21  Universal education remained not so much as a reality as an ideal.

25

  Meritocracy has been well established in China for more than a thousand years. It is no exaggeration to say that China created what was perhaps the earliest and most developed meritocratic civil service in the pre-modern world. The system was based on competitive civil service examinations, the origin of which can be traced back to the Han dynasty (202 BC - 220 AD). But »in the Song dynasty government-administered examinations became the most important route to political power in China. For almost a thousand years (except the early period of Mongol rule), China was governed by men who had come to power simply because they had done exceedingly well in examinations on the Neo-Confucian canon«.  22 



 5.2 Is it still attractive today?

The article was supported by a grant from the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China (HKU 7129/98H).

26

  Is the Confucian conception of justice still attractive today? To a great extent, its major elements – taking care of the poor and needy and promoting the well being of all, a meritocratic civil service examination system, and universal education – can still be found today in Asian societies which have a strong Confucian heritage, such as South Korea, Japan, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, and China. But is this conception still attractive when it is compared with some contemporary "progressive" conceptions that are generally called egalitarian or "social democratic"?

27

  It is important to note the main difference between the Confucian and egalitarian conceptions of justice. The former is an ideal of sufficiency and meritocracy, whereas the latter is equality. From an egalitarian point of view, distribution of offices and positions according to the merit of individual competitors is fair only if the competitors' initial resources – such as their family background and natural talents – are equally distributed. Egalitarians tend to see a just society as a level playing field in which individuals compete among themselves for resources and rewards throughout their entire lives. Confucian idea of meritocracy, however, concerns only about people's actual abilities and the fairness of distributing offices and positions.

Joseph Chan
is Associate Professor of Political Theory at The University of Hong Kong.


28

  Of course Confucian justice concerns whether people have the ability and resources to lead a good life. But it does not seek to equalize life chances as such. It does not see natural inequalities (such as unequal natural talents) or social inequalities (such as unequal family background) as inherently unjust. When it comes to matters about people's well being, material welfare, and life chances, Confucian justice seeks to promote sufficiency for all and not equality between individuals. The idea is to enable each person to have the resources and opportunity to cultivate virtues and valuable relationships and enjoy the good things in life. No doubt both the concrete level of sufficiency and the Confucian conception of the good life on which the level is based can be revised in light of modern experiences. But the idea that justice aims at sufficiency and not equality is a major part of Confucian justice. Justice requires the state to protect each person from falling below the level of sufficiency. Material, social, or natural inequality beyond that level poses no problem for justice. Above the level of sufficiency, meritocracy functions as the main principle of distribution of offices and rewards. This conception of justice, or some other similar western ones, though not progressive enough to egalitarians, seems to remain as a view of justice widely shared by a lot of people in many contemporary societies, Asian or western.


Notes


 1   

Mencius, Book I, B: 5. Translation of Mencius is taken from (1970) D.C. Lau trans. Mencius (London: Penguin Books), italics mine. 

 2   

Which does not necessarily mean 'absolute' priority as understood in John Rawls's (1971) A Theory of Justice (Cambridge/Mass.: Harvard University Press). 

 3   

Xunzi (1990): A Translation and Study of the Complete Works, trans. John Knoblock (Stanford: Stanford University Press), Vol. II, Ch. 9: "On the Regulations of a King", 9.1, 94, italics mine. 

 4   

The Analects: 13.9. Translation of The Analects is taken from (1998) The Analects of Confucius: A Philosophical Translation, translated by Roger T. Ames and Henry Rosemont, Jr. (New York: Ballantine Books). Ames and Rosemont note that Confucius's theme of placing economic well-being over education is carried »through both Mencius and Xunzi, and down to the priority of economic and welfare rights over political rights in the contemporary human rights discourse«. See 254, note 209. 

 5   

Mencius: Book VII, A: 23, Book I, A: 5, Book III, A: 3. 

 6   

Ibid., Book I, A: 7. 

 7   

Xunzi: A Translation and Study of the Complete Works, Vol. II, Ch. 9 "On the Regulations of a King", 9.1, 94. 

 8   

Lushi chunqiu, "Gui gong". 

 9   

The Analects: 2:19. 

 10   

Mencius: Book I, A: 3. 

 11   

Mencius: Book I, A: 7, Book III, A: 3. 

 12   

The Analects: 15.39. See also 7.7. 

 13   

See W. Thedore De Bary (1998): Asian Values and Human Rights: A Confucian Communitarian Perspective. Cambridge/Mass.: Harvard University Press, Ch. 4. 

 14   

Mencius: Book I, A: 7. »Only a Gentleman can have a constant heart in spite of a lack of constant means of support. The people, on the other hand, will not have constant hearts if they are without constant means ... Hence when determining what means of support the people should have, a clear-sighted rulers ensures that these are sufficient, on the one hand, for the care of parents, and, on the other, for the support of wife and children, so that the people always have sufficient food in good years and escape starvation in bad; only then does he drive them towards goodness; in this way the people find it easy to follow him.« 

 15   

The Analects: 16.1. 

 16   

Chen Huan-Chang (1911): The Economic Principles of Confucius and His School. New York, Columbia University Press. 

 17   

Ibid., Vol. II, 599. 

 18   

Ibid. 

 19   

Ibid. 

 20   

De Bary (1998), 41. 

 21   

The calculation was made by Evelyn Rawski, and discussed in De Bary (1998), 48-49. 

 22   

Lynda Shaffer: "China, Technology and Change", taken from the World History Bulletin 1986/87. Online: external linkhttp://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~phalsall/texts/shaffer.html



themes literature agenda archive anthology calendar links profile

home  |  search  |  sitemap  |  newsletter  |  interphil  |  imprint  |  donations