Abstract
Chapter 6 proposes that contrasting views of selfhood and its role in social human life account for the most important differences between the East Asian and Western ethical traditions. A comparison of these views is helpful to flesh out the different perceptions of morality. It is proposed that Western thinking is characterized by a strong focus on the self, and that while Western ethical thinkers and schools certainly seek to reduce self-centeredness, such endeavors generally proceed through an augmentation of the role of human reason and thus an intense and even tormenting self-consciousness. A clear reflection of this tendency is the ethical approach to moral issues qua issues associated with individual action and rational choice. The East Asian approach differs in that it seeks to balance excessive introspection with a cultivated sense of identification with the whole, be it society or the natural realm. While this approach, it seems, largely succeeds in preventing an existential kind of agony, it nevertheless suffers from some other serious weaknessess. Hence each tradition, it is argued, has something to offer the other. Chapter 6 offers a brief outline of the two approaches that may, one hopes, act as a first step toward that purpose.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
An earlier and slightly less developed version of this chapter was published in 2014 in a special issue of the international online journal Nordicum-Mediterraneum as “Ethics and Ego: East-West Perceptions of Morality.”
- 2.
Though this is not altogether certain. As applies to probably all religions (and ethical philosophies), Christian teachings certainly seek to reduce self-centered behaviour. But this is not the point. The practical effects of worship and the strict emphasis on personal sin are quite capable of internalizing the believer’s vision in such a way that later cultural manifestations display an intensified accentuation on self-interest and even egoism. This is, for instance, argued by Friedrich Nietzsche in many of his writings, perhaps most notably in The Genealogy of Morality, and by Max Weber in his classic and compelling analysis of the Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. These complex cases of civilizational analysis cannot be addressed here, but one may also point to Charles Taylor’s cogent thesis that the combination of Christian thinking and modern rational scientific approaches actually served to underscore the (European) human being’s self-love (Taylor 1989, 234ff.).
- 3.
It is true that Mill criticized his predecessor and founder of Utilitarianism, Jeremy Bentham, for a simplified view of nature and for “supposing that the business part of human affairs was the whole of them; all at least that the legislator and the moralist had to do with.” (Mill 2006a, 100) Mill himself had a more complex and pluralist view. However, the approach of Mill’s Utilitarianism is still one in which the subject’s rational calculation is first and foremost intended to establish the goodness and badness of isolated, individual actions (cf. Taylor 1989, 83–86).
- 4.
An intriguingly similar view is expressed in the Daoist classic Liezi: “Yang Zhu said: Man resembles the other species between heaven and earth, and like them owes his nature to the Five Elements. He is the most intelligent of living things. But in man, nails and teeth are not strong enough to provide defence, skin and flesh are too soft for protection; he cannot run fast enough to escape danger, and he lacks fur and feathers to ward off heat and cold. He must depend on other things in order to tend his nature, must trust in knowledge and not rely on force. Hence the most valuable use of knowledge is for self-preservation, while the most ignoble use of force is to attack others” (Lieh-Tzu 1991, 153).
- 5.
Thus, the rationalizing focus on self with all its agony is largely a modern manifestation. In ancient Greek thought, notably in Aristotle’s social philosophy, it is mostly absent. However, a strong indication of the Platonic heritage is present in Aristotle’s ambivalence as to whether the good life ought to be pursued in social activities or in individual contemplation.
- 6.
Some recent titles suffice to illustrate this: In the Meantime: Finding Yourself and the Love You Want (1999); Bliss: Writing to Find Your True Self (1999); Something More: Excavating Your Authentic Self (2000); The Courage to Be Yourself: A Woman’s Guide to Emotional Strength and Self-Esteem (2001); Heal Your Wounds and Find Your True Self: Finally a Book that Explains Why it’s so Hard Being Yourself (2002); Self Matters: Creating Your Life from the Inside Out (2003); The Deeper Journey: The Spirituality of Discovering Your True Self (2006); A Weekend to Change Your Life: Find Your Authentic Self after a Lifetime of Being All Things to All People (2007); Heal Your Self—A Journey to Find YOU (2008); Open the Door: A Journey to the True Self (2008); Coming Home to Your True Self: Leaving the Emptiness of False Attractions (2008); True Self (2010); The Shadow Effect: Illuminating the Hidden Power of Your True Self (2011); Soul Coaching: 28 Days to Discover Your Authentic Self (2011); Know Thyself (2011); Know Thyself—A Guided Journey to Self and Unlocking the Powers Within (2012); Immortal Diamond: The Search for Our True Self (2013); The Enneagram for Teens: Discover Your Personality Type and Celebrate Your True Self (2014); Recovering and Healing After the Narcissist: Discovering Your True Self (2016).
- 7.
This is certainly not meant to imply that the Chinese philosophical traditions, let alone Chinese culture, are identical or even interchangable in this or any other respect with the traditions found in, say, Korea, Japan, or Vietnam. But while Korean, Japanese, and Vietnamese societies certainly have their own particular national and cultural characters, they received considerable philosophical, religious, and cultural influences from China, in many cases developing the original sources of these influences much further than the Chinese did. It is therefore reasonable to assume that the classical Chinese philosophical insights presented in this discussion are, to a greater or lesser extent, shared by other East Asian and some Southeast Asian cultures.
- 8.
For the convenience of readers, all references to Chinese philosophical classics are to available and authoritative English translations.
- 9.
The same reflection appears in Lieh-Tzu (1991, 38).
- 10.
This may be changing. Some recent strands of Western ethics, such as the ethics of care, emphasize the use of emotions and feelings rather than rationality and logical analysis. And it is true that through the ages many Western thinkers have proposed a more feeling-based alternative to the classic rational orientation. But, as throughout this chapter, I am describing the mainstream tendency.
- 11.
While Arendt’s coinage of the “banality of evil” is, without doubt, the most significant outcome of her analysis of the Holocaust, her most controversial claim at the time was that the widespread cooperation of Jewish leadership with the Nazis in the occupied areas of Europe may have aggravated the situation and served to increase the Jewish death toll. She makes no attempt to explain why this was the case, and simply states briefly that it took place “in one way or another, for one reason or another” (Arendt 1963, 61). However, she combines this issue with the question, which she claims is of “greater import”: “Why did [the Jews] go to their death like lambs to the slaughter?” (Arendt 1963, 7). Though she does not say it explicitly, Arendt seems to indicate that a selfless tendency to make the best of the (miserable) situation instead of overturning it may have been involved. The same could probably be said of many of the horrors experienced by Eastern and Southeastern Asians in the twentieth century and beyond.
References
Ames, Roger T. 2011. Confucian Role Ethics. A Vocabulary. Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press.
The Analects of Confucius. A Philosophical Translation. 1998. Translated by Roger T. Ames and Henry Rosemont, Jr. New York: Ballantine Books.
Arendt, Hannah. 1963. Eichmann in Jerusalem. A Report on the Banality of Evil. New York: Viking Press.
Chuang Tzu [Zhuangzi]. 1998. Wandering on the Way. Early Taoist Tales and Parables of Chuang Tzu. Translated by Victor H. Mair. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Cioran, Emil. Tears and Saints. 1995. Translated by Ilinca Zarifopol-Johnston. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Freud, Sigmund. 1940. “Das Ich und das Es.” In Gesammelte Werke. Vol. XIII. Frankfurt am Main: S. Fischer Verlag.
Galtung, Johan, Carl G. Jacobsen and Kai Frithjof Brand Jacobsen. 2000. Searching for Peace: The Road to TRANSCEND. London: Pluto Press.
Kant, Immanuel. 1968a. Anthropologie in pragmatischer Hinsicht. In Akademie Textausgabe. Vol. VII. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Kant, Immanuel. 1968b. Kritik der Urteilskraft. In Akademie Textausgabe. Vol. V. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Köller, Wilhelm. 2004. Perspektivität und Sprache. Zur Struktur von Objektivierungsformen in Bildern, im Denken und in der Sprache. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Lieh-Tzu [Liezi]. 1991. The Book of Lieh-Tzu. A Classic of Tao. Translated by A.C. Graham. London: Mandala.
Metzinger, Thomas. 2003. Being No One. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mill, John Stuart. 2006a. “Bentham.” In Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. Vol. 10. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, Inc. pp. 75–115.
Mill, John Stuart. 2006b. “Utilitarianism.” In Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. Vol. 10. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, Inc. pp. 203–259.
Plato. 1961. Charmides. In Plato. The Collected Dialogues. Edited by Judy Hamilton and Huntington Cairns. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Rosemont Jr., Henry. 2015. Against Individualism. A Confucian Rethinking of the Foundations of Morality, Politics, Family, and Religion. Lanhan et al.: Lexington Books.
Scheler, Max. 1954. Philosophische Weltanschauung. München: Lehnen Verlag.
Sigurðsson, Geir. 2010. “In Praise of Illusions. Giacomo Leopardi’s Ultraphilosophy.” Nordicum-Mediterraneum. Vol. 5, no. 1. http://nome.unak.is/wordpress/05-1/articles51/in-praise-of-illusions-giacomo-leopardis-ultraphilosophy/
Sigurðsson, Geir. 2016. “Creating Meaning: A Daoist Response to Existential Nihilism.” International Communication of Chinese Culture. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40636-016-0061-2
Stirner, Max. 1927. Der Einzige und sein Eigentum. Leipzig: Zenith Verlag/Erich Stolpe.
Sun-Tzu [Sunzi]. 1993. The Art of Warfare. Translated by Roger T. Ames. New York: Ballantine Books.
Tao Te Ching [Daodejing]. 1989. Translated by D.C. Lau. Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press.
Taylor, Charles. 1989. Sources of the Self. The Making of the Modern Identity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wohlfart, Günter. 2005. Die Kunst des Lebens und andere Künste. Skurrile Skizzen zu einem euro-daoistischen Ethos ohne Moral. Berlin: Parerga.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sigurðsson, G. (2018). Selfhood and Morality: East Asian and Western Dimensions. In: Giri, A. (eds) Social Theory and Asian Dialogues. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7095-2_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7095-2_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-7094-5
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-7095-2
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)