'Examining a life' in the 'Teaching' of Socrates and Confucius

Abstract

Arete (ἀρετή/excellence) and ren (仁/humanity) are one of the most frequently discussed moral values in Socratic inquiry and Kongzi’s teaching. Despite their paramount significance in two philosophical traditions, the procedures initially employed to establish these values are surprisingly ambiguous. Socrates famously claims that it is the greatest thing to test himself and others on arete because the unexamined life is not worth living (Apology 38a). He thinks that the ‘definition’ should come first, before the possibility of cultivating a character displaying arete, or any action whereby it may be practiced, since it is impossible to examine how to develop it before knowing what it is (Meno 71b). In contrast, Kongzi, in replying to his disciples’ questions (6/22, 12/1-3, 12/22, 13/19, and 17/6), presents different accounts of ren. The fundamental riddle, as presented by Plato and the authors of the Lunyu, consequently lies in the two questions of (i) what it means to be and (ii) how to be a better person. Socrates and Kongzi take different approaches to address those questions, which entail heterogeneous modes of doing moral philosophy: the former focusses on developing hypothetical methods to approach the destination, the latter on experimental paradigms to the process.