EH 103: Argument of Evaluation

Hsun Tzu’s “Man’s Nature is Evil” is essentially a rebuttal to Mencius’ “Man’s Nature is Good.” Mencius’ writing consists largely of parables and transcripts of debates he had with the philosopher Kao Tzu, while Hsun Tzu’s writing contains analogies and is more similar to modern writing due to his use of his thesis throughout the entirety of his work. While on different sides of the debate, both Hsun Tzu’s and Mencius’ arguments are well written and effective. Mencius’ stance is that all humans are inherently good, while Hsun Tzu's stance is that all humans are inherently evil. Hsun Tzu argues that man will remain evil, and that without rites and rituals to keep man in check, all men will be criminals, while Mencius argues that man will remain good unless made evil. The majority of Hsun Tzu’s “Man’s Nature is Evil” involves him refuting the points made by Mencius. Hsun Tzu and Mencius works are at the center of the debate Nature vs Nurture and both greatly influenced generations of Confucians. Also, Hsun Tzu’s philosophy in “Man’s Nature is Evil,” had an enormous effect on the Chinese philosophy of Legalism, though his teachings were banned due to backlash against Legalist rule in China. While Mencius is on the side of good and Hsun Tzu is on the side of evil, there is still the question of whether human nature is inherently good or evil, or is it a combination of the two?

So what is the debate about? Essentially, the debate is over whether human nature is inherently evil or good and how our environment affects our nature. The nature side of the debate refers to genes that help influence who we are while the nurture side refers to “environmental variables” that help influence who we are. (Cherry). Besides Mencius and Hsun Tzu, there are many others who participated in the debate of nature vs nurture. Others participants of the Nature vs Nurture debate are John Locke, John B. Watson, Augustine, and Hobbes. According to Cherry, John Locke believed in the idea of tabula rasa which argues that we begin as a “blank slate” and who we are is determined by our actions and experiences, while John B. Watson was a behaviorist who believed are behaviour is the result of conditioning and training. According to Ward, Augustine believed all humans are born selfish and are saved through divine intervention, while Hobbes believed humans are saved through civil law.

In his writing, “Man’s Nature is Good,” Mencius compares human nature to barley seeds. In this example, Mencius describes how barley seeds grow if they are in a good environment; he also describes how all seeds grow the same, unless there is an inequality in the amount of rainfall or care received. (Mencius 81). This comparison is used to support his claim that all humans are inherently good unless made evil. In order for the seeds to grow, the seeds need nourishment and a good environment. Mencius is making the point that similar to the barley seeds, human nature needs to be nourished to maintain its goodness otherwise, it will become evil. He is showing support to the claim that environment influences human nature. Also supporting these claims, there is a quote that says “With proper sustenance, anything will grow; and without proper sustenance, anything will fade away.” (Mencius 82). Furthermore, in Mencius’ “Man’s Nature is Good,” there are quotations from the philosopher Kao Tzu. Kao Tzu believed human nature was not inherently good or evil. Kao Tzu, similarly to Locke, believed in the idea of tabula rasa. (Mencius 80). Kao Tzu uses the example of how water flows. He says that human nature is similar to the way water flows. Water does not choose between east and west, and human nature does not choose between good and evil. (Mencius 81). Mencius replies to this example by saying that even though water does not choose between east and west, it does choose between high and low. Mencius uses the example of water to further support his claim that environment influences human nature by saying that human nature, similar to water, responds to the forces around it. (Mencius 81). Mencius also references four principles that involve humanity, duty, ritual, and wisdom throughout his writing, such as in the example of shaping wood and in the example of the barley seeds. He mentions that everyone is born with the four principles inside of them, and that some people make more of themselves because others do not realize their “inborn capacities.” (Mencius 80).

In his writing, “Man’s Nature is Evil,” Hsun Tzu states his thesis in the first sentence and spends the entirety of his work both repeating this claim and supporting this claim. Hsun Tzu begins his argument with his idea that if man indulged in his emotions and wants, then man will inevitably break the rules of society and become a criminal. To prevent this, Hsun Tzu claims man must be given instructions and principles that will guide him into good nature. (Tzu 85). Hsun counters the example of shaping wood that is seen in Mencius’ “Man’s Nature is Good.” He supports his side of the debate by saying that similar to a warped piece of wood that needs to be made straight, human nature needs to be made good by following rites and rules. (Tzu 88). This counter of Mencius’ example also supports Hsun Tzu’s claim that since man’s nature is inherently evil, his goodness is the result of conscious activity. Also, he compares the use of ritual principles shaping man’s nature to the way a potter molds clay and a carpenter carves wood. (Tzu 86). This helps provide insight to Hsun Tzu’s ideas. For example, the potter spends countless hours molding clay until it is beautiful and perfect, and the carpenter spends countless hours carving wood until it also is perfect and detailed. Similarly, the ritual principles shape a man’s nature until it is perfect and good. Hsun Tzu also claims that Mencius is wrong and that he doesn't really understand man’s nature when he states that “man is capable of learning because his nature is good” (Tzu 87). Hsun Tzu supports this claim with showing the difference of nature and conscious activity. According to Hsun Tzu, nature is the part that cannot be learned, while conscious activity is the part that can be learned. He also further provides support for the claim that Mencius is wrong by planting doubt. He questions the reader about why sage kings and ritual principles exist if man’s nature is good instead of evil. (Tzu 87).

Mencius’ argument is that human nature is good unless taught to be bad, while on the other hand, Hsun Tzu’s argument is that human nature is evil unless taught to be good through strict discipline. Hsun Tzu compares human nature to warped boards and that after being straightened, people will always be good. Mencius compares human nature to barley seeds and that they need to bour nourished to grow. So, even though Mencius and Hsun Tzu are on opposing sides, they both make effective arguments. Both men provide claims, both men provide reasoning behind their claims, and both men provide examples to help the reader understand their position on human nature. While I find Mencius’ and Hsun Tzu’s arguments to be effective, I do think they missed the common ground there arguments held. Both Hsun Tzu and Mencius make the point that environment plays a role in influencing whether human nature is good or evil. For example, Mencius makes the point about environment affecting nature in the example of water. He says like water responds to the forces around it, human nature also responds to the forces around it. Hsun Tzu also make the point about environment affecting nature. He even quotes an old text, that says “Environment is the important thing,” to support his points about environment (Tzu 92). But why does any of this matter? Hsun Tzu and Mencius’ arguments play an important role in the debate Nature vs Nurture that is still occuring today. Furthermore, there is a fine line between good and evil and that line can easily be blurred, so what is good to one person may be evil to someone else. So is human nature inherently good, inherently evil, or a combination of good and evil? When thinking about this a Native American fable comes to mind. In the fable, there is a grandfather who is telling his grandson a story about two wolves, one wolf that is evil and one wolf that is good, that are always fighting inside of him and in everyone else in the world. The grandson asks which wolf wins, to which his grandfather responds with “The one you feed.” (The Nature of Man). So whether you notice or not, the debate between good versus evil, or nature versus nurture, is still going on today, and it plays a part in our everyday life. The question is which wolf do you feed?

Works Cited

Cherry, Kendra, and Steven Gans. “The Age Old Debate of Nature vs. Nurture.” ​

Verywell Mind​, Dotdash, www.verywellmind.com/what-is-nature-versus-nurture-2795392.

Mencius. “Man’s Nature is Good.” ​A​ ​Reading the World: Ideas That Matter​, edited by

Michael Austin, W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2017, pp. 79-82.

Tzu, Hsun. "Man's Nature Is Evil." ​A​ ​Reading the World: Ideas That Matter,​ edited by

Michael Austin, W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2017, pp. 84-92.

“The Nature of Man: Is Man by Nature Good, or Basically Bad?” ​Psychology Today,​

Sussex Publishers, www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/

warrior-life/201803/the-nature-man-is-man-nature-good-or-basically-bad.

Ward, Adrian F. “Scientists Probe Human Nature--and Discover We Are Good, After All.” Scientific American,​ 20 Nov. 2012, www.scientificamerican.com/article/

scientists-probe-human-nature-and-discover-we-are- good-after-all/.