厚黑学

Mencius'doctrine of good nature and Xunzi's doctrine of evil nature are unsettled cases in the academic history of our country. The two doctrines have confronted each other for more than two thousand years. Mencius said: all human nature is good, advocating benevolence and righteousness to the people; Confucianism in Song Dynasty inherited its theory, created a school of Neo-Confucianism, and created many circuitous comments. Xunzi, born after Mencius, opposed his theory that human nature was evil and advocated punishment by etiquette.

Hanfei, his student, thought that the sanction of etiquette was weak, but if the sanction of law was strong, he turned to the study of punishment names, which had the disadvantage of being mean and ungrateful. As a result, Confucianism and Legalism denounced each other, resulting in many conflicts in theory and politics. What are the gains and losses of Mencius and Xun? We must study him thoroughly.

Mencius said: "The voice of a child, no one knows not to love his relatives, and his elder brother, no one knows not to respect his brother." There is a flaw in this statement. Let's call a mother, take his own child out, experiment in public, the mother holds him to eat, he reaches out to pull the mother's bowl, if not careful, it will fall to the ground and break. Excuse me, is this phenomenon affectionate? And his mother took a cake in her hand, and when he saw it, he stretched out his hand and dragged it. If he did not give it to him and put it in his mouth, he would immediately reach out and take it out of his mother's mouth and put it in his mouth. Is this phenomenon affectionate?

The child was in his mother's arms, eating cake and milk. Before his brother approached, he pushed him with his hand and hit him. Do you respect your brother for this phenomenon? This is true of children from all continents and countries. In fact, with this phenomenon, Mencius'doctrine of good nature is not flawed; all the comments based on the doctrine of good nature and the laws and regulations promulgated are abusive.

But where did Mencius say that "children love their relatives and respect their elder brothers"? If we want to explain this problem, we have to study it by studying physics. The nature of man is based on me. I am opposite to my mother. The child only knows me. So he takes the cake out of his mother's mouth and puts it in his mouth. Mother is the breast-feeder, brother is the breast-feeder, cake-eater, mother and brother relative, the child loves her mother very much, the brother opened and pushed away. Growing up, going out, meeting with neighbors, brother and neighbors, children love brother. When we go to a foreign country, we love our neighbors when they are opposite to each other.

When we go to other provinces, the people of our province love the people of our province as opposed to the people of other provinces. When you go abroad, you love your own people when they are opposite to foreigners. We study it carefully, that is to say, Mencius's words of loving relatives and respecting brothers are all revealed for my heart.

Nail map

The first circle is me, the second circle is relatives, the third circle is brother, the fourth circle is neighbors, the fifth circle is provincial people, the sixth circle is native people, and the seventh circle is foreigners. If you play this circle carefully, you can find a certain rule: "The closer you are to me, the more sincere your love is, the inverse proportion between love and distance is." The law is similar to that of geocentric attraction, and this phenomenon is very similar to that of magnetic field. From this we can see that man's spirit is the same as magnetoelectricity and gravity, so Newton's example can be applied to psychology.

Whether the picture above is correct or not, we still need to put it to the test: if we go out for a trip with two or three friends in late spring and March, and see the beautiful mountains and rivers, our hearts are very happy. When we go to places where the mountains and rivers are crude and evil, our hearts will be depressed. What is the reason? Because mountains and rivers are things, I am also things, things and I are one, so good things, happy hearts, bad things, unhappy hearts. We went to a place where we saw a lot of rubble on the ground.

On the rubble, the fallen flowers drifted away. My heart was very sad about the fallen flowers and paid little attention to the rubble. What's the reason? Because stone is lifeless and flower is lifeless with me, people often write poems about falling flowers and Fu about falling flowers instead of songs about broken stones or lines about broken stones. Ancient and modern poems, chanting flowers and promoting them as singers, all of them are not together with the description of life. What is the reason for lying on a dead dog on a falling flower, whining and turning in alarm and disrupting the heart of falling flower? Because flowers are plants and dogs are animals with me, they unconsciously show their sympathy for dogs.

What's the reason for seeing a ferocious dog on the way home, who is attacking a man with a stick, when the dog is fighting, we can only help others and never help the dog? Because the dog is a beast, I and that person are human, so unconsciously, more sympathy for people. I broke up with my friend and returned home. As soon as I entered the door, someone came to report that the former friend was walking in the street and fighting with the same person. When I heard it, I rushed to the rescue. It was a fight with someone. Because of the friendship, I could only rescue my friend, but I could not rescue that person. I took my friend to my study and asked him why he was fighting. I listened carefully. Suddenly the house fell down. I jumped out of the door a few steps and turned around to shout to my friend, "You still don't run?" When the house falls down, why don't you call your friends to run before you come back and shout when you run out? This is the proof that human nature is based on me.

We plot the above facts as (b). The first circle is me, the second circle is friends, the third circle is others, the fourth circle is dogs, the fifth circle is flowers, and the sixth circle is stones. The rule is "the farther away from me, the less love, the inverse proportion of love and distance." It's the same as picture A. The realm set by the second picture is totally different from that set by the first picture, and the result is exactly the same, which fully proves the truth of nature. In a word, if there are two things, and they are present in front of me at the same time, my heart will naturally take me as the standard, see the distance from me, determine the thickness of love, there is no difference between gravitational attraction and electromagnetic attraction.

There are two kinds of force: centrifugal and concentric. The outward development of layer A is the phenomenon of centrifugal force; the inward contraction of layer B is the phenomenon of centripetal force. Mencius stood in the picture and looked out. He could see that the nature of all human beings was to love their relatives and brothers as children, to love their neighbours, to love their own provinces, to love their own people, and to magnify them one by one.

If we magnify it again, we can put it in the category of love for human beings and things, because we can judge human nature is good. So he said, "The old, the old, the young, and the young." He also said, "Jusi heart, add to that." Always ask people to expand this inherent goodness. Mencius'happy words poems, which preach people's will, naturally give full play to this kind of goodness as long as people are accustomed to poems, are the essence of Mencius' theory. Therefore, A Tu can be regarded as Mencius'good nature map.

B chart

Xunzi stood outside the picture and looked inward. He could see that the human nature was to forget the stone when he saw the flower, the flower when he saw the dog, the dog when he saw the dog, the friend when he saw the dog, and the others when he saw the friend. When the house fell down, there was only one naked self, even the best friend who had forgotten the human nature. Evil.

So he said, "Wifes live and decline in relatives, desires and trust in friends, and nobles and luxuries and loyalty to the monarch." He also said: "Stick to rigidity? Include steaming and straightening, blunt gold and sharp and then benefit." Always ask people to suppress this inherent malignancy. Xunzi likes to talk about etiquette, and etiquette is the behavior of people. As long as ordinary people are used to etiquette, this vicious nature will not be found out. This is the essence of Xunzi's theory. Therefore, the second picture can be regarded as the evil picture of Xunzi's nature.

Jia-Ethylene Diagram, originally the same, from the eyes of Mencius and Xunzi, has become the two statements of good nature and evil nature, which are extremely opposite. Isn't it very strange? And sometimes, the same thing, Mencius seems to be good, Xunzi seems to be evil, that is even more strange. For example, when I hear my friend fighting with a person, I always wish my friend to win. Is this kind of psychology good or bad?

If we go to ask Mencius, Mencius must say: This is clearly a manifestation of good nature, why do you say that? Friends fight with others, it has nothing to do with you, and you wish the winner, this is the heart of love, unconsciously, from the nature of natural outflow, ancient sages and wise things and, nothing more than love based on one thought. So you must expand your love for him.

If we go to ask Xunzi, Xunzi must say: This is clearly the manifestation of evil nature, why? Your friend is human, and so is others. You save friends without saving others. This is selfish, unconscious and natural outflow from nature. William's second point is that the first World War and the second world war between Germany, Italy and Japan were caused by selfishness. So your selfishness must be suppressed.

What is the truth that the above mentioned statements are the same thing, and that there are two opposite versions, both of which are indestructible? If we want to explain this problem, we just need to look at the drawing to understand it naturally. Figure: The first circle is me, the second circle is friends, and the third circle is others. Is the circle of Friendship big or small? Mencius drew a small circle of my character in it, and compared with it, he said that he was a big circle. Xunzi painted a large circle of characters outside, and compared with it, he said that he was a small circle. Asked why, Mencius said, "The circle of Friendship is drawn by opening the two feet of the circle of my character. Why is it not a big circle?"

Following this trend, it will become bigger and bigger, so it should be expanded to make him draw bigger points. Xunzi said, "Friendship circle is a circle that draws the feet of the big circle of characters together. Why not a small circle?" Along with this trend, the smaller the income, so we should stop it and not make it smaller. Such is the dispute between Mencius and Xun.

In rescuing friends, Mencius mentions me as the expression of goodness in nature, as opposed to friendship, while Xunzi mentions a person as the expression of evil in nature. In our view of drawing, the circle of Friendship can only be said to be a circle, not a big circle, nor a small circle. Therefore, the rescue of friends can only be said to be a natural phenomenon in human nature, can not be said that he is good, nor can he be said that he is evil. Meng Yan's good nature and Xun Yan's evil nature are sophistry. They were born in the Warring States Period, and they are somewhat sophisticated, which is unknown to my generation.

After Xunzi, few people advocated evil nature. Mencius'doctrine of good nature is very influential in our country. We can study his doctrine further. He said: "Nowadays, at first sight, the children will enter the well, and they all have a sense of fear and compassion." This statement is also an important basis for the doctrine of good nature. However, we would like to ask: in this chapter, civilization is the four words of "vigilance and compassion". What is the reason why the following text only says "no heart of compassion and non-human", "heart of compassion and end of benevolence"? This is where there is a flaw in the doctrine of good nature.

Fear means fear. For example, when we are sitting together talking, we suddenly see a man in front of us, carrying a bright white knife and pursuing a man. We are all surprised. Everyone has to jump a few times in their hearts. This is fear. Because everyone has the instinct of fear of death. Seeing a knife is like killing me, so the heart will jump, so will be on guard. When I look at it a little, I know it's not killing me, it's killing others. I magnify my fear of death and turn myself into a person being chased. I have a kind of sympathy for him and want to save him. That's compassion. From this we can see that compassion is a magnification of vigilance. Children are the enlargement of my body, so we should not be afraid, that is, there will be no sympathy. It can be said that the word "sympathy" is still derived from my character.

There are three things when you see your son going into the well: one is me, two is your son, three is your well. The first is me, the second is your son, and the third is your well. I am human with my children, and the well is inanimate. Seeing the child will enter the well, suddenly there is a phenomenon of "death" in front of me, so I will be wary of it. I will show sympathy to the child, and give birth to a sense of sympathy, and want to rescue him. So Mencius said, "The heart of compassion is the end of benevolence." We should know that the vigilant is afraid of death himself, and the compassionate is compassionate for the death of others. Therefore, compassion can be called benevolence, and vigilance can not be called benevolence, so Mencius took the word "vigilance" off and lost it.

But there is a question, if I and my children will enter the well at the same time, what is the state of mind? Needless to say: in this instant, only fear without sympathy, can only take into account my death, can not take into account the children. It's not that you don't love your children, but that you don't care about them. Only when I am out of danger, conscious and compassionate can I send out. Regrettably, Mencius did not put forward this layer to study that day, leaving a flaw, resulting in a school of Confucianism and Neo-Confucianism in the Song Dynasty, creating many absurd comments.

Mencius said that he loved his relatives and respected his brothers, and that he was vigilant and compassionate. There was a word of me hidden inside, but he always talked about it from the second circle, but he did not say anything about me in the first circle. Yang Zi, for me, was able to reveal clearly the first circle, but he worked hard on the first circle, the second and the following circles, regardless of it; Mozi's top-up is to abandon the first circle of me, he advocated that love is good, and so on, is to draw a great circle regardless of the big circle and small circle.

When Yang Zi has a small circle, he does not care about the big circle; when Mozi has a big circle, he does not care about the small circle. Neither of them knows: natural phenomena are wrapped in large circles and small circles. Mencius and Xunzi saw the phenomenon of layers of wrapping up, but Mencius said that layers of enlargement, Xunzi said that layers of shrinkage, it is inevitable to be biased. We take Yang Zi's "I" as the central point, and add a poor love outside, which is consistent with natural phenomena.

To sum up Mencius'and Xunzi's statements, we can conclude that Mencius' remarks about "children do not know how to love their relatives, grow up and respect their brothers" are not wrong, but they can not be said to be good-natured, they can only be said to be natural phenomena in human nature; Xunzi's remarks about "wives with filial piety decline in their relatives, and people who like to have desires but believe in their friends" There is nothing wrong with it, but it can not be said to be sexual evil, it can only be said to be a natural phenomenon in human nature.

But what about scholars? Say: We know that: human nature, can love relatives as a child, a little elder brother, expand this mentality, apply Mencius "old, old, and old, young, young, and young" statement. We also know that: human nature, can filial piety decline in relatives, trust decline in friends, to correct this psychological, applicable to Xunzi "rigid treatment? Including steaming rectification and straightening, blunt gold to be tough and then benefit" statement.

The dispute between Mencius and Xunzheng is just a dispute over the terms of good nature and evil nature. In fact, what he and Xunzheng said is quite good, which can be seen in practice. I don't think we need to ask whether human nature is good or evil. We just need to create a public example: "Psychology changes according to the laws of mechanics." Isn't it simple and clear to apply Newton's theory of attraction and Einstein's theory of relativity to psychology, psychophysics and study them in one? He bitterly argues about such terms as good nature and evil nature.