How to objectively evaluate the Confucian theory of sexual goodness and sexual evil

Rational deduction, value is limited to the scope of knowledge.

The theory of sexual goodness is a theory of human nature put forward by Mencius during the Warring States period. According to Mencius, sexual goodness can be verified by the universal mental activity that every human being has. Since this kind of mental activity is universal, it is justified and comes from human nature and nature, which Mencius called "conscience" and "good ability".

The theory of sexual evil was advocated by Xunzi at the end of the Warring States period, and the essence of human nature discussed by Xunzi is precisely the natural nature of "original simplicity" that does not care about good and evil, which has the possibility of transforming into evil and the opportunity to develop into good. The theory of sexual evil, which emphasizes the necessity of moral education, emphasizes the necessity of moral education, and the theory of sexual goodness, which focuses on the goodness of human nature and pays attention to the consciousness of moral cultivation, are both opposite and complementary to each other, and have had a significant impact on the theory of human nature in later generations.

First, the two are linked.

1. The basis of the theory of sexual goodness and sexual evil is the Confucian "benevolent" mind.

2. Both Mencius and Xunzi thought that there was no difference in human nature. Both Mencius and Xunzi thought that human nature could be changed the day after tomorrow.

3. The theory of sexual goodness and the theory of sexual evil are also based on the practical principles of "seeking" and "learning", so as to achieve the Confucian ideal of "benevolent government", and there is no essential difference between the two in this regard.

Second, the difference between the two.

1. The background of the times is different.

Mencius lived in the middle of the Warring States period, when the social atmosphere was very poor, and Mencius wanted to change this situation, so he put forward the theory of sexual goodness. The era in which Xunzi lived was the end of the Warring States Period, and the unification of Qin was already unstoppable, with hundreds of thousands of people attacking each time. In order to make people enlighten the good, he put forward the theory of sexual evil.

2. The root causes are different.

Mencius believed that the root of human goodness does not come from acquired acquisition, but from a priori conscience and conscience. The root of Xunzi's human evil lies in the instinct of human beings. This instinct is not acquired through learning, and it is not artificially created that people are born with the desire to have ears and eyes, and to have a good voice.

3. The definition of the concept of sexuality is different.

From the very beginning of the definition of the concept of sexuality, Meng Xun had the distinction between the two opposing value orientations of the inner saint and the outer king. "Mencius said that he was good, and Xunzi said that he was evil, which means that there is no rudeness and righteousness in the instinctive behavior that people are born with; In the definition of sexuality, Mencius looked at people and life with kindness, believing that people can improve themselves; Xunzi looked at people and life with a cold and stern gaze, and did not believe that people could improve themselves. “

4. Different propositions on the issue of self-cultivation.

Mencius emphasized the nature of the heart, and Xunzi emphasized instinctive desire. As a result, the two have different views on the issue of self-cultivation. Mencius must emphasize the inner cultivation of human beings from the viewpoint of the theory of goodness, and he developed Confucius's "benevolence by oneself".

Xunzi advocated sexual evil, emphasized external etiquette norms, and took the route of Confucius's "covenant with etiquette", and "etiquette" became the backbone term of Xunzi's doctrine.

The similarities and differences between the theory of sexual goodness and the theory of sexual evil, then their similarities, their differences are well, to have a good heart, to do things well, the difference is that what they do is different.

The similarities and differences between the theory of sexual goodness and the theory of sexual evil, their common point is affirmative sexuality, and their difference is that sex is good and bad.

Even if there are similarities and differences in any vice, they all have arguments, but there is always a single and an evil. Yes.

The similarities between them all start from the same place, they all revolve around human nature, and the difference between this point of view is that one thinks that sex is good, and the other thinks that there are new two ways.

The common denominator between the feminine and the human being in your heart is that people are born good and are born bad, and they are mainly limited by this situation.

The difference is in one assertion that man is born by nature to be good, while another assertion that man is born evil by nature. The key lies in the cultivation and influence of the day after tomorrow.

The difference is that they expound the nature of human beings from opposite directions, and the same knowledge lies in the fact that they all have a certain basis, and they are both explanations of human nature.

This is not different from the theory of sexual evil, the difference between them is that there is a difference between good and evil, so they are different.

Lao Tzu mentioned in the Tao Te Ching that people are good by nature, and people are originally good, and then they learn badly.

They all say that the common denominator of character, the similarities and differences are one kindness, one is writing, and the other is hunger.

The main difference between these two evils is the question of whether human beings are inherently good or natural.

The essence is a benevolent word, but one is congenital and one is cultivated.

This will also start from human nature itself, which means.

The similarities and differences of astonishment agree that they refer to a set of distinctions between good and evil in different aspects, from which we understand three.

The similarities and differences between the theory of sexual goodness and the theory of sexual evil may be a good explanation of **.