Abstract
Confucius argued for the centrality of the superior man’s political duty to his fellow human beings and to the state, while Socrates suggested that the superior man (the philosopher) may have no such political duty. However, Confucius also suggested that one not enter or stay—let alone save—a troubled state, while Socrates stayed in an unjust state, apparently fulfilling his political duty to the state by accepting an unjust verdict. In this essay, I will try to show how Confucius could solve these apparent contradictions. I will then examine the reasons Socrates directly and indirectly offers to resolve his seemingly conflicting positions in light of the discussion of the Confucian case. This article is a first step toward a deeper understanding of both Confucius and Socrates (Plato) by way of comparative studies, and of the general issue of a superior man’s political duty to a bad state.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ames, Roger T. and David L. Hall. 2001. Focusing the Familiar: A Philosophical Interpretation of the Zhongyong. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
Ames, Roger T. and Henry Rosemont, Jr. 1998. The Analects of Confucius. New York: Random House.
Bai, Tongdong. 2008. “A Mencian Version of Limited Democracy.” Res Publica 14 (1): 19–34.
_____. 2009. “The Private and the Public in the Republic and in the Analects” (manuscript).
Barnes, J. 1984. Complete Works of Aristotle, volume 2. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Chan, Wing-Tsit. 1969. A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Cheng, Shude 程树德. 1990. Collected Commentaries of the Analects 論語集解. Beijing 北京: Zhonghua Shuju 中華書局.
Düring, Ingemar. 1957. Aristotle in the Ancient Biographical Tradition. Göteborg: Almgvist and Wiksell.
Graham, A. C. 2001. Chuang-Tsǔ: The Inner Chapters. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
Lau, D. C., trans. 2003. Mencius. Revised and bilingual edition. Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press.
Liu, Baonan 劉寶楠. 1986. The Corrected Meaning of the Analects 論語正義. Shanghai 上海: Shanghai Shudian 上海書店.
Palmer, Martin. 1996. The Book of Chuantzu. London: Penguin Books.
Plato. 1984a. Plato’s Theaetetus. Trans. by Seth Benardete. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
_____. 1984b. Apology. In Four Texts on Socrates. Ed. by Thomas G. West and Grace Starry West. Ithaca. New York: Cornell University Press.
_____. 1984c. Crito. In Four Texts on Socrates. Ed. by Thomas G. West and Grace Starry West. Ithaca. New York: Cornell University Press.
_____. 1991. The Republic of Plato. Trans. by Allan Bloom. New York: Basic Books.
_____. 1997. Phaedo. Trans. by G. M. A. Grube. In Plato: Complete Works. Ed. By John Cooper. Indianapolis: Hackett.
Qian, Mu 錢穆. 2002. A Biography of Confucius 孔子傳. Beijing 北京: Sanlian Shudian 三聯書店.
Sima, Qian 司馬遷. 1986. Record of History 史記. Shanghai 上海: Shanghai Guji Chubanshe 上海古籍出版社.
Strauss, Leo. 1983. Studies in Platonic Political Philosophy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Tiwald, Justin. 2008. “A Right of Rebellion in the Mengzi?” Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 3: 269–282.
Wang, Su 王肅. 1990. Sayings of the Confucian School 孔子家語. Shanghai 上海: Shanghai Guji Press 上海古籍出版社.
West, Thomas G. and Grace Starry West. 1984. Four Texts on Socrates. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
Yang, Bojun 楊伯峻. 1980. Translation and Commentary of the Analects 論語譯注. Second edition. Beijing 北京: Zhonghua Shuju 中華書局.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bai, T. What to Do in an Unjust State?: On Confucius’s and Socrates’s Views on Political Duty. Dao 9, 375–390 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11712-010-9184-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11712-010-9184-z