Confucius had a very unique philosophy of a "gentleman." He uses teaching to convey what he thinks a gentleman should be with examples of ancient Japanese men. His main idea is to describe to us what is Good. What we should and should not do to achieve Goodness, I thought the way he displayed it was a little bit confusing. In Book Four he explains what we should do to be a gentleman and what are the consequences if we don't. In Book Five, as I stated before, he uses some examples of ancient men to show to us what is accepted as Good. What I didn't understand was that whenever he was asked if this person was Good he never knew, " The Master said, "In a state of one thousand chariots, Zilu could be employed to organize the collection of military taxes, but I do not know whether or not he is Good." In Book Six he judges others his "pedagogical goal is to install virtuous dispositions rather than impart abstract principles" it reminds me some what of Ishmael because the point of the book was to teach the man how to become a better "person".
What I didn't agree with Confucius is the way he put his rules he was very blunt, there was no other option. I believe that a role model should always have another alternative to his way of teaching. Is Confucius really the BEST role model?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment