8.2.5 A critical thought.

What does it matter if people’s conception of the self is a reification? Behaviorally we act toward others as if the self is real and from a psychological perspective it is! If the self is an illusion so are all ideologies and religion since for most people they are reified constructs. Reified ideas create concrete identity for people in all cultures, and whether or not the concrete idea is a delusion what perhaps matters most is that people behave as if the reification is real and substantial. Ask any American, German or Vietnamese what it means to be a member of his or her national community and one will immediately elicit reifications that are central components of identity and national character. Further, from a therapeutic perspective of reducing suffering when it comes to facing the existential anxieties of a final end to life it is difficult for a Western trained mind to accept the usefulness of the Buddhist notion that individuals become selfless to such an extent that death does not matter. Therapeutically, however there is a lot of healing in the Buddhist concept of compassion. Nevertheless no psychological or philosophical approach owns compassion as that would also be another reification and illusionary.

8.3 Confucian perspective on personality and the self.

Little is known about Confucius in the Western world. Like Buddha he lived about 2500 years ago, however he spent his life in China whereas Buddha lived in India. Later both bodies of philosophical thought spread across empires and cultures. Many who know a little about Confucian ideas would describe these as antiquated, hierarchical, feudalistic and paternalistic, although writers have in recent times sought to make Confucian thought more relevant to contemporary society (Bell, 2008; Rosemont & Ames, 2009). Confucius’s thoughts are outlined in the “Analects” that contained most of the important ideas of Confucianism (Ames & Rosemont, 1998). Generally these ideas are advice on matters related to politics, social responsibility or philosophy. However arguments can also be made for the relevance of Confucian ideas to personality theory. For example Confucianism explains basic aspects of personality, how it develops, why people suffer, behavior that will eliminate or alleviate suffering, and provide a model for what might be considered a healthy personality (Bell, 2008). In particular Confucian ideas suggested that the locus of personality development is in the family in a way analogous to Western psychology of Freud and others.

The current emphasis on a positive psychology could have taken its inspiration from the Confucius of 25 centuries ago. The ideal and healthy personality develops from a Confucian perspective when we recognize and fulfill important social roles and associated responsibilities. This thought about social responsibilities seems also to overlap with Buddhism and the concept of the interrelated self that emerged from cross-cultural studies in Asia. According to Confucius it is in fulfilling responsibilities in relationships that we reach the ideals of being human, particularly as that development occurs in families, but also within the larger community. However, Confucius sees the family as the forum for healthy human development, in contrast to Freud and others who perceive of family relationships as the locus of individual dysfunction. The outcome of Western human development produces ideally autonomous and independent persons as people achieve maturity by moving away from the family. This concept of maturity is in sharp contrast to Confucian ideas where psychological well-being is seen as a function of relationships and interdependence. In Confucianism becoming human is rooted in our relationships within our first families, but later also in our relationships with our extended families and with the community. How we evolve as persons are a direct result of our relationships according to Confucianism, and personality is fluid as we react to changes or disappearances in our relationships. For example the relationship of a parent to a child is emotionally different from that of a grandparent to a grandchild and personality evolves accordingly.

In contrast to Western psychology that emphasizes the independent ego in Confucianism it makes no sense to see personality as autonomous since that is considered both unhealthy and dysfunctional. The self is defined by the relational roles that we fulfill and measure up to or fail to perform in a responsible way. Psychological dysfunction comes from ignoring or otherwise violating the responsibilities we have toward others in the family or community. More profoundly we can say that the self consist of our relationship roles. The healthy mature person in Confucianism does not fulfill only the narrow responsibilities of the immediate family, but also the larger community. The primary relationships however, are identified in Confucian writings as being father-son, husband-wife, elder brother-younger brother, ruler-subject; and friend-friend (Rosemont & Ames, 2009). In the ultimate sense however humans are responsible for an ever widening circle of relationships that can also be conceived to exist between countries and cultures. Personality is found in responding or not responding to the demands of the roles that we intuitively feel are right and thereby to do right in our relationships.

It might have caught your attention that the principal relationships as defined by Confucius can be construed as authoritarian and hierarchical. In each of these relationships as understood by Confucius and those that followed there are individuals who are superior in the relationship and those who are inferior. For example parent to child is manifestly hierarchical, but so are the traditional husband to wife relationship, and the elder brother to younger brother. It is a valid and principal criticism of Confucianism that is supports the authoritarian nature of human relationships. This criticism has been the basis of modern struggles against Confucianism, for example by the Communist Party in China and elsewhere. However, as Bell (2008) notes, Confucius himself criticized the status quo of society in his day and so was not authoritarian in speaking truth to power. Also, Rosemont and Ames (2009) suggested an alternative interpretation of being “above and below”, as the terms could also be defined as benefactor and beneficiary. In all it should not be surprising that philosophies growing out of societies 2500 years ago should have an authoritarian outlook. The choice for our evaluation is obvious since we can reject the hierarchical nature of relationships of Confucianism while emphasizing the importance of relationships in development and indeed in the salience of the relational personality. The saying “it takes a village” to raise a child has modern usage indicating that our responsibilities is not to only our own atomic family, but indeed to all children and families. When construed in that manner Confucius speaks an urgent message to the modern world.