Consider the following situation:
A woman, Y, was born and raised in Japan. She left her mother in Japan for the US to study at the age of 21.
During 3 years of studying in the US, Y learned some different values, and attempted to bring them into her
relationship with her mother. One day, Y said to her mother, “I have always tried to be a good daughter,
trying to meet your expectations and avoiding any conflicts with you. But now, I believe that having an open
conversation where we communicate our true, honest thoughts and feelings with each other is the key to a
good relationship, even if it might sometimes cause conflicts between us.” To this, her mother replied, “no,
no, I would like to continue to have what we have had: no conflicts, no quarrels, no problems between us.
We have been having a good, harmonious relationship. That is all I want.” After this conversation, Y was sad
and upset to the point that she became so resentful toward her mother that she didn’t go back to Japan or
even call her mother for the following 4 years.
Kongzi and Laozi share the same goal to achieve in our society: harmony and peace. However, they have
different insights into the sources/causes of discord and problems in our society, and thus hold different
views on how to bring harmony and peace among us.
Q: How would Kongzi and Laozi analyze the situation between Y and her mother?
More specifically, (1) what was the problem with their initial relationship before the conversation,
according to them? (2) Why didn’t the conversation go well? (3) What faults would Kongzi and Laozi
see with both Y and her mother in the whole situation? (4) What are the causes/sources of the
discord between them? (4) How could they achieve a better, harmonious relationship, according to
Kongzi and Laozi?
Q: Given that their analyses and recommendations are different, who do you agree with more? Kongzi?
Laozi? Neither? A mixture of their views? (ç Remember that this is the most important question for this
essay!)
•Be as specific and concrete about particular behaviors and acts you are analyzing, as well as Kongzi’s
and Laozi’s analyses of them, as you can.
• You must present direct passages from the Analects and the Daodejing in our text, “Readings in
Classical Chinese Philosophy,” (not any other translations of the Analects and the Daodejing) as
textual evidence to support your analyses.
• In your essay, you should take the following ideas/notions/concepts into account (and explain):
For Kongzi: social roles and proper action/ritual, virtues, and self-cultivation.
For Laozi: categorization/labelling/naming, non-action, and the value of spontaneity/naturalness
