I am a Chinese and I am proud of what Confucius Said. He don't ask help from any kind of god, He just pick directly pick a right tool to make the society more peacefully! thanks to him, a great thinker.
i wish mr. stephen prothero was my religion teacher. it would be very nice. i have learned more in 15 minutes than in my class three time a week…Thank you for this video!!!!!!!
agreed, in my theology class the teacher is rather biased toward his own religion and sometimes take offense, he is a very religious person who believe in superstition and after life which make it hard to have proper conversation as I'm an agnostic
Consider your own biases as well, you just state he believes in superstition. Religion isnt based on superstition almost everything that revolves around religion has an extractable purpose/meaning to it.
In Year 579 BC, there was a World Peace Conference in China, led by the Five Hegemons, were all the Chinese States （楚、晉、秦、齐、宋、鄭、陈、蔡、北燕、杞、胡、沈、白狄、冬，鲁、衛、许、滕、邾） met and signed a World Peace Treaty. Sorry that all barbarian states were not invited. But there were 50 years of peace after that.
Okay, let's end this debate once and for all: (definitions taken from Google) Definition of religion: "The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods." Definition of philosophy: "The study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline." So, the emphasis in religion is on: 1) Belief as opposed to reasoning. Adherents take the truth of the system as a given. Any attempt to defend the truth of the tradition (apologetics), or go beyond what is strictly canonical (eschatology, theology, metaphysics, ethics, demonology, etc.) are classified as "religious philosophy", and are considered separate from religion 'proper'. 2) Some kind of 'controlling power' behind the universe that is beyond human, or 'superhuman'. This is often expressed as a god or gods, but can also be much more abstract, such as a belief in fate or the law of Karma. 3) An emphasis on ritual as a form of psychological catharsis as well as a mechanism for social cohesion. Philosophers may talk about ethics and how one ought to live, but this is separate from ritual. To an outside observer, religious rituals appear meaningless and obsessive compulsive, but they serve important spiritual purposes. Nothing like this appears in philosophy (save for in political philosophy, which is arguably just philosophy practiced in a religious mindset). Whereas the emphasis in philosophy is on: 1) Reasoning as opposed to belief. Adherents of a particular philosophy don't take their positions as a given - rather they provide a logical framework for others to understand how they arrived at their conclusion (provided they're doing it properly). 2) The academic discipline of this logical framework. Philosophers who share the same philosophical tradition are expected to disagree and argue with each other over foundational aspects of their philosophy. To use an example, it is possible to be a Utilitarian philosopher and disagree with everything Jeremy Bentham ever wrote. The same is not true for religious believers, and to the extent that it does happen in religion, those who question teachings are called either "religious philosophers" or "heretics" and in both cases are not assumed by anyone to be representative of what most believers think. --By the first points outlined in both paragraphs, Confucianism is more closely tied to religion. --The second point under 'Religion' supports this view also. Consider what Confucius himself said about Heaven: "The Master was put in fear in Kuang. He said, 'After the death of King Wen, was not the cause of truth lodged here in me? If Heaven had wished to let this cause of truth perish, then I, a future mortal, should not have got such a relation to that cause. While Heaven does not let the cause of truth perish, what can the people of Kuang do to me?' " Heaven is seen as the ideal to be strived towards, as well as the source of mortal destinies. All righteousness is said to come from it. This is not philosophical jargon. This is religious language. --The third point under 'Religion' is the essence of Confucianism. Rituals are the key to achieving social order and bringing Heaven to Earth. --The second point under 'Philosophy' has no analogue in Confucianism. Therefore, Confucianism is a religion.
Those atheists or secularists who misname themselves Confucians are at odds with Confucius himself who was a Theist. Kongzi claimed that if one understood the Worship of God (禘 = 礻(上)帝) they could manage All Below Heaven with the ease of looking at one's palm: 《論語•八佾•一 一》『或問禘之說。子曰：「不知也。知其說者之於天下也，其如示諸斯乎！」指其掌。』 《詩說•頌•六》『《我將》：季秋禘上帝于明堂而配以文王之樂歌也，賦也。』
One of America's most cherished ideas is that everyone, no matter where they come from, should have an equal chance to improve their station in life. Education is a means by which one can hone one's character and skills and prove one's ability to lead. China's ancient exam system embodied this meritocratic ideal, though in practice only the rich could afford such schooling. Still, the system prevented simple nepotism, and even now in America, rich and poor do not have equal access to education.
I believe in both Taoism and Confucianism. I believe in learning, but only in the form of knowing who you are. Having an opinion, and letting knowledge develop you.
You misunderstood the idea of respect and obey between the relationships, this philosophy of "becoming a good man"(which in Confucianism is the ultimate goal for everyone) is also designed for the rulers(the kings and the politicians give advises to the kings) to be humble. The respect it emphasizes is to listen to each others and give advices in a humble way, not to brainlessly obey the ruler.
It's not a positive ideal. I do not think equality is positive, I think it is negative. As a Confucianist I believe strongly in order through a benevolent and honorable hierarchy.
Confucianism's underlying ideas are in fact very American. Confucianism is rooted in relentless self-improvement as a means to actualizing one's moral and intellectual potential. Confucius taught that everyone could improve one's character and lot in life through education: he said -All men are basically the same; it is learning and practice that set them apart- and -In education, there should be no class distinctions-, demonstrating the strong egalitarian ethic in his thought. Very...AMERICAN.
4:19 "… you know America is so much first of all about youth, but it's also about egalitarianism, you know, equality is one of the great American virtues." I love United States for so many reasons, but I recommend the speaker to check this index for income-type of equality: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality and sort by "World Bank Gini (%)". He may be shocked to see how US compares to South Sudan, DR Congo and China.
Equality under the law, equality in political voice, equality of opportunity. Those are American ideals even if we don't live up to them. Equality of income or any other outcome in life has never been an American value. And by the way the bottom 10% of Americans are way better off than 95% of people in South Sudan or DR of Congo, so I'm not sure why you think those places are better just because they are more "equal".
codediporpal I agree that bottom 10% of Americans are probably way better off than 95% of people in South Sudan or DR of Congo, that's why I moved to US, live here very happily and very grateful to American people for building the infrastructure and culture that I take benefit from. As far as I understand term "egalitarianism" that the author mentioned includes economic equality: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egalitarianism
***** Economic equality? No, that would be communism. And ironically the only way to impose economic equality is to have extreme concentration of power. I think you came to the wrong country if that's what you're looking for. Go to Cuba and you can live under a dictatorship where everybody is equally poor.
It's not only that. It's a lot like Aristotle's self improvement. Which our modern western civilization is based on. The west and East have a lot more common than we thought.
In Neo-Confucianism there is an adaptation towards the acceptance of Daoist and Buddhist beliefs. It is religious-like in respect to traditional values and ritual as in a ritualistic way in which we interact. Perhaps there is a metaphoric context towards religion in regards to its ritual and tradition type process or path?
@TheMalar this wasn't in my inbox, so sorry for the late reply. anecestor cults, the classics, and the tradtion of bulding altars and shrines to great figures all predated confucianism, and confucian thinkers supported these tradtions since honoring the past was seen as very important. it wasn't long before they became bound to each like platonism and judhaism, and much later with christianity.
@chinesemusicDJ He's not talking about American religion. He's talking about the general Western zeitgeist that implies that everyone is equal, and have the same opportunities.
@zoticus1 yes, but the absorption of other beliefs or rather the absorption of confucian ideals in to other beliefs held by the chinese came early on with confucianism becoming the state philosophy/ religion. which created what you can call popular confucianism, with heavens, hells, gods, ect. all for the masses and had gone on for many centuries in china & east asia, thats why confucianism is such a big part of chinese religion and religion of all east asian cultuers.
about 禮 Li, the meaning "rituel' is not original meaning of this word. In the age of confucius, it meant a systeme of normes about politics, ethic etc.
whatever "-ism" or "-ity" or "-m", power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. 礼 (li3) can also be translated "etiquette, courtesy, manners"
Confucianism is not a religion. The vast majority of East Asians don't see it as a religion, scholars in the China field themselves recognize it is not a religion unless we define the term too broadly, and the only ones who said it was a religion were the Christian missionaries that wanted to appropriate Confucianism in order to more easily convert the native Chinese. There are a number of Confucian religious sects, but it is telling how they are a recent phenomenon that didn't come into existence until contact with Christianity and how they only have a few thousand members in their fold, unlike the millions of Buddhists and Taoists.
Can u actually cite one source to prove what you're saying. Confucianism is a religion in every sense of the word. It's just that it directs its religious reverence to human society rather than a god. That's the only difference.
VanLightning900 If Confucianism doesn't have gods, then that would make it completely unique and solitary in the history of religions. Fact is, a religion is the systematized worship of a god or gods, and since Confucianism doesn't have this, it is thus not a religion. If it is a religion, then liberalism, the dominant political system in the world right now, is a religion, and I'm pretty sure you don't consider liberalism a religion. Also, can you please say you instead of u? I mean, seriously, that's annoying.
Quq Balam I don't think that's a good comparison. Religion is the systematized worship of something higher than the human individual. Not necessarily a God. In confucianism this higher authority is human society itself. In addition to worship, religions also usually have scriptures, rituals, places of worship and a clergy. Liberalism lacks all of this and is therefore not a religion. Confucianism has all of these elements. Human society is worshiped, Confucius' analects are the scriptures, things like ancestor veneration are the rituals, confucian temples are the places of worship where Confucius' memory is honored, and the kings, elders and the politicians are the religious clerics who implement and teach confucian doctrine. Liberalism isn't like this. Yes confucianism is a strange and unusual religion but religion nonetheless. It's religion of humanity centered on the here and now.
VanLightning900 All religions in history have worshiped gods with no exception. It's only Confucianism that gets defined as a religion without gods by mendacious Orientalists that want to make Confucianism the essence of China based on this silly belief that religions are the basis of a culture, and even then said mendacious Orientalists use the oxymoronic term of "secular religion" in order to argue for their position because they know and also say so themselves that Confucianism is hostile to gods to the point of practically advocating atheism. As for liberalism, it is an appropriate comparison because liberalism does worship something higher than humans as well, which is freedom, the law and the state. This is in fact hasn't been lost on some people who have noticed how American liberalism has in effect worked as a "civic religion".
Quq Balam And no not all religions have worshipped gods. There is no concept of a creator god in buddhism. Budhism may acknowledge gods exist but there is no worship for them. It's only later in time the budha himself was turned into a god. Religions don't need gods. All they need to worship is a higher power. That's it. That higher power could be a personal god, nature, or the human society. It's just that the first one has been near universal.
Firstable Confucius had nothing to do with heaven. He proclaimed himself that he is not going to talk about miracles, spirits, ghosts and gods, thins like that; when people asked him about heaven, he replied "We don't even understand life, how can we talk about dead?" And actually in ancient China, politicians are teachers, and teachers are at the same time learners. The philosophy of ultimate virtue is to study hard so you can come out with good ideas to serve the nations.
Because of the legacy of confucianism, and its value system it is still extremely difficult to establish a civil society. we still put blood/personal relationship above truth and justice.
@chinesemusicDJ I'm not sure if you heard the interview in the right context but when he says Confucianism is un-American, he's criticizing American individualism and praising Confucianism. I'm also not for religions that force their beliefs on others but whether as a philosophy or religion, Confucianism, particularly neo-Confucianism, is also guilty of religious persecution, particularly of rooting out Buddhism, Taoism, and animism from society.
4:40 - The USA was built on genocide and slavery and has one of the most unequal income distributions in the world. Equality is certainly not an American value, which is an advantage for the US.
The USA was not 'built' on slavery and genocide. Genocide of the natives were caused by flu and slavery was ended with half of America going to war with the other half.
@@Mjganny Ohhhh. All the Native Americans got the flu starting with Pilgrims through the Trail of Tears? All those Indians in King Phllip's War died of the flu?Why didn't they call it King Phillip's Flu? There was two hundred years of slavery and Cotton is King was because of their sweat and tears. And the North had a lucrative slave business.
No one central theme of Confuscianism is the way how one should submit to a superior authority. It values collective good over individualist to an extremists extent. These themes deny ones individual rights and political freedom, not very American here...................I know because I am Chinese. If Chinese society wants to progress it has to reform Confuscianism, it needs to be be modify to emphasis individual rights and freedoms
No, Confucianism teaches that a tyrant violates the rule of Ren. And if he or she violates this rule they have no right to rule and they should be ripped from power and replaced with a ruler who will represent their best interests. So Confucianism does not say you are "lesser" than your authority, just that you must respect and obey them as long as they respect and treat you well. It does not endorse monarchies either, in fact it supports a meritocracy. In which the hard workers get the power.
Son picked this book by the same name up at public library. Page 41 is censored in right column causing part of 42 to be cut out. What was in the right column on pg41?
I think it is correct to consider Confucianism a religion. It is a semi-religion/pseudo religion. Confucianism is definitely NOT a philosophy. To be considered a philosophy it must have logic. It must have a thesis and a step by step deductive reasoning process to prove the thesis. And scholars can challenge the thesis. Confucianism is NOT based any logically reasoning. the Analects of confucius (论语) is collection of what Confucius said and what confucius did. It is more like a biography of confucius by his students. it does NOT have a central thesis, and it does not show any logical deductive reasoning process.
Xiao 晓 Chen 陈 take a look at this teaching from Confucius, ‘子不語怪力亂神’ ( I do not speak about gods, ghosts and the paranormal). Confucius addressed that talking about all these things is a waste of time. They do not concern Education, Teachings and the harmony and discipline within the society so he rejects to talk about them. He means we should focus more on the reality and improve our knowledge and virtues 個人修養. We cannot just pray everyday for what we want or hope that gods can get what you want and do nothing, instead, we have to LIVE. Also, don’t think that you do good deeds for rewards from gods, you behave just because of your compassion and virtues. A Chinese classic talks about the ideal mindset of humans: 公孫丑上 and 四端, which is ‘four virtues of humans that are not driven by external rewards’. So what we can see is Confucius concentrate more on teachings. However, Confucius teaches people about religious rituals and ceremony. The reason he does this is because he teaches us to express Respects to our ancestors. ‘敬鬼神而遠之‘, Confucius supposes that we have to express respects to God’s and ghosts ( dead ancestors are ghosts) but still, have to get far away from them (遠之) since we still shall Live In Reality and never just hope for rewards from them. We can see Confucius does agree on presence of gods and ghosts. But what we should do is to LIVE with our virtues and respect them. There are never Right or Wrong, it’s just how you realise in it but I’d still say it’s a Philosophy.
I don't get it. The whole idea, as described in the video, is about social order. Why would you classify it as religion/philosophy? Religion requires a god (it's the definition). If you do not consider it as philosophy, why would it be a religion? Nothing has to be one or the other.
whether it is philosophy or not is NOT dependent on whether it believes in God, but whether it is following rationality, whether it is following reason. In fact many philosopher and scientist also believe in God. It is possible to believe in God and be rational. The problem of Confucianism is that it DOES NOT explain why ? Why should we respect our ancestors ? Why should we following ritual or ceremony ? Why should there be emperor ? why should emperor be considered any better than common man. Confucianism is a collection or saying by Confucius. because it is irrational, it does not following any kind of logically deductive reasoning process. it NOT a philosophy.
No you don't really need a god for it to be a religion (this is one of key difference between Eastern and western religion). For example Buddhism, Buddhism does not have a God. It has a set of of principle that must be followed.
but Confucianism is sexist and is almost facistic. Seriously no, Confucianism is really pretty bad XD. I mean there are salvageable elements in it, but Confucius was the guy that scolded a farmer for farming. What he should have been doing was making himself righteous and virtuous in order to create a good government which could then provide him for the things that he was farming. For Confucius, EVERYTHING is for the service of the state. Which makes sense given his historical circumstance. Again there's alot good to salvage but the actual politics of Confucius are terribly unethical.
well, the core concept of confucianism is not sexist or some bad idea you thougt, some confucianism elite added some bitter idea to the confucianism practice.
First thing, I never said anything about physical weakness. I was refereeing to mental strength and chrisma. Second, yes, we do have natural instincts. If we didn't we would not survive. And as for the fact that only rich people can run for president, yes this is true. But America isn't a meritocracy, it's a flawed democracy that has turned into a popularity contest rather than a choice on the policy of the candidate.
@TheMalar true, but confucianism and daoism are not seen as religions on theire own by chinese peoples for the most part, they are parts of a whole that togther form chinese religion.
Much like a habit. We shake hands, say hello, ask how are you but we don't see it as a ritual because it is a way of life, every day, without thought once it is practiced. Do we not do certain things religously? Go to the gym, drink coffee?
Prothero is superficially correct in saying that citizens had obey the elite, but this is true all over the old world. Confucius was unique, especially for his time (circa 500 B.C.), in that he believed that this elite should not be determined by birth, but by demonstrating character and ability--again, sounds AMERICAN. Indeed, China's ancient civil service examination system, the first meritocracy, served as the model for Britain's civil service and later those throughout the West.
@Secyrb well i agree with you in that western societies do value the individual more so than the community, even more then family to an extent, but confucian ethics can help bulid stronger social and family bonds even with in the frame work of christianity just as it has helped to shape buddhism, shinto, ect, in east asia.
@sevenknots you are right "Li" actually means "zhou Li" (周礼). It is a form of political inequality (天子， 诸侯， 大夫， 庶民, 奴隶). During Western Zhou there were very strict political caste system. 在西周时规定了森严的等级制度,天子为最高一层,下面依次为诸侯,卿大夫和士,士是统治阶级里最低的一层.士下面就是平民,平民下面是广大的奴隶
@TheMalar i don't think calling confucianism a religion is correct, rather we should say that it is a facet of traditional chinese religion much like daoism is. what i mean is that for us chinese confucianism, daoism, buddhism are all major asspects of chinese culture and spirituality and aside from buddhism neither daoism nor confucianism colud stand on thiere own as religions with out the use of older chinese religious beliefs.
I agree that America is full of narcissists and that we need to be more considerate of others, but I don't think that blindly following "higher ups" is going to help us. All it's going to do is give "higher ups" an ego boost. If we're going to become more Collectivist then we need to do it *together* as a *whole*. Not just those of us who are "lesser".
I think you're completely right about blind following being a terrible idea, and I'm not exactly comfortable with such hierarchy myself, but there is the one caveat mentioned shortly after 6:45, where if the ruler doesn't act "like a ruler should" then it is appropriate to rebel against said ruler. So really, Confucianism (as explained here) doesn't advocate for blind following of anyone, but kind of assumes that there will be a ruler worth following, which, especially in America these days, is really not so much the case.
@baimeng1 if Confucius wanted a religion he would have done so, but in his wisdom he knew it was to become an institutional item and therefore a partisan notion, that which his teachings go against. If one was to read what he was saying they would understand his words were absolutes, without personal interpretation and therefore without dogma.
4. confucianism degraded purpose of education. In confucianism the purpose of education was NOT to seek truth, knowledge. The purpose of education was to pass the civil service exam and become an official. As an official the main duty was to help the emperor maintain authoritarian rule over his subjects, in exchange the official gets privilege, power over the local population and also money. the Lust for power, privilege and money is the true purpose behind education. Unfortunate this mentality continued to this very day. Passing the exam become the goal of education This is the reason why today chinese do well on international exam but yet fail to create new things and discovery new knowledge
you are wrong, you are confused with Confucian theory and " so called confucian system" mao china is not communism communism theory advocate that disappearing of state, govt, control over people. under mao, communist govt exert control over people this is difference between theory and system.
Confucianism encourage people to seek new knowledge., learning from teacher, learning from student. there are no end of learning. stop displaying your ignorance.
eiji kenji No, Confucianism encourage people to blindly memorize the text without even thinking logically. Education is supposed to teach people how to think logically, critically and independently. Confucianism is the opposite of what a good education is supposed to be.
People failed to create new thing in modern china, because the lack of competition. Money and power is what driven people to create new things, to compete in the open market of ideas. How can you type all that without understand the difference between communism or capitalism. The Chinese government official exam did not exist until Shui dynasty (by Emperor Yang Guang). There is over 1 to 2 thousand years gap between them. I'm not sure how they take an exam that did not exist until 1 to 2 thousand years later. The entire Confucianism Education System is teaching philosophy, as learning to be human. It's not scientific education system. It's like arguing about history class is the reason why people failed to create new things. You are taking the wrong class.
@zoticus1 sorta true but sorta not true. over the long history of confucian philosophy it has come to be an imprtant element of traditionial chinese religion, just like daoism, so much so that for many chinese it is hard confucian philosophy sperated from chinese religion. still you are right in that confucian philosophy is not a religion in its own right and can be adopted, and modified to fit into many cultures and religions.
@TheMalar yes, but they can stand on their own as sperate religions, something that confucianism and daoism can't with out the support of traditional chinese beliefs, values, ect. if we take away these beliefs then neither confucianism nor daoism would be relgions just philosophies. you have to keep in mind that confucianism wasn't a religion at all untill much later on when the cult of kong fusi became state mandate, and the rise of neo-confucianism came about.
Who said that people have to always be obedient in confucianism?! confucianism says that a husband and a wife respect each other like guests, how is that hierarchical and un-egalitarian?
Confucianism is definitely not a religion. Confucius did speak of Heaven and ancestral worship but it's pretty obvious he was speaking more in terms of Traditional Chinese religion, which pretty much everyone was at that time. If he was attempting to create a religion, I believe he would have gone far more into the topic, such as men such as Laozi and Siddhartha did.
You need to distinguish fact, realization, and truth for your exact understanding of genuine truth. To the people who seek the genuine truth, I dare recommend without hesitation OnCharm’s book “Human, God, and Truth: Life is the Awakening Process - Amazon”.
Is it just me or does it seem like Confucius may have suffered from high-functioning Autism? "I have to go to work.", " OK, well, first tap on the floor three times, kneel twice, turn around , clasp your belt from left to right, raise your coffee cup to the sky, take a sip, put it down while humming, turn to your right, put your shit on (left sleeve first) . . .
I think that classifying Confucianism as a religion, philosophy, lifestyle, political system, etc is problematic, because such a concept of the separateness of those things is inherently Western. To Confucius, it was all varying manifestations of moral action, spread across a multitude of social situations. That being said, the closest belief system I can claim as being my “religion” is Confucianism, because I find the Confucian classics and values to be satisfying, not just on an intellectual level, but a deeply emotional and even spiritual level. I attempt to live my life by the teachings of Confucius in much the same way a Christian attempts to live their life by the teachings of Jesus. Even though we have very different notions of God and Humanity, we have the same kind of devoted relationships to our respective texts and ancient masters.
It doesn't have to be a religion, but in the traditional Chinese context, Confucian thought does usually have a notion of Heaven as the source of all creation and the origin of virtuous action. That being said, is an impersonal Heaven, more like a highly mysticized idea of Nature or a kind of universal Mind to which we are all connected, but never enforces itself upon us. Very different from the Abrahamic God, in who's image Man is made and willfully interferes directly with worldly affairs. I think Wing-Tsit Chan said it best when he described Chinese philosophy as a Spiritual Humanism; "Not the humanism that denies or slights a Supreme Power, but one that professes the unity of man and Heaven." In other words, there is an idea of Divinity, but we devote ourselves to that Divinity by devoting ourselves to our fellow human beings, rather than devoting ourselves to it in spite of our fellow human beings. I choose to embrace it as a kind of religious identity, but the basic ideas can just as easily be adapted into a completely secular moral philosophy. If you want a look at Confucian thought through a more naturalistic lens, I highly recommend checking out the Xunzi, an ancient work that completely disregards any notion of the supernatural, but still advocates Confucian principles and rituals as a way of cultivating individual virtue and bringing about social harmony.
Are you kidding me? You say a meritocracy is bad because it allows the creative, brave, and hard working to have a higher place in life? I'm sorry, but which person would you rather run a government? Naturally strong and bold leaders, or naturally weak and spineless people. I'm afraid that in this world the strong win my friend, and for good reason. Strong leaders are better than weak leaders. And humans need leaders, why do you think anarchism never reigned in places with more than one person.
I was commenting on Japanese porn which has existed since before the Meiji restoration. Previous comments as in our previous comments which you've clearly failed to notice.
One mistake - it is very far from being un-American: America is so much first of all about acquiring wealth and hierarchical social order with obedience to it. But it's also about egalitarianism in that one should be willing to fight for their rights, not that you will get it. America is more hierarchical than most other countries, but social mobility is allowed. With that said, if you show disrespect to those above you - you will be put down - Americans expect "ass-holes" or those that will try to buck the system, especially if those above "loose their mandate from Heaven."
Charles DaCosta yeah, I was just talking mostly public mandates. As for family and societal expectations, that's a whole nother can of worms, because it's different from household to household
I disagree with Mr. Prothero when he says that "no there is not a God," in Confucianism. They do have a God, but, not in the same way as Christianity or Sikhism do. More on the same way that a Deist views Him.
why do you like to take morality and associated it with nationality, especially a country that has shows none especially when it comes to foreign policy
Assume your name is sparrow they search for the top sparrow and you find that a million sparrows are above you and you face hell! Of course this is only a Buddhists Curse.
I can surely tell you guys that confucianism is not a religion, there is no god or spirit in Confucianism. it is a mix of philosophy and ethics like Taoism.
Yes, junk food is something modern and something the Japanese are highly specialized in. I really don't see where you're getting at. Are you complaining about Modernity? If so then what would an Asian domination really change about that? And you're complaints about globalization belong more towards Italy, Holland, and Britain, for the creation of Mercantilism and the Industrial revolution. And yeah, the world had superior values before the modern age thus this video on Confucianism.
@chinesemusicDJ Jihad is not religious. it is "a personal struggle". The crusade is nothing more than history being written by the victor. In the west people have spoken words that do not directly translate and they slant and demonize cultures they do not understand. It would be beneficial to understand that in which you speak,lest you make a fool of yourself.
Confucianism is not a religion. It is a way of life based on ethics, self-imposed morality, adherence to tradition, and respect for society. Respect is at the core of confucian thought: respect for ancestors, parents, authority and teachers. Confucius taught about love, spirituality, and a sense of civility. It is a system which strives to strike harmony amongst members of society.
confucian is about self cultivation self improvement led to social order imagine every indian people stop raping people, stop littering river with dead bodies do you need police? do you need legal system?
I think liberalism with its ideas of equality and freedom can work with Confucianism. While we should all b equal before the law, hopefully equally safe from persecution and starvation we need to know how to listen and respect each other. While the 5 relationships should not be taken as doctrine, the ideas of mutual respect for those older, more experience and the ideas of knowing your history. So there should be a balance between individual freedom and equality their should be some level of hierarchy so we can listen and repect each other and be productive citizens
+wotan237 I read Confucianism and some of the bible (bible too big, can't read it all). And I think the bible is very disturbing. Confucius, on the other hand, is much more peaceful. For example, the bible teach if there is a gay man, you should have him beheaded, ISIS style. (Well, it didn't exactly say ISIS style, but the style it say is same as ISIS.) Also the bible teach, if your husband is a wife beater, you still need to honor and be submissive to him. If your husband is a drunk that beat your child to half death, as a wife, you should remain quiet and do nothing. It also say a woman should only be allow to conduct domestic affair (So, if they don't have a man to depend on, they should just starve to death or be a bagger, like how it was, during Taliban ruled Afghanistan era.)
+juiweiYang2000 "For example, the bible teach if there is a gay man, you should have him beheaded" Nowhere in the Bible is this said. " Also the bible teach, if your husband is a wife beater, you still need to honor and be submissive to him. " That's why God saves Diana from Onan, right? (Read Genesis 38) "If your husband is a drunk that beat your child to half death, as a wife, you should remain quiet and do nothing." Now you're talking nonsense. This is not said anywhere in the Bible, and if you continue to claim this is the case, you can cite where this appears. "It also say a woman should only be allow to conduct domestic affair (So, if they don't have a man to depend on, they should just starve to death or be a bagger, like how it was, during Taliban ruled Afghanistan era.)" This is why there are female leaders, prophetesses and queens in the Bible, right?
Quq Balam Timothy 2:11-15 "Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet she will be saved through childbearing-if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control." Thus, it is e.g. a sin for Hilary Clinton to run for President, thus, the bible is full of crap Peter 3:1-22 "Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct. Do not let your adorning be external-the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear- but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God's sight is very precious. For this is how the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves, by submitting to their own husbands, ..." and Ephesians 5:22-33 "Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, ..." So, it is a sin, for a woman to speak up against an abusive partner that bash up she and her children, thus the bible is full of crap Titus 2:3-8 "Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good, and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled. " So, to make matter worse, according to the bible, it is a sin for a woman, to be anything else other then a house wife (even nuns are refer to as "bride of Jesus" and wear a wedding ring) and older woman must also teach such submissiveness and don't work, to the next generation of girls. Proverbs 19:14 "House and wealth are inherited from fathers, but a prudent wife is from the Lord." So, the wife is a property of the husband in Christianity, a gift given to the husband by Christ Corinthians 7:39 "A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord." So in Christianity, it is a sin for a woman to leave an abusive husband that bash her and her children up, all of those women who leave their abusive husband, conducted a sin, thus Christ is full of crap. Corinthians 11:11 "Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman;" So in the bible you must get married, so if a girl can't find a nice guy, she must married a guy that bash her up. (FYI: Despite the west, believe the west treat women well and non west treat women like crap, all the statistic in the US have show, women from a western background are 2 times more likely to be victim of domestic abuse, then non western women. Most white westerns girls that grew up in Asia, I know, especially the ones I met in high school and in college, black list men who are white/Christian/western on dating, there reason is exactly that men of this nature usually treat their wife like a property/servant. I use to think those girls are speaking non sense bullshit, until I moved to the west and start having some understanding towards Christian values.) Leviticus 20:13 ":If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them." So, according to the bible you must kill a gay man, so the bible is full of crap
juiweiYang2000 Nowhere in those passages does it say that it is a sin for women to speak up against men, or that it is okay for men to beat them, which is what you originally claimed. Sure, it teaches them that husbands are their head, but it doesn't say that husbands have the right to beat them, nor that women should accept to be beaten by their husbands. Again, that's why I mentioned the story of Dianan and Onan, since Onan was sexually abusing her, for which God kill him in punishment. There are also other stories of women standing up to men. For instance, the story of Deborah in Judges where she stood up against an invading army led by a man, or the story of Judith, who was able to kill another male general by manipulating him. Heck, the entirety of the Book of Esther is precisely about a woman standing up to the Persian Emperor himself to stop him from massacring Jews. Nor are those biblical saying that the only fate a woman has is to be a devoted wife and mother. In fact, there are contradictory passages and there are examples of women not marrying in the Bible, like Mary Magdalene and other female disciples of Jesus. Paul in fact said that the ideal is not to marry but to be celibate as he explains in 1 Corinthians 7, thus completely refuting the idea that women are only meant to be wives and mothers and nothing more. Moreover, the idea that women were to be silent at church is also refuted by the fact that there were active female participants in the early Christian community. Not only was there the aforementioned Mary Magdalene, but also the Deaconess Phoebe and the missionaries Priscilla and Julia, mentioned in Romans 16 (Priscilla is also mentioned in other passages of the New Testament). Finally, you said that homosexuals were to be beheaded, but like the passage of Leviticus that you cited, it doesn't say that, so you're still wrong. Nor does it refer to homosexuals. It refers just to anal sex, and most likely doesn't even refer to that but only means anal rape. Notice how lesbians are not mentioned anywhere in the Bible.
Quq Balam According to the teaching of the bible, "Christ follower are superior and non believers are inferior." that allow wiggle room to justify Christ following women to stand up against men, who don't follow Christ, whether that is justifiable, depends on how each person define the bible. In fact the bible wrote In fact the bible wrote Chronicles 15:12-13 "And they entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and with all their soul, but that whoever would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, should be put to death, whether young or old, man or woman." Just further prove the bible is full of crap Corinthians 7:32-35 "I want you to be free from anxieties. The unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord. But the married man is anxious about worldly things, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided. And the unmarried or betrothed woman is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit. But the married woman is anxious about worldly things, how to please her husband. I say this for your own benefit, not to lay any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and to secure your undivided devotion to the Lord." In other word, a woman can only be single, if she is to serve Christ, in other word, what we today refers to as a nun. Further prove the bible is full of crap
Someone posted here Confucianism looks good on paper but not in practice. Fair enough... such is the human condition. Better than Christianity was isn't good on paper or in practice. Especially the OLD Testament.
This philosophy came up from the warring states of ancient China, when people hated other people. and all there was fields of bodies. KuFuZi (Confucius) wanted peace and had an idea, he encouraged the authority to stop the bloodshed and taught the states to use logic reasoning with gentle words (Education) He taught people to respect the seniors, co-worker, parents, siblings, and the government. It saved and taught civil rights to the states. Is that wrong?! Or do you want rebellions, traitors, children killing their parents, sibling murder, being rude to your bosses and co-workers. Confucanism is actually a etiquette guide to be a gentleman or lady. It has nothing to do with Marxist Communism (a Western-origin economic idea). truly Western and English cannot understand or translate the meaning of the true means of this philosophy. It seems disgusting to you because it grew with time and lost many of its original aspects but it was a philosophy for society to work respectfully and honorable together. What threats it now is the influence of other nations rashness of freedom; freedom to act on ones own and not care what others see you as (individualism) freedom to be a criminal and drug-dealer. why not help serve your society and teach, heal, love, and care. Is serving your country slavery? we work for others, we are not working for yourself- others benefit from you vice versa.
Confucianism is not a religion. Confucius never taught as a religious teacher, neither was he a deity to be worshipped. Confucius was a philosopher and teacher. Filial piety is not rigidity, it's basic respect for our elders. What is so wrong about taking care of our parents? By the way, the Bible, which is a religious text which was also a foundation for Western civilisation, teaches that we ought to honour our father and mother. By the way, the Bible also taught us to submit to authority. Is it un-American too? If it is, I am glad I am not American. Submission to authority does not necessarily imply hierarchical authority. I submit to my boss because I respect him/her as someone who may has given me a chance to not only put food on my table but to also grow in my skills and personality. I get to learn something on the job too. My boss might have more experience than I do. I do not like tyrannical authority but if everyone starts rebelling like Americans do, there will be civil war and chaos...just like in America. By the way, everything that was spoken here about Chinese culture is largely incorrect. Stop misrepresenting the Chinese community damn it.
I am sorry. But this commentator needs to be more REAL. There is nothing egalitarian about American society. If anything, America stands for everything and anything racist. It is a country where everyone has been catalogued according to ethnicities and socioeconomic background. I don't need to prove this. Just look around our cities and see the chaos of our ghettos and the overwhelming beauty of our exclusive neighborhoods where only the ELITE is allowed in. The most exclusive areas in the USA are gated and out-of-bounds to the lower classes. We have elite UNIVERSITIES and schools which don't even have computers. We have city sections where PEACE reigns and city sections which are WAR-TORN areas. So ... where is the "EGALITARIANISM" in our society. Let's be real. That's what we teach and that's what we aspire to, but we are way out of league with nations such as Finland, New Zealand, Norway, Costa Rica, Japan, Oman, Botswana, etc. I am sure there a few more nations out there a little more civil and orderly than we are.
Confucianism is just like COMMUNISM. It is very beautiful on paper. Wow. So very beautiful. In reality, it has messed up Asia. I lived in Asia for 14 years and saw the whole hypocrisy. Talking about social harmony? Oh my... it certainly ain't happening in Asia. Take a look around at all the inequalities in Asia, from child prostitution to dog-eating and the massacring of animals in the Koreas. If not convinced, visit Taiwan and see a nation deteriorating into CHAOS...pollution, prostitution, an educational system bordering on madness, high incidence of suicide, adultery, dishonesty in business. I can say the same thing about South Korea where 50% of men practice adutery and fully another 20% don't, but feel it is o.k. Need I go on? Asia is probably way closer to HELL than to any state of orderliness and beauty as prescribed by Daoism, Confucianism, Shintoism and all the -isms I can mention.
You obviously have not lived in asia for 14 years from what I read from your comments. Anyone who lived in asia for more than a year can be alot more specific and detailed about the problems surrounding it's society, instead you just rambled a list of stereotypes and jargon that any idiot can come up with. Don't kid yourself, you don't know shit, and stop lying.
Dude! You are the idiot and the ignoramus. I lived in ASiA for 14 years. When I say 50% of the men there cheat, I am being conservative. In an opinion poll, 75% of Korean men thought that sex outside marriage was alright. 25% were not even sure. In the West the picture is not much better but it is a little better. So saying 50% is kind. An INDIAN friend of mine just told me 50% of Indian men are bisexual and cheat on their wives. You need to travel a little bit more, get more life and speak more languages. Anyway...if I am stupid, you are a foolish ignorant idiot. So I guess we are even.
Confucianism works even better in feudal society. Confucianism is not AT ALL related to communism. Communism is not just "social harmony". Seriously, have a brain!
I am a Chinese and I am proud of what Confucius Said. He don't ask help from any kind of god, He just pick directly pick a right tool to make the society more peacefully! thanks to him, a great thinker.
i wish mr. stephen prothero was my religion teacher. it would be very nice. i have learned more in 15 minutes than in my class three time a week…Thank you for this video!!!!!!!
agreed, in my theology class the teacher is rather biased toward his own religion and sometimes take offense, he is a very religious person who believe in superstition and after life which make it hard to have proper conversation as I'm an agnostic
Consider your own biases as well, you just state he believes in superstition. Religion isnt based on superstition almost everything that revolves around religion has an extractable purpose/meaning to it.
In Year 579 BC, there was a World Peace Conference in China, led by the Five Hegemons, were all the Chinese States （楚、晉、秦、齐、宋、鄭、陈、蔡、北燕、杞、胡、沈、白狄、冬，鲁、衛、许、滕、邾） met and signed a World Peace Treaty. Sorry that all barbarian states were not invited. But there were 50 years of peace after that.
Okay, let's end this debate once and for all: (definitions taken from Google)
Definition of religion: "The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods."
Definition of philosophy: "The study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline."
So, the emphasis in religion is on:
1) Belief as opposed to reasoning. Adherents take the truth of the system as a given. Any attempt to defend the truth of the tradition (apologetics), or go beyond what is strictly canonical (eschatology, theology, metaphysics, ethics, demonology, etc.) are classified as "religious philosophy", and are considered separate from religion 'proper'.
2) Some kind of 'controlling power' behind the universe that is beyond human, or 'superhuman'. This is often expressed as a god or gods, but can also be much more abstract, such as a belief in fate or the law of Karma.
3) An emphasis on ritual as a form of psychological catharsis as well as a mechanism for social cohesion. Philosophers may talk about ethics and how one ought to live, but this is separate from ritual. To an outside observer, religious rituals appear meaningless and obsessive compulsive, but they serve important spiritual purposes. Nothing like this appears in philosophy (save for in political philosophy, which is arguably just philosophy practiced in a religious mindset).
Whereas the emphasis in philosophy is on:
1) Reasoning as opposed to belief. Adherents of a particular philosophy don't take their positions as a given - rather they provide a logical framework for others to understand how they arrived at their conclusion (provided they're doing it properly).
2) The academic discipline of this logical framework. Philosophers who share the same philosophical tradition are expected to disagree and argue with each other over foundational aspects of their philosophy. To use an example, it is possible to be a Utilitarian philosopher and disagree with everything Jeremy Bentham ever wrote. The same is not true for religious believers, and to the extent that it does happen in religion, those who question teachings are called either "religious philosophers" or "heretics" and in both cases are not assumed by anyone to be representative of what most believers think.
--By the first points outlined in both paragraphs, Confucianism is more closely tied to religion.
--The second point under 'Religion' supports this view also. Consider what Confucius himself said about Heaven:
"The Master was put in fear in Kuang. He said, 'After the death of King Wen, was not the cause of truth lodged here in me? If Heaven had wished to let this cause of truth perish, then I, a future mortal, should not have got such a relation to that cause. While Heaven does not let the cause of truth perish, what can the people of Kuang do to me?' "
Heaven is seen as the ideal to be strived towards, as well as the source of mortal destinies.
All righteousness is said to come from it. This is not philosophical jargon. This is religious language.
--The third point under 'Religion' is the essence of Confucianism. Rituals are the key to achieving social order and bringing Heaven to Earth.
--The second point under 'Philosophy' has no analogue in Confucianism.
Therefore, Confucianism is a religion.
Those atheists or secularists who misname themselves Confucians are at odds with Confucius himself who was a Theist.
Kongzi claimed that if one understood the Worship of God (禘 = 礻(上)帝) they could manage All Below Heaven with the ease of looking at one's palm:
《論語•八佾•一 一》『或問禘之說。子曰：「不知也。知其說者之於天下也，其如示諸斯乎！」指其掌。』
《詩說•頌•六》『《我將》：季秋禘上帝于明堂而配以文王之樂歌也，賦也。』
It is a religion . It's one of the world's 12 major religions.
Thank you. At 42 , I finally found a religion/teachings of way of life today. It sucks being an atheist in Indonesia .
have you ever called out sincerely to the name of Jesus? He will answer, no other god will.
One of America's most cherished ideas is that everyone, no matter where they come from, should have an equal chance to improve their station in life. Education is a means by which one can hone one's character and skills and prove one's ability to lead. China's ancient exam system embodied this meritocratic ideal, though in practice only the rich could afford such schooling. Still, the system prevented simple nepotism, and even now in America, rich and poor do not have equal access to education.
I believe in both Taoism and Confucianism. I believe in learning, but only in the form of knowing who you are. Having an opinion, and letting knowledge develop you.
oh thank you for saying this. My eyes opened.
I agree. Self-perfection is a type of freedom.
You misunderstood the idea of respect and obey between the relationships, this philosophy of "becoming a good man"(which in Confucianism is the ultimate goal for everyone) is also designed for the rulers(the kings and the politicians give advises to the kings) to be humble. The respect it emphasizes is to listen to each others and give advices in a humble way, not to brainlessly obey the ruler.
It's not a positive ideal. I do not think equality is positive, I think it is negative. As a Confucianist I believe strongly in order through a benevolent and honorable hierarchy.
Confucianism's underlying ideas are in fact very American. Confucianism is rooted in relentless self-improvement as a means to actualizing one's moral and intellectual potential. Confucius taught that everyone could improve one's character and lot in life through education: he said -All men are basically the same; it is learning and practice that set them apart- and -In education, there should be no class distinctions-, demonstrating the strong egalitarian ethic in his thought. Very...AMERICAN.
4:19 "… you know America is so much first of all about youth, but it's also about egalitarianism, you know, equality is one of the great American virtues."
I love United States for so many reasons, but I recommend the speaker to check this index for income-type of equality:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality
and sort by "World Bank Gini (%)". He may be shocked to see how US compares to South Sudan, DR Congo and China.
Equality under the law, equality in political voice, equality of opportunity. Those are American ideals even if we don't live up to them.
Equality of income or any other outcome in life has never been an American value.
And by the way the bottom 10% of Americans are way better off than 95% of people in South Sudan or DR of Congo, so I'm not sure why you think those places are better just because they are more "equal".
codediporpal I agree that bottom 10% of Americans are probably way better off than 95% of people in South Sudan or DR of Congo, that's why I moved to US, live here very happily and very grateful to American people for building the infrastructure and culture that I take benefit from.
As far as I understand term "egalitarianism" that the author mentioned includes economic equality: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egalitarianism
***** Economic equality? No, that would be communism. And ironically the only way to impose economic equality is to have extreme concentration of power. I think you came to the wrong country if that's what you're looking for. Go to Cuba and you can live under a dictatorship where everybody is equally poor.
***** Not to mention America was founded on slavery and racism towards Africans.
+codediporpal but in america everyone has an equal opportunity. Each individual has an equal opportunity to move up in society.
Confucianism is NOT a religion. It is a TEACHING. There is a big difference.
It's not only that. It's a lot like Aristotle's self improvement. Which our modern western civilization is based on. The west and East have a lot more common than we thought.
this is a good reviwe of confucianism, i wish more of the world had taken to confucian ideals.
What a Beautiful religion.
debatable.... define religion.
Shalom....
In Neo-Confucianism there is an adaptation towards the acceptance of Daoist and Buddhist beliefs. It is religious-like in respect to traditional values and ritual as in a ritualistic way in which we interact. Perhaps there is a metaphoric context towards religion in regards to its ritual and tradition type process or path?
@TheMalar this wasn't in my inbox, so sorry for the late reply.
anecestor cults, the classics, and the tradtion of bulding altars and shrines to great figures all predated confucianism, and confucian thinkers supported these tradtions since honoring the past was seen as very important. it wasn't long before they became bound to each like platonism and judhaism, and much later with christianity.
Good stuff!
@chinesemusicDJ He's not talking about American religion. He's talking about the general Western zeitgeist that implies that everyone is equal, and have the same opportunities.
@zoticus1 yes, but the absorption of other beliefs or rather the absorption of confucian ideals in to other beliefs held by the chinese came early on with confucianism becoming the state philosophy/ religion. which created what you can call popular confucianism, with heavens, hells, gods, ect. all for the masses and had gone on for many centuries in china & east asia, thats why confucianism is such a big part of chinese religion and religion of all east asian cultuers.
about 禮 Li, the meaning "rituel' is not original meaning of this word. In the age of confucius, it meant a systeme of normes about politics, ethic etc.
whatever "-ism" or "-ity" or "-m", power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
礼 (li3) can also be translated "etiquette, courtesy, manners"
Confucianism is not a religion. The vast majority of East Asians don't see it as a religion, scholars in the China field themselves recognize it is not a religion unless we define the term too broadly, and the only ones who said it was a religion were the Christian missionaries that wanted to appropriate Confucianism in order to more easily convert the native Chinese. There are a number of Confucian religious sects, but it is telling how they are a recent phenomenon that didn't come into existence until contact with Christianity and how they only have a few thousand members in their fold, unlike the millions of Buddhists and Taoists.
Can u actually cite one source to prove what you're saying. Confucianism is a religion in every sense of the word. It's just that it directs its religious reverence to human society rather than a god. That's the only difference.
VanLightning900
If Confucianism doesn't have gods, then that would make it completely unique and solitary in the history of religions. Fact is, a religion is the systematized worship of a god or gods, and since Confucianism doesn't have this, it is thus not a religion. If it is a religion, then liberalism, the dominant political system in the world right now, is a religion, and I'm pretty sure you don't consider liberalism a religion.
Also, can you please say you instead of u? I mean, seriously, that's annoying.
Quq Balam I don't think that's a good comparison. Religion is the systematized worship of something higher than the human individual. Not necessarily a God. In confucianism this higher authority is human society itself. In addition to worship, religions also usually have scriptures, rituals, places of worship and a clergy. Liberalism lacks all of this and is therefore not a religion. Confucianism has all of these elements. Human society is worshiped, Confucius' analects are the scriptures, things like ancestor veneration are the rituals, confucian temples are the places of worship where Confucius' memory is honored, and the kings, elders and the politicians are the religious clerics who implement and teach confucian doctrine. Liberalism isn't like this. Yes confucianism is a strange and unusual religion but religion nonetheless. It's religion of humanity centered on the here and now.
VanLightning900
All religions in history have worshiped gods with no exception. It's only Confucianism that gets defined as a religion without gods by mendacious Orientalists that want to make Confucianism the essence of China based on this silly belief that religions are the basis of a culture, and even then said mendacious Orientalists use the oxymoronic term of "secular religion" in order to argue for their position because they know and also say so themselves that Confucianism is hostile to gods to the point of practically advocating atheism.
As for liberalism, it is an appropriate comparison because liberalism does worship something higher than humans as well, which is freedom, the law and the state. This is in fact hasn't been lost on some people who have noticed how American liberalism has in effect worked as a "civic religion".
Quq Balam And no not all religions have worshipped gods. There is no concept of a creator god in buddhism. Budhism may acknowledge gods exist but there is no worship for them. It's only later in time the budha himself was turned into a god. Religions don't need gods. All they need to worship is a higher power. That's it. That higher power could be a personal god, nature, or the human society. It's just that the first one has been near universal.
Confucianism is not a religion. Its a way of life.
@joylaval i agree but there are two types of confucianism and taoism; philosophical and religious.
Very insightful...
Firstable Confucius had nothing to do with heaven. He proclaimed himself that he is not going to talk about miracles, spirits, ghosts and gods, thins like that; when people asked him about heaven, he replied "We don't even understand life, how can we talk about dead?"
And actually in ancient China, politicians are teachers, and teachers are at the same time learners. The philosophy of ultimate virtue is to study hard so you can come out with good ideas to serve the nations.
Because of the legacy of confucianism, and its value system it is still extremely difficult to establish a civil society. we still put blood/personal relationship above truth and justice.
I agree 100%!! i dont knnow why he said is not an american religion just because it ORIGINATED in china doesnt mean anything i tottally agree
@chinesemusicDJ I'm not sure if you heard the interview in the right context but when he says Confucianism is un-American, he's criticizing American individualism and praising Confucianism. I'm also not for religions that force their beliefs on others but whether as a philosophy or religion, Confucianism, particularly neo-Confucianism, is also guilty of religious persecution, particularly of rooting out Buddhism, Taoism, and animism from society.
Confusionism
4:40 - The USA was built on genocide and slavery and has one of the most unequal income distributions in the world.
Equality is certainly not an American value, which is an advantage for the US.
The USA was not 'built' on slavery and genocide. Genocide of the natives were caused by flu and slavery was ended with half of America going to war with the other half.
@@Mjganny Ohhhh. All the Native Americans got the flu starting with Pilgrims through the Trail of Tears? All those Indians in King Phllip's War died of the flu?Why didn't they call it King Phillip's Flu? There was two hundred years of slavery and Cotton is King was because of their sweat and tears. And the North had a lucrative slave business.
@@Doriesep6622 Ok, still not the point.
@chinesemusicDJ Very true, all the world's religions just essentially teach the same morals, morals that should be taught even with a lack of religion
No one central theme of Confuscianism is the way how one should submit to a superior authority. It values collective good over individualist to an extremists extent. These themes deny ones individual rights and political freedom, not very American here...................I know because I am Chinese. If Chinese society wants to progress it has to reform Confuscianism, it needs to be be modify to emphasis individual rights and freedoms
Great video! Very thoughtful insight :)
The title is misleading. It's not another religion, just an idea.
No, Confucianism teaches that a tyrant violates the rule of Ren. And if he or she violates this rule they have no right to rule and they should be ripped from power and replaced with a ruler who will represent their best interests. So Confucianism does not say you are "lesser" than your authority, just that you must respect and obey them as long as they respect and treat you well. It does not endorse monarchies either, in fact it supports a meritocracy. In which the hard workers get the power.
Son picked this book by the same name up at public library. Page 41 is censored in right column causing part of 42 to be cut out. What was in the right column on pg41?
I think it is correct to consider Confucianism a religion. It is a semi-religion/pseudo religion. Confucianism is definitely NOT a philosophy. To be considered a philosophy it must have logic. It must have a thesis and a step by step deductive reasoning process to prove the thesis. And scholars can challenge the thesis. Confucianism is NOT based any logically reasoning. the Analects of confucius (论语) is collection of what Confucius said and what confucius did. It is more like a biography of confucius by his students. it does NOT have a central thesis, and it does not show any logical deductive reasoning process.
Xiao 晓 Chen 陈 take a look at this teaching from Confucius, ‘子不語怪力亂神’ ( I do not speak about gods, ghosts and the paranormal). Confucius addressed that talking about all these things is a waste of time. They do not concern Education, Teachings and the harmony and discipline within the society so he rejects to talk about them. He means we should focus more on the reality and improve our knowledge and virtues 個人修養. We cannot just pray everyday for what we want or hope that gods can get what you want and do nothing, instead, we have to LIVE. Also, don’t think that you do good deeds for rewards from gods, you behave just because of your compassion and virtues. A Chinese classic talks about the ideal mindset of humans: 公孫丑上 and 四端, which is ‘four virtues of humans that are not driven by external rewards’. So what we can see is Confucius concentrate more on teachings. However, Confucius teaches people about religious rituals and ceremony. The reason he does this is because he teaches us to express Respects to our ancestors. ‘敬鬼神而遠之‘, Confucius supposes that we have to express respects to God’s and ghosts ( dead ancestors are ghosts) but still, have to get far away from them (遠之) since we still shall Live In Reality and never just hope for rewards from them. We can see Confucius does agree on presence of gods and ghosts. But what we should do is to LIVE with our virtues and respect them. There are never Right or Wrong, it’s just how you realise in it but I’d still say it’s a Philosophy.
If you do something and it works(to an extent) and it does not depend on the supernatural I think we can safely say it is a philosophy.
I don't get it. The whole idea, as described in the video, is about social order. Why would you classify it as religion/philosophy? Religion requires a god (it's the definition). If you do not consider it as philosophy, why would it be a religion? Nothing has to be one or the other.
whether it is philosophy or not is NOT dependent on whether it believes in God, but whether it is following rationality, whether it is following reason. In fact many philosopher and scientist also believe in God. It is possible to believe in God and be rational.
The problem of Confucianism is that it DOES NOT explain why ? Why should we respect our ancestors ? Why should we following ritual or ceremony ? Why should there be emperor ? why should emperor be considered any better than common man. Confucianism is a collection or saying by Confucius. because it is irrational, it does not following any kind of logically deductive reasoning process. it NOT a philosophy.
No you don't really need a god for it to be a religion (this is one of key difference between Eastern and western religion). For example Buddhism, Buddhism does not have a God. It has a set of of principle that must be followed.
me too.
I think China should use Confucianism and make it a model of governance for themselves, but try to adapt it to the modern day situation.
but Confucianism is sexist and is almost facistic. Seriously no, Confucianism is really pretty bad XD.
I mean there are salvageable elements in it, but Confucius was the guy that scolded a farmer for farming. What he should have been doing was making himself righteous and virtuous in order to create a good government which could then provide him for the things that he was farming.
For Confucius, EVERYTHING is for the service of the state. Which makes sense given his historical circumstance.
Again there's alot good to salvage but the actual politics of Confucius are terribly unethical.
well, the core concept of confucianism is not sexist or some bad idea you thougt, some confucianism elite added some bitter idea to the confucianism practice.
First thing, I never said anything about physical weakness. I was refereeing to mental strength and chrisma. Second, yes, we do have natural instincts. If we didn't we would not survive. And as for the fact that only rich people can run for president, yes this is true. But America isn't a meritocracy, it's a flawed democracy that has turned into a popularity contest rather than a choice on the policy of the candidate.
@TheMalar true, but confucianism and daoism are not seen as religions on theire own by chinese peoples for the most part, they are parts of a whole that togther form chinese religion.
Much like a habit. We shake hands, say hello, ask how are you but we don't see it as a ritual because it is a way of life, every day, without thought once it is practiced. Do we not do certain things religously? Go to the gym, drink coffee?
Prothero is superficially correct in saying that citizens had obey the elite, but this is true all
over the old world. Confucius was unique, especially for his time (circa 500 B.C.), in that he believed that this elite should not be determined by birth, but by demonstrating character and ability--again, sounds AMERICAN. Indeed, China's ancient civil service examination system, the first meritocracy, served as the model for Britain's civil service and later those throughout the West.
@Secyrb well i agree with you in that western societies do value the individual more so than the community, even more then family to an extent, but confucian ethics can help bulid stronger social and family bonds even with in the frame work of christianity just as it has helped to shape buddhism, shinto, ect, in east asia.
Correct. And democracy is unConfucian. Given that Confucianism is a better system than democracy, I'll take Confucianism any day!
@sevenknots you are right "Li" actually means "zhou Li" (周礼). It is a form of political inequality (天子， 诸侯， 大夫， 庶民, 奴隶). During Western Zhou there were very strict political caste system.
在西周时规定了森严的等级制度,天子为最高一层,下面依次为诸侯,卿大夫和士,士是统治阶级里最低的一层.士下面就是平民,平民下面是广大的奴隶
@TheMalar i don't think calling confucianism a religion is correct, rather we should say that it is a facet of traditional chinese religion much like daoism is. what i mean is that for us chinese confucianism, daoism, buddhism are all major asspects of chinese culture and spirituality and aside from buddhism neither daoism nor confucianism colud stand on thiere own as religions with out the use of older chinese religious beliefs.
I agree that America is full of narcissists and that we need to be more considerate of others, but I don't think that blindly following "higher ups" is going to help us. All it's going to do is give "higher ups" an ego boost. If we're going to become more Collectivist then we need to do it *together* as a *whole*. Not just those of us who are "lesser".
I think you're completely right about blind following being a terrible idea, and I'm not exactly comfortable with such hierarchy myself, but there is the one caveat mentioned shortly after 6:45, where if the ruler doesn't act "like a ruler should" then it is appropriate to rebel against said ruler. So really, Confucianism (as explained here) doesn't advocate for blind following of anyone, but kind of assumes that there will be a ruler worth following, which, especially in America these days, is really not so much the case.
@baimeng1
if Confucius wanted a religion he would have done so, but in his wisdom he knew it was to become an institutional item and therefore a partisan notion, that which his teachings go against.
If one was to read what he was saying they would understand his words were absolutes, without personal interpretation and therefore without dogma.
You've never heard of a place called "Japan" before, have you?
4. confucianism degraded purpose of education.
In confucianism the purpose of education was NOT to seek truth, knowledge. The purpose of education was to pass the civil service exam and become an official. As an official the main duty was to help the emperor maintain authoritarian rule over his subjects, in exchange the official gets privilege, power over the local population and also money. the Lust for power, privilege and money is the true purpose behind education. Unfortunate this mentality continued to this very day. Passing the exam become the goal of education This is the reason why today chinese do well on international exam but yet fail to create new things and discovery new knowledge
you are wrong,
you are confused with Confucian theory and " so called confucian system"
mao china is not communism
communism theory advocate that disappearing of state, govt, control over people.
under mao, communist govt exert control over people
this is difference between theory and system.
Confucianism encourage people to seek new knowledge., learning from teacher, learning from student.
there are no end of learning.
stop displaying your ignorance.
eiji kenji No, Confucianism encourage people to blindly memorize the text without even thinking logically. Education is supposed to teach people how to think logically, critically and independently. Confucianism is the opposite of what a good education is supposed to be.
People failed to create new thing in modern china, because the lack of competition. Money and power is what driven people to create new things, to compete in the open market of ideas. How can you type all that without understand the difference between communism or capitalism. The Chinese government official exam did not exist until Shui dynasty (by Emperor Yang Guang). There is over 1 to 2 thousand years gap between them. I'm not sure how they take an exam that did not exist until 1 to 2 thousand years later. The entire Confucianism Education System is teaching philosophy, as learning to be human. It's not scientific education system. It's like arguing about history class is the reason why people failed to create new things. You are taking the wrong class.
@zoticus1 sorta true but sorta not true. over the long history of confucian philosophy it has come to be an imprtant element of traditionial chinese religion, just like daoism, so much so that for many chinese it is hard confucian philosophy sperated from chinese religion.
still you are right in that confucian philosophy is not a religion in its own right and can be adopted, and modified to fit into many cultures and religions.
@MastaMattv2 what the problem?
@TheMalar yes, but they can stand on their own as sperate religions, something that confucianism and daoism can't with out the support of traditional chinese beliefs, values, ect. if we take away these beliefs then neither confucianism nor daoism would be relgions just philosophies. you have to keep in mind that confucianism wasn't a religion at all untill much later on when the cult of kong fusi became state mandate, and the rise of neo-confucianism came about.
For anyone seeking the truth, please check out the scribd website that is listed on my channel.
Who said that people have to always be obedient in confucianism?! confucianism says that a husband and a wife respect each other like guests, how is that hierarchical and un-egalitarian?
@NW0arescum But it's still a positive ideal, which is hard to dismiss.
Confucianism is not a religion...
Science Fiction can consume your life.
Confucianism is definitely not a religion. Confucius did speak of Heaven and ancestral worship but it's pretty obvious he was speaking more in terms of Traditional Chinese religion, which pretty much everyone was at that time. If he was attempting to create a religion, I believe he would have gone far more into the topic, such as men such as Laozi and Siddhartha did.
Though I suppose modern American values have degraded to that point I suppose
What are you even talking about and how does it even relate to previous comments?
You need to distinguish fact, realization, and truth for your exact understanding of genuine truth. To the people who seek the genuine truth, I dare recommend without hesitation OnCharm’s book “Human, God, and Truth: Life is the Awakening Process - Amazon”.
Is it just me or does it seem like Confucius may have suffered from high-functioning Autism? "I have to go to work.", " OK, well, first tap on the floor three times, kneel twice, turn around , clasp your belt from left to right, raise your coffee cup to the sky, take a sip, put it down while humming, turn to your right, put your shit on (left sleeve first) . . .
I think that classifying Confucianism as a religion, philosophy, lifestyle, political system, etc is problematic, because such a concept of the separateness of those things is inherently Western. To Confucius, it was all varying manifestations of moral action, spread across a multitude of social situations.
That being said, the closest belief system I can claim as being my “religion” is Confucianism, because I find the Confucian classics and values to be satisfying, not just on an intellectual level, but a deeply emotional and even spiritual level. I attempt to live my life by the teachings of Confucius in much the same way a Christian attempts to live their life by the teachings of Jesus. Even though we have very different notions of God and Humanity, we have the same kind of devoted relationships to our respective texts and ancient masters.
For being a 20 years atheist, I can accept Confucianism as my religion
It doesn't have to be a religion, but in the traditional Chinese context, Confucian thought does usually have a notion of Heaven as the source of all creation and the origin of virtuous action. That being said, is an impersonal Heaven, more like a highly mysticized idea of Nature or a kind of universal Mind to which we are all connected, but never enforces itself upon us. Very different from the Abrahamic God, in who's image Man is made and willfully interferes directly with worldly affairs.
I think Wing-Tsit Chan said it best when he described Chinese philosophy as a Spiritual Humanism; "Not the humanism that denies or slights a Supreme Power, but one that professes the unity of man and Heaven." In other words, there is an idea of Divinity, but we devote ourselves to that Divinity by devoting ourselves to our fellow human beings, rather than devoting ourselves to it in spite of our fellow human beings.
I choose to embrace it as a kind of religious identity, but the basic ideas can just as easily be adapted into a completely secular moral philosophy. If you want a look at Confucian thought through a more naturalistic lens, I highly recommend checking out the Xunzi, an ancient work that completely disregards any notion of the supernatural, but still advocates Confucian principles and rituals as a way of cultivating individual virtue and bringing about social harmony.
Are you kidding me? You say a meritocracy is bad because it allows the creative, brave, and hard working to have a higher place in life? I'm sorry, but which person would you rather run a government? Naturally strong and bold leaders, or naturally weak and spineless people. I'm afraid that in this world the strong win my friend, and for good reason. Strong leaders are better than weak leaders. And humans need leaders, why do you think anarchism never reigned in places with more than one person.
4:34 You sure you aren't talking about Western Europe?
I was commenting on Japanese porn which has existed since before the Meiji restoration. Previous comments as in our previous comments which you've clearly failed to notice.
One mistake - it is very far from being un-American: America is so much first of all about acquiring wealth and hierarchical social order with obedience to it. But it's also about egalitarianism in that one should be willing to fight for their rights, not that you will get it.
America is more hierarchical than most other countries, but social mobility is allowed. With that said, if you show disrespect to those above you - you will be put down - Americans expect "ass-holes" or those that will try to buck the system, especially if those above "loose their mandate from Heaven."
Interesting.
Charles DaCosta Yes, but we don't place a focus on education as nearly as important as Confucius envisioned in his teachings.
in terms of gov policy - yes you are right. But interns of family and socal instutions like the churches - no you are wrong.
Charles DaCosta yeah, I was just talking mostly public mandates. As for family and societal expectations, that's a whole nother can of worms, because it's different from household to household
I disagree with Mr. Prothero when he says that "no there is not a God," in Confucianism. They do have a God, but, not in the same way as Christianity or Sikhism do. More on the same way that a Deist views Him.
why do you like to take morality and associated it with nationality, especially a country that has shows none especially when it comes to foreign policy
buddha was born in nepal
The narrator doesn't even know Confucianism. He conceives it in a very narrow way.
It is a very broad video with the intention of general teaching, get a grip.
@chinesemusicDJ Jihad is not holy war
Assume your name is sparrow they search for the top sparrow and you find that a million sparrows are above you and you face hell! Of course this is only a Buddhists Curse.
hey....you forgot Native Americans too
I can surely tell you guys that confucianism is not a religion, there is no god or spirit in Confucianism. it is a mix of philosophy and ethics like Taoism.
Yes, junk food is something modern and something the Japanese are highly specialized in. I really don't see where you're getting at. Are you complaining about Modernity? If so then what would an Asian domination really change about that? And you're complaints about globalization belong more towards Italy, Holland, and Britain, for the creation of Mercantilism and the Industrial revolution. And yeah, the world had superior values before the modern age thus this video on Confucianism.
@chinesemusicDJ
Jihad is not religious. it is "a personal struggle".
The crusade is nothing more than history being written by the victor.
In the west people have spoken words that do not directly translate and they slant and demonize cultures they do not understand.
It would be beneficial to understand that in which you speak,lest you make a fool of yourself.
@MastaMattv2 hahah you know whats up from Mr.Watson
Confucianism is not a religion. It is a way of life based on ethics, self-imposed morality, adherence to tradition, and respect for society. Respect is at the core of confucian thought: respect for ancestors, parents, authority and teachers. Confucius taught about love, spirituality, and a sense of civility. It is a system which strives to strike harmony amongst members of society.
confucian is about self cultivation
self improvement led to social order
imagine every indian people stop raping people, stop littering river with dead bodies
do you need police? do you need legal system?
the confucianisme is not a reglion at all. what a basical mistake!
I think liberalism with its ideas of equality and freedom can work with Confucianism. While we should all b equal before the law, hopefully equally safe from persecution and starvation we need to know how to listen and respect each other.
While the 5 relationships should not be taken as doctrine, the ideas of mutual respect for those older, more experience and the ideas of knowing your history.
So there should be a balance between individual freedom and equality their should be some level of hierarchy so we can listen and repect each other and be productive citizens
Confucianism, hell yeah. its what we need here in the US right now!
+wotan237 I read Confucianism and some of the bible (bible too big, can't read it all). And I think the bible is very disturbing. Confucius, on the other hand, is much more peaceful.
For example, the bible teach if there is a gay man, you should have him beheaded, ISIS style. (Well, it didn't exactly say ISIS style, but the style it say is same as ISIS.) Also the bible teach, if your husband is a wife beater, you still need to honor and be submissive to him. If your husband is a drunk that beat your child to half death, as a wife, you should remain quiet and do nothing. It also say a woman should only be allow to conduct domestic affair (So, if they don't have a man to depend on, they should just starve to death or be a bagger, like how it was, during Taliban ruled Afghanistan era.)
+juiweiYang2000
"For example, the bible teach if there is a gay man, you should have him beheaded"
Nowhere in the Bible is this said.
" Also the bible teach, if your husband is a wife beater, you still need to honor and be submissive to him. "
That's why God saves Diana from Onan, right? (Read Genesis 38)
"If your husband is a drunk that beat your child to half death, as a wife, you should remain quiet and do nothing."
Now you're talking nonsense. This is not said anywhere in the Bible, and if you continue to claim this is the case, you can cite where this appears.
"It also say a woman should only be allow to conduct domestic affair (So, if they don't have a man to depend on, they should just starve to death or be a bagger, like how it was, during Taliban ruled Afghanistan era.)"
This is why there are female leaders, prophetesses and queens in the Bible, right?
Quq Balam Timothy 2:11-15 "Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet she will be saved through childbearing-if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control." Thus, it is e.g. a sin for Hilary Clinton to run for President, thus, the bible is full of crap
Peter 3:1-22 "Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct. Do not let your adorning be external-the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear- but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God's sight is very precious. For this is how the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves, by submitting to their own husbands, ..."
and
Ephesians 5:22-33 "Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, ..."
So, it is a sin, for a woman to speak up against an abusive partner that bash up she and her children, thus the bible is full of crap
Titus 2:3-8 "Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good, and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled. "
So, to make matter worse, according to the bible, it is a sin for a woman, to be anything else other then a house wife (even nuns are refer to as "bride of Jesus" and wear a wedding ring) and older woman must also teach such submissiveness and don't work, to the next generation of girls.
Proverbs 19:14 "House and wealth are inherited from fathers, but a prudent wife is from the Lord." So, the wife is a property of the husband in Christianity, a gift given to the husband by Christ
Corinthians 7:39 "A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord." So in Christianity, it is a sin for a woman to leave an abusive husband that bash her and her children up, all of those women who leave their abusive husband, conducted a sin, thus Christ is full of crap.
Corinthians 11:11 "Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman;" So in the bible you must get married, so if a girl can't find a nice guy, she must married a guy that bash her up.
(FYI: Despite the west, believe the west treat women well and non west treat women like crap, all the statistic in the US have show, women from a western background are 2 times more likely to be victim of domestic abuse, then non western women. Most white westerns girls that grew up in Asia, I know, especially the ones I met in high school and in college, black list men who are white/Christian/western on dating, there reason is exactly that men of this nature usually treat their wife like a property/servant. I use to think those girls are speaking non sense bullshit, until I moved to the west and start having some understanding towards Christian values.)
Leviticus 20:13 ":If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them."
So, according to the bible you must kill a gay man, so the bible is full of crap
juiweiYang2000
Nowhere in those passages does it say that it is a sin for women to speak up against men, or that it is okay for men to beat them, which is what you originally claimed. Sure, it teaches them that husbands are their head, but it doesn't say that husbands have the right to beat them, nor that women should accept to be beaten by their husbands.
Again, that's why I mentioned the story of Dianan and Onan, since Onan was sexually abusing her, for which God kill him in punishment. There are also other stories of women standing up to men. For instance, the story of Deborah in Judges where she stood up against an invading army led by a man, or the story of Judith, who was able to kill another male general by manipulating him. Heck, the entirety of the Book of Esther is precisely about a woman standing up to the Persian Emperor himself to stop him from massacring Jews.
Nor are those biblical saying that the only fate a woman has is to be a devoted wife and mother. In fact, there are contradictory passages and there are examples of women not marrying in the Bible, like Mary Magdalene and other female disciples of Jesus. Paul in fact said that the ideal is not to marry but to be celibate as he explains in 1 Corinthians 7, thus completely refuting the idea that women are only meant to be wives and mothers and nothing more.
Moreover, the idea that women were to be silent at church is also refuted by the fact that there were active female participants in the early Christian community. Not only was there the aforementioned Mary Magdalene, but also the Deaconess Phoebe and the missionaries Priscilla and Julia, mentioned in Romans 16 (Priscilla is also mentioned in other passages of the New Testament).
Finally, you said that homosexuals were to be beheaded, but like the passage of Leviticus that you cited, it doesn't say that, so you're still wrong. Nor does it refer to homosexuals. It refers just to anal sex, and most likely doesn't even refer to that but only means anal rape. Notice how lesbians are not mentioned anywhere in the Bible.
Quq Balam According to the teaching of the bible, "Christ follower are superior and non believers are inferior." that allow wiggle room to justify Christ following women to stand up against men, who don't follow Christ, whether that is justifiable, depends on how each person define the bible. In fact the bible wrote
In fact the bible wrote
Chronicles 15:12-13 "And they entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and with all their soul, but that whoever would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, should be put to death, whether young or old, man or woman."
Just further prove the bible is full of crap
Corinthians 7:32-35 "I want you to be free from anxieties. The unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord. But the married man is anxious about worldly things, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided. And the unmarried or betrothed woman is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit. But the married woman is anxious about worldly things, how to please her husband. I say this for your own benefit, not to lay any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and to secure your undivided devotion to the Lord."
In other word, a woman can only be single, if she is to serve Christ, in other word, what we today refers to as a nun. Further prove the bible is full of crap
Besides, your channel is filled with Anime. Doesn't seem like you mind post-Tokugawa culture that much.
the medicine is fo goat meh
@garcia0137 so do correct this false view of USA culture is the job should be done
This guy doesn’t know what he’s talking about. I bet he is reading from a script (probs the girl too) because it just sounds scripted
Someone posted here Confucianism looks good on paper but not in practice. Fair enough... such is the human condition. Better than Christianity was isn't good on paper or in practice. Especially the OLD Testament.
This philosophy came up from the warring states of ancient China, when people hated other people. and all there was fields of bodies. KuFuZi (Confucius) wanted peace and had an idea, he encouraged the authority to stop the bloodshed and taught the states to use logic reasoning with gentle words (Education) He taught people to respect the seniors, co-worker, parents, siblings, and the government. It saved and taught civil rights to the states. Is that wrong?! Or do you want rebellions, traitors, children killing their parents, sibling murder, being rude to your bosses and co-workers. Confucanism is actually a etiquette guide to be a gentleman or lady. It has nothing to do with Marxist Communism (a Western-origin economic idea). truly Western and English cannot understand or translate the meaning of the true means of this philosophy. It seems disgusting to you because it grew with time and lost many of its original aspects but it was a philosophy for society to work respectfully and honorable together. What threats it now is the influence of other nations rashness of freedom; freedom to act on ones own and not care what others see you as (individualism) freedom to be a criminal and drug-dealer. why not help serve your society and teach, heal, love, and care. Is serving your country slavery? we work for others, we are not working for yourself- others benefit from you vice versa.
Very well said !!!
Confucianism is not a religion. Confucius never taught as a religious teacher, neither was he a deity to be worshipped. Confucius was a philosopher and teacher. Filial piety is not rigidity, it's basic respect for our elders. What is so wrong about taking care of our parents? By the way, the Bible, which is a religious text which was also a foundation for Western civilisation, teaches that we ought to honour our father and mother. By the way, the Bible also taught us to submit to authority. Is it un-American too? If it is, I am glad I am not American. Submission to authority does not necessarily imply hierarchical authority. I submit to my boss because I respect him/her as someone who may has given me a chance to not only put food on my table but to also grow in my skills and personality. I get to learn something on the job too. My boss might have more experience than I do. I do not like tyrannical authority but if everyone starts rebelling like Americans do, there will be civil war and chaos...just like in America.
By the way, everything that was spoken here about Chinese culture is largely incorrect. Stop misrepresenting the Chinese community damn it.
I am sorry. But this commentator needs to be more REAL. There is nothing egalitarian about American society. If anything, America stands for everything and anything racist. It is a country where everyone has been catalogued according to ethnicities and socioeconomic background. I don't need to prove this. Just look around our cities and see the chaos of our ghettos and the overwhelming beauty of our exclusive neighborhoods where only the ELITE is allowed in. The most exclusive areas in the USA are gated and out-of-bounds to the lower classes. We have elite UNIVERSITIES and schools which don't even have computers. We have city sections where PEACE reigns and city sections which are WAR-TORN areas. So ... where is the "EGALITARIANISM" in our society. Let's be real. That's what we teach and that's what we aspire to, but we are way out of league with nations such as Finland, New Zealand, Norway, Costa Rica, Japan, Oman, Botswana, etc. I am sure there a few more nations out there a little more civil and orderly than we are.
maybe AMERICAN is VERY CONFUCIANISM!!!
Confucianism is just like COMMUNISM. It is very beautiful on paper. Wow. So very beautiful. In reality, it has messed up Asia. I lived in Asia for 14 years and saw the whole hypocrisy. Talking about social harmony? Oh my... it certainly ain't happening in Asia. Take a look around at all the inequalities in Asia, from child prostitution to dog-eating and the massacring of animals in the Koreas. If not convinced, visit Taiwan and see a nation deteriorating into CHAOS...pollution, prostitution, an educational system bordering on madness, high incidence of suicide, adultery, dishonesty in business. I can say the same thing about South Korea where 50% of men practice adutery and fully another 20% don't, but feel it is o.k. Need I go on? Asia is probably way closer to HELL than to any state of orderliness and beauty as prescribed by Daoism, Confucianism, Shintoism and all the -isms I can mention.
You obviously have not lived in asia for 14 years from what I read from your comments. Anyone who lived in asia for more than a year can be alot more specific and detailed about the problems surrounding it's society, instead you just rambled a list of stereotypes and jargon that any idiot can come up with. Don't kid yourself, you don't know shit, and stop lying.
Dude! You are the idiot and the ignoramus. I lived in ASiA for 14 years. When I say 50% of the men there cheat, I am being conservative. In an opinion poll, 75% of Korean men thought that sex outside marriage was alright. 25% were not even sure. In the West the picture is not much better but it is a little better. So saying 50% is kind. An INDIAN friend of mine just told me 50% of Indian men are bisexual and cheat on their wives. You need to travel a little bit more, get more life and speak more languages. Anyway...if I am stupid, you are a foolish ignorant idiot. So I guess we are even.
Confucianism works even better in feudal society. Confucianism is not AT ALL related to communism. Communism is not just "social harmony". Seriously, have a brain!
democracy looks so good on paper, but in reality, it messed the nation.
Cherie Bao Confucianism had nothing to do with " economy structure' -capitalism or communism