Mengzi’s View on the Public and the Private

Abstract

The relationship between the public (gong 公) and the private (si 私) was a vital issue in the intellectual circle of the Warring States Period (475–221 BCE or 403–221 BCE). Although the thinkers of that time did not frequently use the terms gong and si in their works, to a certain extent, they realized that they had no alternative but to face the relevant problems directly and present ideal schemes to properly address them. In-depth discussions concerning the public and the private, in fact, had already taken place in the Spring and Autumn period (770–476 BCE or 770–403 BCE). For example, Kongzi (Confucius) once exchanged views with the Duke of She on the virtue of uprightness (zhi 直). The latter held that an environment of uprightness should be one in which one would bear witness against his father even if he commits only a minor crime; however, Kongzi had a completely opposite opinion: “The father conceals the misconduct of the son, and the son conceals the misconduct of the father. Uprightness is to be found in this” (Lunyu 2022: 13.18; Ruan 1980: 2507). This conversation has already touched the overlapping field between the public and the private. However, the changes of social order and social structure in the Spring and Autumn period were relatively minor, compared with those in the Warring States Period. During the latter period, thinkers became more and more interested in the issue of the public and the private; and they also frequently and directedly used the terms gong and si to express their previsions and hopes of a new social order. Xunzi (c. 310-c. after 238 BCE) and Hanfei (c. 280–233 BCE) were representative thinkers in the terminal stage of the Warring States Period putting forward systematic theses about the gong-si relationship. For example, Xunzi emphasized that the noble person should “overcome selfish desires (siyu 私欲) through public righteousness (gongyi 公義)” (Xunzi 2022: 2.12; Wang 1988: 36). Hanfei, once a disciple of Xunzi, also firmly believed that “carrying out selfish righteousness (siyi 私義) leads to disorder; carrying out public righteousness (gongyi 公義) leads to order” (Hanfeizi 2022: 19.5; Wang 1998: 128). From the above account, we can roughly conclude that the problem about the relationship between the public and the private, from Kongzi to Xunzi and Han Fei, was becoming increasingly acute and intense. And in the final stage of the Warring States period, thinkers including Xunzi and Han Fei generally called for a “sage-king” (shengwang 聖王) with the ability to advance a mode of absolutely political-religious unity, regardless how different their elaborations of the concept of “sage-king” may be.