The Differences Between Confucian and Mencian Contingency

摘要

The concept of "quan bian 权变", which can be translated as contingency, has been referred to achieving adaptability in Confucian Classics. In order to practice wisdom, both Confucius and Mencius emphasize contingency along with the principle of "zhong yong 中庸", which is the main form of adhering to the golden mean. However, they disagree on internal and external motives of enhancing self-cultivation. Confucian thought prioritizes that virtues are acquired by learning to conform to the traditional norms, while Mencian thought prioritizes that virtues are emerged by knowing the natural values. This kind of disagreement is undoubtedly concerned with the differences in their human nature theories. Unlike Confucian theory that highlights inherently similar nature, Mencian theory proclaims inherently good nature. Since Confucius and Mencius have opponent views about innate characteristics, explanations referring to moral ethics specifically indicate postnatal education where the motives are separated into internal and external ones. In this paper, we will discuss the role of contingency in Confucian and Mencian philosophy by considering the statements that reveal the possibilities and impossibilities of moral adaptability.