The Philosophic Basis for Philanthropy in China

Billionaires Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are encouraging wealthy Chinese businessmen to take up philothropic giving.  The WaPo picks up the story and speculates on why there has not been mucn in the way of charitble donation in China.  Invariably, Confucianism is invoked:

Chen [Guangbioa] said he felt anger and shame after hearing from the Gates Foundation that many invitees called to make sure they would not have to donate. That same night, he said, he woke up at 1 a.m. and penned a 1,070-word letter on his company's website announcing his plan to leave his entire fortune - estimated at $440 million - to causes such as education and environmental protection groups.

The decision, he acknowledged, breaks with the Chinese tradition of leaving wealth for your descendants and also with Confucian values of first taking care of your family, and then your country. But he says his wife and children have been supportive.

It is true that Confucianism emphasizes familial obligations.  We must attend to our duties to parents and children and relatives, and, if there are conflicting social obligations, family duties should take precedence.  But this, in and of itself (i.e. free from un-Confucian utilitarian or Legalist influences), need not preclude or discourage philanthropy.  We should make sure that our family members have a sufficent, perhaps even comfortable, existence.  But beyond that sufficiency, we should be generous to others, even strangers.  Especially in the case of the very wealthy, there is nothing in Confucianism that would suggest children and family members should be bequeathed all of a persons estate.  Consider these two passages from The Analects:

When Adept Hua was sent to Ch'i on a mission, his mother was running short of supplies, so Jan Ch'iu asked that she be given grain.

"Give her a basketful," replied the Master.

Jan Ch'iu asked for more.

"Alright, give her a bushel," replied the Master.

Jane gave her twenty-five bushels, whereupon the Master said: "Hua set off for Ch'i riding a sleek horse and wearing light furs.  I have heard that the noble-minded give to help the needy, not to subsidize the wealthy."  6.3 (6.4 in some versions)

Confucius is concerned because Hua is well off, and should be able to provide for his mother.  But clearly Confucius is upholding the idea that the "noble-mineded give to help the needy, not to subsidize the wealthy" - 君子周急不繼富.

In the very next passage of The Analects this same idea is reinforced:

When he was appointed regent, Yuan Szu was offered nine hundred measures of grain, but he refused.  The Master said: "Why refuse? Aren't there people in your neighborhoods and villages who need that grain?" 6.4 (or 6.5)

Yuan does not need the food for himself or his family.  But Confucuis says he should take the surplus and distribute it to those in need - 以與爾鄰里鄉黨乎.

In this same spirit much could be said of Mencius's stance that the wealthy should share their food and comforts not only with their families but with people, and that would include poor and destitute people, more generally.

But let's take a quick turn toward Daoism.  The Daodejing tells us:

The Way of heaven is like a drawn bow pulling down the high and raising up the low;

it takes away where there's abundance and restores where there's want.

The Way of heaven takes away where there's abundance and restores where there's want, but the Way of humankind isn't like that: it takes away where there's want and gives where there's abundance.

Only a master of Way can give abundance to all beneath heaven.  Such a sage acts without presumption and never dwells on success:

great worth has no need to be seen. 77

The Way of humankind is greedy and selfish - taking away where there's want and giving where there's abundance - the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.  I think it is important to keep in mind that this is not an irremedial, fundamental human nature - Daoism does not assume a consistent, unchanging human nature.  Rather, we should take it as an observation: selfishness and greed are manifest in some, perhaps even many, human interactions.  But there is also the possibility of more generous behavior.  The "Sage," a person who opens him- or herself to Way, or here the Way of heaven, and follows in its unfolding, can come to counteract the Way of humankind.  People who live with Way can "give abundance to all beneath heaven."  That is the ideal.  Generosity - taking away where there is abundance and giving where there's want - is possible and preferable.

We could go on.  If we add in Mohism (with its notion of "inclusive care"), to Confucianism and Daoism, we will find a multifaceted and firm philosophical foundation for philanthropy in China.  Thus, whatever the reasons for the hesitations of some Chinese millionaires and billionaires to give to the needy, we should not blame Confucianism or Chinese philosophy...

Comments

[Marcopolo]

Fantastic post. Thoroughly enjoyed it.

[Scott "Bao Pu" Barnwell]

Hi Sam,

Thos are good points and references to the Analects. I wonder if 6.5 suggests our philanthropy should preferentially be given to our family, our neighbourhoods, our villages? I wonder whether Confucius would support the practice of bypassing those near to us (family, friends, community) and give aid to those in faraway places.

Re: Daodejing

You're absolutely right that the passage you quoted doesn't suggest the human nature is innately partial, unfair, greedy. I suspect the author would say that people get that way due to society's influence. (Personally I think we have "good" and "bad" tendencies.)

re: "People who live with Way can "give abundance to all beneath heaven." That is the ideal. Generosity - taking away where there is abundance and giving where there's want - is possible and preferable."

-- In saying that this generosity is ideal and prefereable, do you think there's a moral 'ought' there for the Daoist sage?

[Sam]

Scott,
Long story short, I think there are moral oughts for a Daoist sage, most of which center on allowing for the untrammeled unfolding of Way....

[Scott "Bao Pu" Barnwell]

Hi Sam,
I'd like to hear the long story someday, but for now, it would seem that you believe that man has the power to prevent the "untrammeled unfolding of Way," yes?

[Bill Rich]

What Confucius or Dao-tze wrote/said is one aspect. There is another aspect of which verse do I pick as excuse to do the opposite. That's the practical side of Chinese.