School of Thought Debate

[cgao]

Your father committed a terrible crime. What should you do? 

[Taylor Bub]

As a confucian, 

I believe that my father is naturally good as all people are.  Even if he broke the law, I have a loyalty and responsibility to care for my father.  With that being said I cannot do anything but keep his secret.  I know that people are teacheable and they all have the ability to grow and learn, and I know that my father will be able to grow and learn in the future.

[Camie Fleet]

My Father broke the law, due to mt Mohist beliefs I must turn him in to benefit the society as I love all people equally in our society. My family is not more important than the safety of our society. 

[Anastasia Brown]

If my father broke the law and I was aware of this. I must report him. The laws must be followed. Even though he is my father, the laws must be followed or there could chaos. The laws are known and must hold all accountable to following the laws.  I must turn him over to the proper authorities

[Hope Watterson]

I am terribly confused because I know that I should obey my father, as it would terrible to turn him in for his crime, and I must obey him. However, my father and I must follow the law of our benevolent ruler, who is at the highest level. This means that I should turn my father in for his crime. If I turn my father in, I am sure to be cast out of my family, but if I don't turn my father in for his crime and he is caught, our family will surely be doomed.

I have decided that I will stand by my father, and I will not turn him in for his crime. I must stand by my father and my family and take the chance that he will not be caught. I will try to help my dear father make secret restitutions for his crime. 

[Jade Kidd]

I really feel like the laws are the problem here. They're forcing us to be part of civilization and away from our natural instincts. I'm sure dear old dad was just being spontaneous and going with the flow. I think I'll practice some wu wei here. 

[Todd Rutley]

Rulers promote the greater good by impartiality in treatment of all people (“universal love”).  The “universal love” idea can be equated with “the Golden Rule” (Do unto others…).  Aligning personal and common interests will promote both state aims for peace & prosperity and personal freedom (the invisible moral hand).

 

[Morgan Burt]

As a Daoist, I have a question regarding this scenario - Why do we have law in the first place?

I believe the law itself is the problem and not my father. If it were not for the law, there would be no wrong done here. My opinion is that it was because of the laws in place that he supposedly "acted out."  I feel that he was acting in accordance to nature and responding the world around him. There is natural order and rhythm in the world (i.e. life and death, sun up and sun down, fire and new growth), therefore the earth may deal with him accordingly and it is not the job of ths so called "lawmaker." However, my suggestion to my father, is he must escape the law, the corruption, and competition that civilization brings. Instead, he must head to the Peach Blossoms in order to reconnect with nature. He must find and balance his Qi and must live out the rest of the days with the rhythm of life that occurs around him.

[Jennifer Macchiarella]

According to Analects 16, a person serving his father may gently remonstrate him, but if that doesn't work, he should "resume his attitude of deference."  The Confucianist should try to correct his father's behavior, but if it doesn't work, give up. He should, however, continue to act correctly himself so as to serve as an example, "As a model to the world."  

I think a system of government that allows one to forgive one's relatives is highly problematic.  The criticism that Confucianism leads to nepotism could be traced to an incident such as this. 

[Melina Melgoza]

If there is one word I could use to describe me, it would be COMMITTED. I must renounce my father and I will personally turn him in. The purpose of us adhering to a government is that we have a unified concept of morality--my father is not the exception. We must conform upward. I cannot care more for my family than I do for other's families. That is the moral basis of our society and thus, since my father harmed another, he must live out the consequences.

[Melina Melgoza]

Hello Daoist,

Would you then argue that there should be no consequences? If there are no consequences to our actions, then how do we correct behavior? Is behavior then not meant to be corrected? I must disagree with you, there must be law and order in order for us to be a functioning society. We must care for society at large much more than just for ourselves and our own families. Consequences to aggression is what keeps us moving forward in these troubling times. Your father must have consequences to his actions.

- MOHIST

[Melina Melgoza]

To another Daoist, 

Your unconsequential actions have been leading us astray as a society. There must be consequences to your dear old dad. We cannot let this action go unnoticed because others will follow and our civilization will fall into demise. If it were my father, I'd turn him in. His life does not matter more than society as a whole. We absolutely must think of society as a whole before we go around pardoning those that deserve consequences.

Signed, A

An angry Mohist

 

[Miguel Diaz]

My father is not guilty of breaking an important law. My father is a follower of Zhuang Zi. He thinks that all government laws and regulations of social morality are oppressive.  What is legal and what is evil is subject to interpretation. Humankind is biased. Humans cannot agree on what is universal and what is good. The Dao is the only way. The Dao cannot be described, but it's the only way. My father needs to be released at once.

[Ryan Carothers]

Master Moh has encouraged me to turn my own family member in. I would respect Dad, if he followed the law. My obedience would be dutyful, in that case. Unfortunately, he has rejected the law. If I protect him, civilization will implode. I know the Daoist will criticize me. Needless to say, the Daoist is lost. He cannot see the forest from the trees, having run away from civilization a long time ago. Just ask, and he will admit --- he does not know his own way! Simply put, he does not know how to maintain the civilization we have spent so long building. To the Confucion --- I must say actions speak louder than words. Mumble many high, and lofty ideals --- I build them from the ground up!

[Richard Cate]

My initial reaction would be to look on the Time of the Qin (Legalist) as straight forward. The State is All, it supeceeds personal connections and has in efect become your family. In which case you would be morally obligated to turn in your father for the good of the State.

However, the Qin law, which is still the basis of Chinese Law as far as I can find, is very comprehensive, It has so many crimes, degrees, and punishments listed that I doubt any but the most brilliant law schollars knew them all. It also took intent into concideration. Once arrested, usually on information provided by neighbors who didn't like youor by what the myriad of neighborhood spys reported you were guilty until and unless you could prove yourself innocent. That was especially hard to do because family members were not considered reliable and if not believed would be subject to torture to prove they were bearing false witness as were any witnesses in your behalf. 

As a prisoner you would be tortured until you confessed, if you persisted to protest your innocence the degree of torture was increased. Needless to say they had a high conviction rate. The length of time you took to confess was a determining factor in your sentence by the judge who heard your case, no jury. You could state your lack of intent to do wrong, your remorse and willingness to make restitution but as I said you were unlikely to have many witnesses come to your defence.

The punishments were not always death as the simplistic level of knowledge we (or our students) look up in the course of the debate implies. Punishments were harsh but were set to fit the leel of the crime. Anything from a fine, to caining before the sentencing judge, being whipped through the streets, The widespread use of wooden collars and cages worn from 2 weeks to 3 months and you had to be on public display during daylight hours, they might chain a heavy stone around your neck to be carried around on publicdisplay as well. 

Another common practice was to tatoo your name and crime on your face. Convicts had to wear red to signify themselves as convicts. 

For more serious crimes it was common to have one or both feet cut off, to have your nose or ears sliced off. Many were sentenced to exile into work at hard labor on public construction projects. and of course to have your head cut off, be cut in two or to be quartered either by blade or for more public showings for crimes like treason by being tied to horses and pulled apart. (

Public execution is always a big crowd pleaser, it gives the people a day off and a day in town, There is much betting on various factors from which piece comes off first to if the prisoner has time to scream. It is important because it reinforces confidence in the State and the Law. An evil doer was caught and fairly punished. For this purpose it is not important that the person be guilty or innocent, simply that the State has ben proven just and powerful. It means that execution of prisoners that is not done publicly serves no purpose to society.)

Later dynasties would add "cut and kill" Where the guilty would be cut into pieces in a systematic and proscribed way, starting with the eyebrows and moving from less critical parts to the more important. By the Boxer Rebellion it had been refined to be called the death of a thousand cuts. The executioner would use a VERY sharp blade and dance around the condemned and make small razor like cuts, making sure to not hit vital parts like arteries. The point was to hit nerve rich areas, pasusing to rest and to allow the pain and anticipation of an almost endless process to sink in on the prisoner, who would be revived if they passed out. They would eventually dies of blood loss. This was not outlawed until after a French soldier took photos of the process and Westeners forced the Empress to stop the process. (Foreigners occupied and controlled much of China at the time.)

So do you turn in your father? Familys were held accountable anc culpable of crimes, so there is an reasonable chane you woulf be punished as well. But I think a young zealous member of the party, as it were, would feel mandated to turn him in. Whither rewarded or punished. In NAZI Germany you were rewarded for turning in a family member for questioning and reeducation, the same for early communist Russia.  

I would guess that close to 100% of our students given the question would say NO.

[Author]

Posts