The Significance of Mencius' "heart sensitive to the suffering of others" for Moral Awareness and Enlightenment

The "Three Character Classic (《三字經》)" states: "At the beginning of human life, nature is inherently good (人之初，性本善). Natures are similar, but habits make them different (性相近，習相遠)." The first sentence is from Mencius (孟子, c. 371 – c. 289 BCE), and the second is Confucius (孔子, c. 551 – c. 479 BCE)'s view on human nature. When discussing Chinese culture's understanding of moral consciousness and moral behavior, it naturally begins with human nature. Especially today, where Chinese and Western cultures interact and influence each other, most young people admire Western values of individual autonomy and freedom of thought. Using Mencius's teachings as a standard to demonstrate moral ideas distinct from Western culture, thereby enlightening young people today about Confucian moral consciousness and understanding, requires addressing the core issues and starting from the essentials.

Mencius' discussion of "Theory of Good Human Nature (人性本善/性善論)" holds that everyone has a "heart of compassion (惻隱之心)" making it an unquestionable duty to save and help others, and a responsibility one should not shirk. This is a well-known principle among the Chinese. However, contemporary young people, when considering Mencius' example of " Suppose a man were, all of a sudden, to see a young child on the verge of falling into a well. He would certainly be moved to compassion (吾人乍見孺子將入之井，皆有怵惕惻隱之心)." (Mencius, Book II, Part A [《孟子·公孫丑上》]), which is used to argue that "No man is devoid of a heart sensitive to the suffering of others (人皆有不忍人之心)." and the claim that " Theory of Good Human Nature," generally do not completely reject it but tend to harbor doubts. Why do they react this way? I believe it mainly comes down to two reasons: First, from their daily life experiences and observations, although good people and good deeds are not lacking, immoral acts are also quite common, making it difficult to firmly believe in the idea that human nature is inherently good. Second, their moral views are largely influenced by the Western cognitive psychology concept of "heteronomous morality." Take, for example, the moral theory of Swiss cognitive psychologist Jean Piaget (1896-1980), who believed that our moral views develop from childhood heteronomy to adult autonomy. In the childhood stage of moral development, we tend to blindly obey authority, especially parents and teachers. When making moral judgments, we often consider only external situational factors or judge based on the severity of the wrongdoing's outcome, rather than the internal motive of whether the wrongdoer acted "intentionally." It is only in adulthood, when "autonomous morality" gradually develops, that moral judgments shift to being based on an individual's internal motives. In short, the heteronomous morality theory holds that the moral subject is formed through nurture, with moral principles coming from external norms, and moral consciousness established through external education. Therefore, contemporary young people tend to feel somewhat disconnected from the "autonomous morality" implied in Mencius' thought. They believe that the emergence of the "heart that cannot bear to see others suffer" or "heart of compassion" is based on personal subjective feelings and may not be the same for everyone. Even if such feelings exist, they are mainly due to later education or external heteronomous moral norms.

So, how can we better help young people grasp Mencius's concept of self-discipline and morality? Personally, I believe that using another example from "Mencius" would more easily trigger their understanding. This is the discussion of the "The heart sensitive to the suffering of others (不忍人之心)" between Mencius and King Xuan of Qi (齊宣王, c. 350-c. 301 BCE) in "Mencius, Book I, Part A (孟子·梁惠王上》)". In it, King Xuan sympathizes with the ox that is to be slaughtered for sacrifice and feels compassion, so he replaces the ox with a lamb. However, at that time, King Xuan did not truly understand or clearly realize the reason behind his feelings. Essentially, there is no difference in the value of life between the ox and the lamb; both are innocent victims slaughtered for sacrifice. Is the life of a lamb less valuable than that of an ox, thus justifying its sacrifice? Later, after Mencius explained and pointed out the key issues, King Xuan finally understood the principle. This is exactly what Mencius emphasized—the psychological difference between "saw the ox but not the lamb (見牛未見羊)."

Specifically, to understand why the "The heart sensitive to the suffering of others" can arise, one must closely examine our psychological response behind " saw the ox but not the lamb." The key to the manifestation of this compassionate heart lies in our ability to empathize with the "other (他者)." This "other " is not limited to rational and emotional humans but also includes living animals. Confucianism, with benevolence as its foundation, emphasizes the role of "empathy as nature (感通為性)." Its moral philosophy holds that the possibility of moral consciousness and moral practice depends on mutual empathy between people or between humans and things. This compassion or pity born from benevolent empathy is not limited to humans; it can equally manifest toward each ox and lamb in nature. In the event of "saw the ox but not the lamb," the key to the distinction lies in the lamb not being present before the eyes, while the ox is witnessed immediately. The clear contrast between "saw the ox but not the lamb," involves a more complex psychological transformation than "see a young child on the verge of falling into a well," yet it more vividly reveals the reason why Mencius said the "The heart sensitive to the suffering of other " arises.

Looking further, it is only when facing a real living being that our behavioral choices can more truly reflect an inner moral consciousness. The crucial point lies in this: when we face a real living being, the phenomena triggered within us—such as sympathy, care, and compassion—are all vivid and capable of resonating with the other. The reason we have these various reactions is due to a genuine direct encounter with the people or things around us, a seamless connection between living beings. This is precisely the significance of moral consciousness awakening and emerging.