Van Tuyle !

1
Loyd Van Tuyle
Peter Barr
Contemplation and Action
12 February 2015
Comparing Daoist and Confucian Action
Daoism and Confucianism have a lot in common. For starters, they were both founded
through the teachings of Chinese philosophers (at least allegedly. It is still a matter of debate if
Laozi, the founder of Daoism, actually existed). Both religions differ greatly from each other in
the way they are taught to interact with the world around them. Confucians believe in an active
participation in the world around them, while Daoism rejects interference with anything in order
to preserve the natural process of life and order. In this way, the religions are almost opposite,
despite the similarities they share regarding their origin.
For instance, when confronted with a situation regarding the extinction of a species (such
as the American Whooping Crane, which has been hunted to near extinction as well as suffered
large amounts of habitat destruction) Daoism and Confucianism would differ in their
interpretation of the scenario. A Confucian may analyze the situation and see that humans have
benefitted from the hunting of the American Whooping Crane and the encroachment into their
habitats. Confucius is quoted in his analects 10:11 :
There was a fire in the stables. When the Master
Returned from court, he asked: Was anybody hurt?
He didnt ask about the horses.

Van Tuyle !2
From this passage we can gather that Confucians value human life over that of animals. Daoists,
however, would likely approach this situation from a point of view that would value
noninterference in the habitat of the American Whooping Crane. Dao, in Chinese means path or
way, and this way refers to the way of non interference with the outside world. The overhunting
and habitat encroachment of the American Whooping Crane as a violation of the way. This
overstepping into the territory of the crane is claiming too much and interfering with the natural
process of the world, thus disrupting the balance of the world.
While both of these religious traditions approach this situation differently, I think that
both religious traditions would find a moral common ground to save the American Whooping
Crane. I was raised as a Protestant Christian, however self-identify as an agnostic or atheist
person. I used to be very active in my church and was even part of my churchs Youth Group.
While I enjoyed being active in my community, something about attending church started to rub
me the wrong way. During sermons, I would start to lose focus or fall asleep, or just plain
disagree with what my pastor was telling me. I didnt dread going to church, but it was no longer
something that fulfilled me spiritually. I had begun to find ways to activate my spirituality in
other ways- ways that were actively interpreting the spirit of the world I exist in and what my
role is in this world. I did not walk away from my church-going career without the influence of
Christianity, though. My mother had the golden rule on our refrigerator when I was a child, and it
shaped my morality into what it is today. Even as a small child in Sunday school I would enjoy
the lessons that the scripture would teach most of the time. (My old churchs denomination, the
United Church of Christ, is famously progressive and tended to stay away from the fire and
brimstone aspects of the Christian religion, however the historically rural and conservative

Van Tuyle !3
background of its denomination did make sure some somewhat backwards things were said
from time to time.) I generally think that the Ten Commandments are good rules to live by, but I
do not see myself as taking my children to church in the future.
In my opinion, the eradication of an entire species is disastrous not only to the
biodiversity of any ecosystem, but to the complex and fragile structures that govern the
regulation of reproduction and availability of food across species as well as to the imaginations
and curiosity of the humans that could have been unlocked by the flight or science of the
American Whooping Crane. For this reason, I see the differences in Daoism and Confucianism
more so questions of approach to morality rather than two separate moral schools. This could be
because I believe that morality is fairly universal and that to understand morality it is rather a
question of knowledge and empathy than one of strict adherence to tenants you likely had
handed down to you from your parents.
If a baby was floating down a river to certain death, I believe that both the Confucian and
the Daoist would try to save the baby. The Confucian clearly values human life through its
principle of Rn, but a simple interpretation of Daoism may suggest that a Daoist would simply
let the baby float down the river to its death in order to adhere to the Dao. I think that this
interpretation is harmful to perception of Daoism and actually paints Daoists as psychopathic;
incapable of feeling the natural emotional reaction of seeing a baby floating down a river and
also incapable of acting on that emotional response. In reality, I would imagine a Daoist to think
of the world as balanced before the baby found its way into the river and thus by removing the
baby from the river they would be restoring the Dao and balance of the world.

Van Tuyle !4
Even in the story of Chuang Zhou, assumed to be a strict practitioner of Dao, admits
reaction upon hearing that his wife has died: When she first died, do you think I wouldnt
grieve like anyone else? Chang later overcomes his grieving by remembering that death is part
of the way of the universe, but the initial reaction was there nonetheless. Because of this, I
believe that both the Daoists and Confucians would save the floating child. Even if the child
grew up to be a mass-murderer, I dont think the Daoist would claim to have enabled this to
happen by upsetting the Dao through saving the life of a child who was innocent at the time of
danger.
Perhaps my own morality clouds my interpretation of these religious traditions. My ideas
of universal morality may exist out of my atheism out of some misplaced optimism that, in fact,
morality can exist outside of the confines of a codified and limited book of teachings. Either way,
I dont find the teachings of either Confucianism or Daoism to be very appealing to myself. Of
the two, however, I think that Daoism would be more applicable to my worldview. I believe that
my belief system is one of peace even in the darkest of situations and the happiest of situations. I
believe that like peace is the best choice of action in all times, my belief is much like that the
Dao is always the best choice during a period of Yin or Yang.