Comparative Analysis Of Human Nature Of Marx, Confucius And Mencius

The academic research on human nature has been thriving these latest years. In China, a comprehensive research in this field started after the 1980 s, which produced a large quantity of academic works. China’s domestic research on human nature has been non inter-disciplinary, which is focused on a comparative study. The comparative study on Marxism and ancient Chinese philosophy has gradually become a hot topic. In this process, the dissimilarities and relations have been unearthed to correct some traditional misunderstandings. Nevertheless, there are still problems with this uni-directory approach. The majority of the scholars in this field are single disciplinary academic backgrounds, pedantic in thinking modes, unable to connect the dots amongst different paradigms, out of which arises mutual criticism and gratuitous disputes. The Marxist view on human nature pays attention to the social and historical function of material life. He is opposed to an abstract research on mankind. He believes that answers can be found in real lives. On the other hand, Confucius and Mencius focus on the function of morality. Both of them try to incorporate the idea of personal god and heaven into the inner self to reveal knowledge of oneself. The Marxist and Chinese view on human nature both targets the essence and realization of human characters, accenting the social nurturing aspect. Both of these two schools also consider human activity as the driving force of the formation and development of civilization, and both of them endorse and perfect form of human society. The difference is that Marxist view put more stress on the impact of labor on humans while Chinese view on the impact of morality. The former view is more scientific while the other more metaphysical, and spiritual. The former emphasizes a comprehensive development of human while the latter an individualistic. The former depicts a future perfect state while the other an ancient perfect state. It will be oversimplifying to merely draw a line between these two schools of thought. Their differences cannot be fully comprehended without a clear understanding of the purpose of the theory, a cognitive foundation, cultural differences and a gradual shift of human position throughout history.