Introduction
Human beings have formulated moral principles that guide their actions and the manner in which they relate to each other. Confucius was an ancient Chinese thinker who acknowledges that the presence of a gentleman among barbarians helps them overcome their uncouthness. Seneca believes that a virtuous life is only possible when an individual is at distance from the masses or crowd. For Confucius, the emerging insights are strong and capable of guiding people to borrow best practices and behaviors from morally upright people. Seneca’s views are applicable in a world whereby more people appear to engage in unethical practices. While these viewpoints sound strong and practical, the greatest question: Who of the two presents a more convincing and acceptable reasoning? Seneca’s suggestion that the virtuous life is possible when individuals are at a distance from the crowd sounds more agreeable since it is founded on the attributes of personal moral philosophy.
Supporting Reasons
The way a person leads his or her life is founded on a personal philosophy informed by the power of reason. Several insights could be presented to support this statement. For instance, Seneca’s observation guides individuals to understand that life is a unique experience that cannot be shared. People will have to remain practical and embrace their intrinsic values to engage in actions that are socially acceptable. He reveals his “implicit belief in the equality and brotherhood of man despite all barriers of race or class or rank” (Seneca 1969, p. 19). These pursuits are unique in such a way that a person does not need others to promote or implement them in life. Furthermore, such a practice becomes an opportunity for virtuous people to avoid the masses since they have clearly-defined roles, expectations, and objectives. Their personal philosophies will continue to dictate the choices and decisions they make without any form of external influence.
The effort to live among barbarians is challengeable since chances of emulating unfavorable behaviors tend to increase significantly. With humans being social creatures, they have evolved to develop innate abilities that guide them to interact with others, learn, and transform their lives. Based on this observation, it is evident that “the active man should be able to take things easily, while the man who is inclined towards repose should be capable of action” (Seneca 1969, p. 31). Additionally, social exchange theory supports this process whereby people learn ideas and expect others to fulfill their needs. Consequently, scholars could challenge Confucius’ thoughts since a person who has decided to settle among barbarians might be compelled to embrace similar malpractices. The presence of this kind of crowd will create additional opportunities for being influenced negatively and eventually becoming uncouth (Confucius 2015, p. 12). Additionally, such process will result in the loss of a virtuous man who could have maintained his philosophy by staying away from the barbarians.
Individuals have a tendency to choose the kind of life they want to pursue based on their moral goals and ethical philosophies. Based on this idea, a person who decides to have a virtuous life will not need the masses to act uprightly. In the studied book, Seneca indicates: “It is man’s duty to live in conformity with the divine will” (Seneca 1969, 15). The individual understands that there is an intrinsic force guiding him to remain kind, forgive other, and show the highest level of respect. Without the desire to bend or follow others, they will be resolute and ready to engage in actions that support their principles and values. Furthermore, such individuals will be keen to make the society a better place for all. However, Confucius assumes that the presence of a virtuous person among barbarians could change them. Such an argument is erroneous since the people in question could have already made up their minds to lead their lives that way. In addition, the absence of a moral foundation makes it impossible for them to get rid of their uncouthness. These issues present compelling reasons for supporting and agreeing with Seneca’s views.
Objection #1 and Retort
While Seneca’s view appears more appealing, a good man is still capable of settling among barbarians and eventually guiding them to embrace virtuous ideas, thereby denouncing their uncouthness. However, such an outcome would require a lot of effort to teach, engage, and guide these people to embrace the notions of morality and apply it in their personal philosophies. The gentleman would have a huge mountain climb if he strives to complete such activities for the overall benefits of the barbarians. Notwithstanding, philosophers can consider this assertion to start new centers to educate people about morality and the importance of leading acceptable lives. Despite these possible engagements and successes, the undeniable fact is that the issue of morality is capable of delivering positive outcomes when an individual begins with himself. He goes further to say: “When one does not occupy the position, one does not plan its governance” (Confucius 2015, p. 53). For the case of the barbarians, one or two of them might be unwilling to change. Consequently, they will continue to display their unacceptable behaviors, thereby creating room for uncouthness.
Although Confucius’ views are to some extent practical, Seneca’s argument is acceptable since a person who decides to pursue ethical principles does not need others to either provide timely guidelines or seek external influence. Basically, the move to settle among barbarians as a gentleman with the aim of transforming them to become good people could be self-defeating. Such a person could be happy to guide and educate a few of the barbarians. However, a small percentage could defy the emerging lessons and teachings and continue to portray their uncouth behaviors. It is evident the Confucius writes: “People make errors according to the type of person they are” (Confucius 2015, p. 15). This means that such individuals might not reform simply because a virtuous man is available. For the man who decides to lead his life alone, chances of achieving contented and virtuous experiences increase significantly. Nonetheless, the whole essence of morality is personal in nature and those who embrace the idea would opt to say away from the influential nature of other people.
Objection #2 and Retort
A person who has a strong moral foundation and philosophy will not be moved or compelled to become uncouth based on the negative behaviors of others. For Confucius, such a citizen who chooses to live among barbarians would not have to interact and guide them “to do what is right” (Confucius 2015, p. 37). The argument that such a person could be compelled to become a bad person is, therefore, challengeable. The gentleman might also find some loopholes and succeed to encourage the neighbors to consider the power of becoming upright. They could achieve such a goal by remaining resolute and promoting the most appropriate practices. This knowledge leads Seneca to state that “the wise man is content with himself” (Seneca 1969, p. 44). They will also present additional opportunities for empowering the targeted followers and encouraging them to pursue desirable actions.
The fact that humans are social in nature could create new opportunities for behavioral change when a gentleman or virtuous person decides to become part of a crowd. The case of the gentleman in Confucius’ hypothetical scenario reveals that the individual could find it hard to continue pursuing his moral principles. Additionally, the idea resonates with Seneca’s viewpoint since the best strategy for having a virtuous life is to avoid the masses. Depending on the nature of the external influences, the virtuous could find it hard to remain ethical and promote principles that remain dear to him (Confucius 2015, p. 56). Under such a circumstance, the person will be compelled to transform his moral philosophy. These arguments and counterarguments, therefore, support the fact that Seneca’s views are more plausible and capable of guiding more people to pursue their moral goals and eventually succeed in their lives. With these forces, Confucious (2015, p. 55) indicates: “One must not act on guesses, one must not demand absolute certainty, one must not be stubborn”. Those who follow such teachings will achieve their moral foundations.
Conclusion
From this analysis, it is evident that Seneca’s point of view is more agreeable since it is founded on personal moral philosophy and encourages people to stay away from the crowd. Those who embrace such an idea will avoid the challenges associated with the move to test their moral standards. However, the emerging arguments could compel future analysts to think of how they can still remain virtuous when the crowd decides to come to them. Under such a scenario, such righteous individuals would not have sought the company of such members of the society. This emerging issue could help scholars and moral philosophers to present better ideas that could help more people develop superior moral philosophies. The ultimate aim is to present ethical principles that guide more members of the society to their goals in life.