This paper is written to discuss the idea of Kongzi's "Gentleman" compared to Friedrich Nietzsche's "Nobleman". To show that many of the same characteristics of a "good" man are shown by both philosophers to have many of the same traits.
Kongzi refers to a type of person called the "Gentleman". A gentleman was a naturaul leader. He was born with virtue, and if he learned and strived to be "Good", all would follow him naturally. He was seen as being virtuous by birth, and if he followed his nature, he would be "Good".
"One who rules through the power of Virtue is analogous of the Pole Star: it simply remains in place and receives the homage of the myriad of lesser stars". (Readings in Classical Chinese Phikosophy, Ivanhoe P.J. Van Norden B.W 2003).
Kongzi went on to describe the Gentleman as a person who was a natural ruler. That the Gentleman should rule because of the natural order of things, and due to his natural Virtue:
"...The Virtue of a Gentleman is like the wind, and the Virtue of a petty person is like the grass - when the wind moves over the grass, the grass is sure to bend" (P37, Ivanhoe P.J., Van Norden B. W. 2003).
Friedrich Nietzsche was a well-known philosopher who lived in the 1800's. He believed that due to natural selection of species and man, that there were two classes of men. Masters (Nobleman), and Slaves (the masses). He believed what made a man a Nobleman was directed by nature. The Nobleman was born Noble. That was because he was at the top of the natural selection ladder, he was a natural leader and a good man.
“At the commencement, the noble caste was always the barbarian caste: their superiority did not consist first of all in their physical, but in their psychical power—they were more complete men (which at every point also implies the same as "more complete beasts")”. (Friedrich Nietzsche. Beyond Good and Evil. Translated by Helen Zimmern. 257-261).
Much Like Kongzi, Nietzsche, believed that an inherited Virtue or Good was attached to the Nobleman. That this trait was what led to his being a higher person then the average person.
“The distinctions of moral values have either originated in a ruling caste, pleasantly conscious of being different from the ruled—or among the ruled class, the slaves and dependents of all sorts”. Friedrich Nietzsche. (Beyond Good and Evil. Translated by Helen Zimmern. 257-261).
For both Philosophers the Gentleman or Nobleman was by nature the best man had to offer. They were the cream that rises to the top, the best of the best. Their good was the absence of non-good. (The absence of traits that a good man would have).
Kongzi states: “I have yet to meet a person who truly loved goodness or hated a lack of goodness. One who truly loved goodness could not be surpassed, while one who truly hated a lack of goodness would at least be able to act in a good fashion.” (P11, 4.6 Ivanhoe P.J., Van Norden B. W. 2003).
Nietzsche states: “Let it at once be noted that in this first kind of morality the antithesis "good" and "bad" means practically the same as "noble" and "despicable",—the antithesis "good" and "evil" is of a different origin. The cowardly, the timid, the insignificant, and those thinking merely of narrow utility are despised; moreover, also, the distrustful, with their constrained glances, the self-abasing, the dog-like kind of men who let themselves be abused, the mendicant flatterers, and above all the liars:—it is a fundamental belief of all aristocrats that the common people are untruthful. "We truthful ones"—the nobility in ancient Greece called themselves”.
Summing Up: Kongzi and Nietzsche both believed that a higher form of man can be found in “Good” men. That this power was a process of life itself, and that a man was born with it, and he could harness its energy to excel in life. That this Good man was a natural leader, whose virtue and natural selection, would make him rise to the top of society. That the true leader, need only follow his own thoughts and virtues, to lead mankind to follow the ways of heaven, and nature.
Kongzi refers to a type of person called the "Gentleman". A gentleman was a naturaul leader. He was born with virtue, and if he learned and strived to be "Good", all would follow him naturally. He was seen as being virtuous by birth, and if he followed his nature, he would be "Good".
"One who rules through the power of Virtue is analogous of the Pole Star: it simply remains in place and receives the homage of the myriad of lesser stars". (Readings in Classical Chinese Phikosophy, Ivanhoe P.J. Van Norden B.W 2003).
Kongzi went on to describe the Gentleman as a person who was a natural ruler. That the Gentleman should rule because of the natural order of things, and due to his natural Virtue:
"...The Virtue of a Gentleman is like the wind, and the Virtue of a petty person is like the grass - when the wind moves over the grass, the grass is sure to bend" (P37, Ivanhoe P.J., Van Norden B. W. 2003).
Friedrich Nietzsche was a well-known philosopher who lived in the 1800's. He believed that due to natural selection of species and man, that there were two classes of men. Masters (Nobleman), and Slaves (the masses). He believed what made a man a Nobleman was directed by nature. The Nobleman was born Noble. That was because he was at the top of the natural selection ladder, he was a natural leader and a good man.
“At the commencement, the noble caste was always the barbarian caste: their superiority did not consist first of all in their physical, but in their psychical power—they were more complete men (which at every point also implies the same as "more complete beasts")”. (Friedrich Nietzsche. Beyond Good and Evil. Translated by Helen Zimmern. 257-261).
Much Like Kongzi, Nietzsche, believed that an inherited Virtue or Good was attached to the Nobleman. That this trait was what led to his being a higher person then the average person.
“The distinctions of moral values have either originated in a ruling caste, pleasantly conscious of being different from the ruled—or among the ruled class, the slaves and dependents of all sorts”. Friedrich Nietzsche. (Beyond Good and Evil. Translated by Helen Zimmern. 257-261).
For both Philosophers the Gentleman or Nobleman was by nature the best man had to offer. They were the cream that rises to the top, the best of the best. Their good was the absence of non-good. (The absence of traits that a good man would have).
Kongzi states: “I have yet to meet a person who truly loved goodness or hated a lack of goodness. One who truly loved goodness could not be surpassed, while one who truly hated a lack of goodness would at least be able to act in a good fashion.” (P11, 4.6 Ivanhoe P.J., Van Norden B. W. 2003).
Nietzsche states: “Let it at once be noted that in this first kind of morality the antithesis "good" and "bad" means practically the same as "noble" and "despicable",—the antithesis "good" and "evil" is of a different origin. The cowardly, the timid, the insignificant, and those thinking merely of narrow utility are despised; moreover, also, the distrustful, with their constrained glances, the self-abasing, the dog-like kind of men who let themselves be abused, the mendicant flatterers, and above all the liars:—it is a fundamental belief of all aristocrats that the common people are untruthful. "We truthful ones"—the nobility in ancient Greece called themselves”.
Summing Up: Kongzi and Nietzsche both believed that a higher form of man can be found in “Good” men. That this power was a process of life itself, and that a man was born with it, and he could harness its energy to excel in life. That this Good man was a natural leader, whose virtue and natural selection, would make him rise to the top of society. That the true leader, need only follow his own thoughts and virtues, to lead mankind to follow the ways of heaven, and nature.