What were Mencius and Xunzi arguing about when they disagreed about human nature?

Question

I'm writing an essay comparing moral development theories, and my tutor suggested the debate between Mencius and Xunzi as a classical example. I understand Mencius said human nature is good and Xunzi said it is bad, but I've read that this is a simplification. Could someone explain the actual positions and arguments?

Henrike Vogel · Accepted Answer

Both are Confucians who agree that people need education and ritual. They disagree about the raw material.
Mencius (4th century BCE) holds that human nature is good in the sense that it contains "sprouts" of virtue. His famous example: anyone who suddenly sees a child about to fall into a well feels alarm and compassion, not for any reward. That feeling is the sprout of humaneness; there are also sprouts of righteousness (shame), propriety (deference) and wisdom (approval and disapproval). Education cultivates what is already there, like tending a plant.
Xunzi (3rd century BCE) holds that human nature is bad in the sense that our raw desires, left alone, lead to conflict and disorder. Goodness is the product of deliberate effort (wei): ritual, teaching, practice. His image is warped wood that must be steamed and pressed against a straightening board.
So the dispute is less about whether people can become good than about whether goodness is a development of nature or a transformation of it. That maps nicely onto nativist versus constructivist views of moral development.

Elif Yıldız · Answer

Development versus transformation is exactly the framing I needed, and the child at the well is perfect for the essay's opening. Thank you, Henrike!

What were Mencius and Xunzi arguing about when they disagreed about human nature?

2 answers

Accepted answer