[US] Paul Woodruff: Reverence—A Forgotten Virtue, translated by Lin Bin and Ma Hongqi, Commercial Press, July 2007, 14 yuan—★
I personally highly recommend this book!
The topic of this book is very much to my taste: “Reverence”—that is, what we have all along been talking about as “敬畏” (awe and reverence). The author discusses Reverence from the standpoint of virtue ethics—that is, from the perspective of what I have all along been calling virtue ethics—which is quite to the point, and says many things I have long wanted to say but have not yet said. I also very much agree with the author’s use of Reverence to interpret the Confucian “礼” (ritual propriety).
I have also long been discussing this question: what is it exactly that modern people have lost? I think it is not that people have lost tradition, nor that they have lost nature, but that they have lost “Reverence,” or, as the author puts it, we have not actually lost “Reverence” at all, but only forgotten it.
I always say that the source of all my views is my “philosophy of the starry sky,” so what is the core of my philosophy of the starry sky? I have mentioned it before: it is precisely this “Reverence.” This thing can connect my positions in all kinds of domains—nature, science, religion, ethics, politics, love… “Reverence” is the key to all of it.
The opening overview in the first few chapters of this book is splendid, while in the latter half there are many places that feel somewhat verbose. The author discusses the “reverence” embedded in ancient Greece and in ancient Chinese Confucianism, and devotes a great deal of ink to trying to prove that reverence is a virtue that transcends history, culture, and sectarian boundaries. Of course, I do not fully agree with the author’s views, especially his discussion of relativism, because in my view insisting on pluralism is precisely also out of “Reverence.” But on the whole, this is a very special book; just from the title alone, it is one you simply have to read!
The following excerpts make first use of “Hanwang handheld transcription”: that is, I used a scanning pen to draw across the book, then recognized the text into the computer. The efficiency of excerpting does seem somewhat improved, though not as useful as I had hoped…
Pages 1–4 Reverence is an ancient virtue, and it still survives in our lives, lingering on in those nearly forgotten forms of ritual, in moments of inexpressible awe, and in the nostalgia for cultural customs and practices that have been lost and are no more. We have the word “reverence” in our language, but we scarcely know how to use it. Today, it has no place in ordinary discussions of moral ethics or political theory. More surprisingly still, even when modern people speak of the ancient cultures they hold in the highest esteem, reverence has somehow vanished without a trace.
Reverence arises from a profound understanding of human limitation, and from this comes the capacity to feel awe toward all those things we take to lie beyond our own control—God, truth, justice, nature, and even death. As this capacity for awe gradually develops, it brings with it the capacity to respect our human fellows together with their flaws. This in turn cultivates our sense of shame when moral defects exceed the limits normally permitted to human beings. The Greeks before Plato regarded reverence as one of the bastions that uphold society; in China, Confucius’s direct followers held the same view. Both groups hoped to see reverence in their leaders, because reverence is also a virtue of leaders. Simply put, reverence is the virtue that prevents human beings from trying to play god.
Forgetting that one is merely an ordinary person, believing that one can act as god—these are all conduct contrary to reverence. The ancient Greeks regarded tyranny as the greatest form of irreverence; they gave the crimes committed by tyrants a famous name: “hubris.” Those who lack reverence are arrogant, rude, and without shame, unable to stand in awe before anything above themselves. And those who lack reverence will likewise fail to respect those they regard as beneath themselves—ordinary people, prisoners, children. In the Greek and Chinese traditions, these two lacks go hand in hand. If an emperor has a sense of awe, it reminds him that there is Heaven above him—as the ancient Chinese put it, he is the “Son of Heaven.” And any one of us, so long as we remember that we are merely the child of someone or of some great person, is thereby improved; in that state of mind, we are more able to respect all children. The reverse is also true: if you cannot bring yourself to respect children, you are very likely deficient in your ability to recognize the worth of other people or other things. Compared with religion, reverence has more to do with politics. We can easily imagine religion lacking reverence—for example, whenever religion leads to wars of aggression or violence, we see this. But power lacking reverence—for everyone involved, that is a disaster. Power lacking reverence burns with the flames of arrogance, while servitude lacking reverence stores up the kindling of rebellion. Politics without reverence ignores the public interest and turns a deaf ear to the cries of the weak. What about personal life without reverence? A complete lack of reverence? That would be coarse and selfish, something best endured alone.
The view that reverence belongs to the sphere of religion is a common mistake; in fact, it belongs to social groups. Wherever people want to act together, they will bind themselves with some kind of ritual or etiquette, and observing such customary rules may itself be an act of reverence. Behind civility and all those graceful good deeds that make social life bearable and pleasant, reverence provides the support. Yet in our own time, what we often hear in the news is more praise of irreverence than praise of reverence. This is because it is in our nature to take pleasure in mocking others and to like making jokes about serious things. It is not because we inwardly despise reverence. In my view, what the media calls “irreverence” often describes qualities that are anything but irreverent. If one wished to express what they really mean, a better way might be “bold and unruly, fierce in temperament, plain and unadorned, unmoved by false sentimentality”—all of which are good qualities. Reverence is compatible with these traits, and almost all forms of irony and satire are likewise compatible. Nietzsche was one of the great Western philosophers who praised reverence, and he was at the same time a master of irony. Reverence and the insight that can recognize the absurd and the ridiculous are allies; both keep people from self-display or hubris. So do not think this book is a denunciation of laughter. Not at all.
Page 11 Can reverence be separated from faith? The answer is actually complicated. Reverence depends to a certain extent on faith, yet by no means on those rigid formal dogmas. Thus I was shocked and delighted to discover that reverence—at least in theory—can be shared by different religions. In fact, what contemporary believers admire in other religions is not faith itself (they reject most of the content of other religions’ beliefs), but reverence. So they know reverence, even if they do not know to call it by that name.
Page 12 My search for reverence in the universal sense led me out of ancient Greece, into ancient China, and then back to the European tradition, back to writers of our own time. I quickly found that I had been reading the wrong books. Most modern philosophers have forgotten the existence of reverence. But poets still remember it, as always. I may have thought at the outset that Yeats would be a poet full of reverence. And Tennyson. But Philip Larkin? That was a completely surprising discovery.
Pages 13–14 Why write about reverence? Because we have forgotten what it means. Because reverence elevates leadership and promotes progress in education. Most importantly, because reverence allows people to feel the warmth of friendship and family life. And because without reverence, everything falls into chaos. People then will not know how to respect themselves or respect one another. An army will no longer be able to distinguish itself from a band of robbers. Without reverence, we cannot explain why we should treat the natural world with respect. Without reverence, a house is not a home, a boss is not a leader, a teacher is not a teacher. Without reverence, we do not even know how to learn reverence. To spread reverence, you must find the seeds of reverence in every person and then help them take root and sprout.
Page 15 Reverence crosses the barriers between different faiths and even runs through the structure of any community beyond religion, no matter how secular that community may be. Our beliefs may separate us from one another, but reverence absolutely will not. If you long for world peace, do not pray that everyone share your faith. What should be prayed for is that everyone may have reverence in their hearts.
Page 22 Voting in a democracy is a ritual. Other peoples who have finally been able to go to the polls in groups have deep feelings about the value of this ritual. That feeling comes from reverence, and feelings are beyond dispute.
Page 40 Virtue is not acquired externally. Standing outside, you cannot even appreciate virtue. Unless you yourself already possess even a little reverence, you cannot understand why the virtue of reverence is needed; and unless you have already begun to practice reverence, you cannot learn reverence at all. Only by doing, or about to do, more and more virtuous things, and by turning them into habit, can you learn reverence. Aristotle understood this. Mencius meant something similar: if virtue had to be imposed from outside, it would keep colliding with our spirit. Fortunately, reverence is all around us. So for anyone who wants to cultivate and carry forward the virtue of reverence, any time and place can be a starting point.
Page 41 In fact, the point I emphasize in this book is that reverence, ritual, and respect do not vanish, nor can they vanish from a society that is still functioning properly. It is only that we have failed to recognize their existence. So I am not saying that ancient societies were better than modern ones. On the contrary, what I am saying is that ancient people had a better understanding than we do of the virtues on which any society depends for its existence and development. What we have lost is not reverence, but awareness of reverence. We are still, unconsciously, doing reverent things, and that is heartening. For the complete absence of reverence would be an unbearable sorrow.
Page 43 What we have lost is not reverence itself, but knowledge about reverence. We do not understand what reverence really is, or why we need it, or how we should cultivate it. I do not mean to rebuild ancient dress codes, or insist on forms of ritual that have already disappeared. No one has the ability to do such a thing, least of all philosophers. What I mean is that whether in moral consciousness or in political thought, we should restore the view of reverence and give it the proper place it deserves. I believe that if we understand what reverence is and know why it matters, then we will surely become better. Only then will we be able, amid the torrent of ever-accelerating cultural change, consciously to protect and cultivate reverence. Otherwise, we will be like a group of passengers on a ship who, when the vessel is lifted by huge waves, clutch only the gunwale and forget the oars and paddles beneath their feet.
Page 47 Ritual of course includes ceremonial elements, but Confucius repeatedly emphasized that its significance goes far beyond that. What is lost in all translations is reverence, and reverence must exist in the minds of those who practice ritual and propriety. Reverence gives ceremony feeling, and feeling is what makes ceremony valuable.
Page 57 Sexual love can serve as an example; I believe, as every loving couple instinctively knows, that reverence makes sexual love seem noble. Sexual acts may reflect a hierarchy, and hierarchy can be barbaric: there may be those who demand and those who are demanded of. Even upon the bed of love, we may still feel something animal-like. On a bed imbued with reverence, however, there is nothing barbaric. Reverent love leads to awe; so long as there is awe, all acts of love are profoundly human.
Page 71 Virtue is the capacity to possess particular emotions. Through training and cultivation, this capacity can be fully developed, and it can prompt those who possess it to do the right thing. Emotions affect people’s conduct; emotions are the catalyst of action. Fear makes you want to flee, anger makes you want to explode, sorrow makes you want to weep. Virtue is a trained emotional experience that makes you want to do good. Take courage as an example. So long as you have courage, you can feel the appropriate confidence and fear—an emotion that can prompt you to do anything brave…. The more virtues we have, the less we need to think about rules.
Page 73 As I mentioned at the beginning, reverence is the capacity to produce a series of interconnected emotional perceptions; it is a consciousness of human smallness, accompanied by awe, respect, and shame; this emotional complex is usually expressed and strengthened through ritual.
Page 75 Reverence is the capacity to express a cluster of related emotions. Each emotion has a different object: respect is directed toward other people, shame is a feeling about one’s own shortcomings, and awe is usually a feeling toward something extraordinary.
Page 82 If reverence for tradition means following tradition no matter what it is, then it would be better for tradition to be contentious, with some parts good and some bad. Such reverence is not virtue. If it is not virtue, then it is not reverence. It is, therefore, “fake reverence.” There is a humble way of respecting tradition that once was abandoned by people: to regard tradition, as far as possible, as a magnificent edifice handed down from ancient times. The Parthenon in Athens, as a historically significant site, deserves to be preserved, but it is not necessary to live in it. If, however, it were remodeled so that people could live in it, that would be irreverent. There is also a respectful rule for honoring traditions that are still alive. If we are still to live within a tradition rather than discard it, then we should show it sufficient respect and sustain its existence through continual renewal, rather than treating it as a monument. Doing so does not violate the boundary between human and divine. Reverence for tradition is different: it mistakes human custom for the will of God.
Page 84 Does reverence hinder the expression of humor and irony? No. Irony is beneficial to reverence in two ways: it reminds those who think themselves remarkable of their shortcomings; it awakens the long-slumbering sense of shame in people.
Page 132 Earlier I said that virtue is an intensified capacity to express the right emotion at the right time. It exists within the natural capacity to express emotion, and through repeated practice it is strengthened into a fairly reliable part of a person’s character. This is the “礼” (ritual propriety) in the Analects and in The Mencius: virtue carried out through ritual. And in certain cases, “礼” itself is a virtue.
Page 139 From ancient times onward, both Greeks and Chinese insisted on treating the dead well; but they held different beliefs, and at different periods had different beliefs, to explain their insistence on funerals. It may have been accidental that both cultures chose burial rather than other funeral customs, but it was by no means accidental that both cultures valued ritual and emphasized that such ritual should be carried out with reverence, so that grief could be given as full and as appropriate an expression as possible.
Page 140 In the centuries after Confucius’s thought came to be widely accepted, China made tremendous progress in science and technology, social form, and many other aspects. “礼” does not hinder change; it makes change orderly.
Page 147 Reverence must have awe toward something—a thing I call the object of reverence. What might that be? According to the concept of reverence we first defined, such a thing makes us aware of the many limitations of human beings. So you must believe that there exists something that meets at least one of the following conditions: it is not altered or controlled by human means, it is not fully understood by human experts, it is not created by human beings, it is transcendent.
Page 158 Reverence exists in awe, but awe and fear are not the same thing. Schweitzer never feared life, even though life was one of the objects of his reverence.
Page 227 When silence is transformed into a provocative but inactive interjection, it becomes irony. Like pure humor, irony shows a sense of awe toward problems that cannot be easily mastered.
Page 228 The core creed of reverence—believing in human imperfection…
August 29, 2007
Translated from the Chinese original with AI assistance. The original text is authoritative.
Leave a Reply