A reader emails with a question that emerged in a discussion she had with friends about the relative merits of the moral systems of Christianity and Confucianism.  Her friends say that Confucianism relies too much on "face," or how one is perceived by others, and thus leads to a lack of authentic, internally-generated morality.  They therefore conclude that:

...  western Christian values foster honesty more than Confucianism.

     This hearkens back to a long-standing distinction between "guilt" cultures versus "shame" cultures and, I think, ultimately rests on a misreading of Confucius and an idealization of the effects of Western Christianity.

     The shame/guilt dichotomy goes back to Ruth Benedict, an anthropologist of Japan.  She argued that traditional Japan (and some might extend this to other Confucian societies: China and Korea) relied upon social expectations, which are external to the individual, as the primary means of defining proper behavior.  What matters is where a person is positioned in society; that positioning defines proper behavior; and if a person does the wrong thing based on those social expectations, then correction comes from losing face, or being shamed, in the eyes of the community.  It is an external thing. 

    Guilt societies, the argument goes, regulate proper behavior from the inside out.  There is some sense of general equality ("we are all equal in the eyes of God," for example) and thus, universal standards of morality that apply to everyone, regardless of social rank.  Moral expectations are, or must be, internalized, so that an individual will look inward and reflect upon whether he or she is living up to the standard that applies to all.  It is an internal thing. 

    These are big, unwieldy generalizations that breakdown when looked at more carefully.  Here are a couple of problems.

     First, in the case of Confucius, he was quite clearly, at least in what he wrote in the Analects (and how this is carried over into the writings of Mencius), not saying that morality is simply a matter of externally-generated standards that can be used to shame individuals into doing the right thing.  He was very much saying that we must internalize ethical standards, some of which have universal aspects, and constantly look inward and ask if we are living up to them in our daily lives.  Many quotations could be marshaled in support of this idea, here’ s one

The Master said: “A ruler who
has rectified himself never gives orders, and all goes well. A ruler who has not rectified himself gives
orders, and the people never follow. (13.6)

     In other words, if a person has not undergone serious self-cultivation, reflecting upon and acting upon ethical rightness, then he or she can never be effective in defining moral standards for a community.  Before you can say to another what the right thing to do is, you must already be thinking and doing the right thing in your own life. 

     Here’s a quote from Mencius along the same lines: 

"Mencius said: ‘The ten thousand
things [everything] are all there in me.  And there’s no joy greater
than looking within and finding myself faithful to them.  Treat others
as you would be treated.  Devote yourself to that, for there’s no more
direct approach to Humanity." (236)

     This doesn’t sound to me like a predominantly externally-generated moral order.  Indeed, the Confucian-Mencian tradition is based upon a complex interplay of external social responsibility and internal personal conscience.

     It should also be said that Confucius looked down upon those who carried out their social responsibilities just for show or without genuine personal and emotional engagement.  Going through the motions to "save face" is completely contrary to his teachings.

     One the other side of the equation, we can sometimes be too quick to believe that Western moral systems, like Christianity, are somehow more honest because they are based on more genuinely internally-driven understandings.  The briefest consideration of the current sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church suggests that Western Christians, even the leadership of Western Christian churches, can become obsessed with saving face in the community, even if that means protecting sexual predators and repressing the suffering of young victims. 

     I am not saying Catholics are somehow unique in this regard. I’m sure we could think of instances where Christianity relies on shame instead of guilt.  Rather, I am suggesting we should all embrace a certain humility when considering whether one moral system is more "honest" than another.  Each has the potential for honesty or dishonesty.