Confucius focuses on the family: it is in the cultivation of our closest loving relationships, especially those between parents and children, that we create and expand our Humanity.  In the Analects he writes more about the filial obligations children owe parents, but there are also passages that remind us of the duties parents have to children.  We must "cherish the young."  Fathers need to be fathers; that is, they cannot simply claim the title, they must fulfill the daily duties of fatherhood; they have to be there for their children and guide them to moral maturity.

      That is also the theme of today’s NYT column by Bob Herbert, discussing a new book by Bill Cosby and Alvin Poussaint.   Herbert does not mention Confucius, but he has a deeply Confucian message to convey:

…Speaking
about the epidemic of fatherlessness in black families, Mr. Cosby
imagined a young fatherless child thinking: “Somewhere in my life a
person called my father has not shown up, and I feel very sad about
this because I don’t know if I’m ugly — I don’t know what the reason
is.”

Dr. Poussaint, referring to boys who get into trouble,
added: “I think a lot of these males kind of have a father hunger and
actually grieve that they don’t have a father. And I think later a lot
of that turns into anger. ‘Why aren’t you with me? Why don’t you care
about me?’ ”

The absence of fathers, and the resultant feelings
of abandonment felt by boys and girls, inevitably affect the children’s
sense of self-worth, he said.

       Fathers have to be fathers.  They cannot just walk away from the children they are responsible for.  If they do, those children are likely to be damaged, and the whole cycle of social disintegration begins anew.

      Herbert suggests that overcoming the culture of fatherlessness will be difficult:

The most important step toward ending the tragic cycles of violence
and poverty among African-Americans also happens to be the heaviest
lift — reconnecting black fathers to their children.

In an
interview yesterday, Dr. Poussaint said: “You go into whole
neighborhoods and there are no fathers there. What you find is apathy
in a lot of the males who don’t even know that they are supposed to be
a father.”

 The scale of the challenge seems daunting.  But the cure may not be as hard as Herbert thinks.  It is a social-cultural thing.  Young men have to see, and come to believe, that fulfilling personal duty is the best path to personal fulfillment.  They will be more complete in themselves, more complete as men, when they take care of their children – a message that applies to all men, not just black men.  Changing cultural norms can be difficult, just as Confucius understood the attainment of Humanity is rare.  But difficult or rare is not impossible.

     In urging us on to Humanity, Confucius tells us that, even if we do not accomplish the goal completely and perfectly (he was forthright about his own shortcomings in this regard), the process of working toward Humanity brings its own rewards.  It is not that hard to do:

The Master said: "Is Humanity really so far away?  We need only want it, and here it is!" (7.30)

     I suspect Cosby and Poussaint would agree: we need only want it, and here it is.  We only have to be fathers to be fathers.  And this could bring us to a Confucian-inspired slogan for their campaign (though they would have to get permission from Nike):

Fatherhood: Just Do It.

Sam Crane Avatar

Published by

One response to “Black Confucians”

  1. Alexus McLeod Avatar

    Hi Sam–
    Nice discussion!
    I think your take on Confucius here is right–he certainly would have thought that the entire nuclear family is necessary to cultivate virtue in the child and the parents. However, I think Cosby and Poussaint are wrong on this point, both in their diagnosis of missing fathers as a major cause some of the problems (violence and poverty, among others) of many blacks in America, and in their implicit claim (and perhaps that of Confucius!) that the “traditional” family is most conducive to moral stability.
    Regarding the former: Cosby and Poussaint offer no evidence to back up the claim that fatherlessness leads to poverty and violence. Is there any indication that fatherlessness in the white American population, for example, plays such a role? I seem to have remember hearing of a study some years ago which found that, to the contrary, children of single parent homes were no more likely to be unstable than those of two parent homes. Having come from a two parent home myself, I find no major moral differences between myself and those I know from one parent homes.
    Regarding the latter: it would be (at least) very odd to think that those many historical and contemporary groups and civilizations with different forms of “marriage” and child rearing than our own (think of collective child-rearing societies, polyandrous and polygynous societies, etc.) are somehow lacking in moral stature in ways that societies with our “traditional” notion of child rearing are not. Of course, Confucius would probably bite this bullet and claim moral supremacy for the “traditional” scheme. But this is one place I disagree with the master–it just seems implausible.

    Like

Leave a reply to Alexus McLeod Cancel reply