Confucius Statue

[Yeahman]

For those against 10 Commandments in courthouses and Nativity scenes on public lawns, what do you think about the statue of Confucius in NY's Chinatown?

Confucius Statue (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ae/Confucius_Statue_von_Liu_Shihs_II.JPG)

[eos]

i have no problem with it cuz it's in chinatown. and last time i checked, confucius was chinese. now if the statue was in, say, little italy, i'd have a problem. and so would other people. i think we have one here in chinatown too...it's right next to the CHINESE benevolent association building.

[SunWuKong]

Confucianism is not a religion. there's nobody to worship, no system of supernatural beliefs. it's just a philosophy about social structure and social conduct. there's no religious Confucian establishment. it would be like having a statue of Aristotle or something. the better question to ask would be one directed at a statue of Buddha in a public area.

[TB4000]

Are those Confucius sayings that people quote actually true, or just stuff they made up?

[Yeahman]

Confucianism is not a religion. there's nobody to worship, no system of supernatural beliefs. it's just a philosophy about social structure and social conduct. there's no religious Confucian establishment. it would be like having a statue of Aristotle or something. the better question to ask would be one directed at a statue of Buddha in a public area.
Very debatable. Many Confucians consider it a religion. Certain in its history, Confucianism has been treated as a religion in the sense that it was believed that it was immoral to follow other religions.
Does it matter though? The logic behind the opposition to religious symbols in public is that it is implicitly saying that the government gives preferential treatment to a belief regardless of the content. A promotion of atheism, though there is no one to worship and no supernatural beliefs, would violate the 1st Amendment. So why wouldn't this statue of Confucius?

[nameless]

^Because we all know that this was put up by Chinese people and not the government. And I always thought that the 10 Commandments was a no-no at a court house because it sent a mixed message - are you there to be judged by man's law or not? The nativity scene issue is taking it a bit far though.

Anyway, if it weren't for fortune cookies, I doubt most people would know who Confucius was.

[SunWuKong]

Very debatable. Many Confucians consider it a religion. Certain in its history, Confucianism has been treated as a religion in the sense that it was believed that it was immoral to follow other religions.

i am not aware of this. many Chinese rulers in the past have simultaneously been Buddhist while running a Confucian court. even Islam was tolerated amongst the rulers' subordinates. in fact, the only people who seem to think Confucianism is a religion are uninformed westerners.

not that i'm saying i know 100% for sure, but do you have any sources that say that Confucians believed it was "immoral" to follow "other" religions?

Does it matter though? The logic behind the opposition to religious symbols in public is that it is implicitly saying that the government gives preferential treatment to a belief regardless of the content. A promotion of atheism, though there is no one to worship and no supernatural beliefs, would violate the 1st Amendment. So why wouldn't this statue of Confucius?

so where does it stop? does it violate the 1st Amendment for the government to promote a healthy diet? that's a belief, isn't it?

the clearest difference here is that there is no Confucian religious establishment. again, a better parallel would be a statue of Buddha.

[yoMAMA]

i am not aware of this. many Chinese rulers in the past have simultaneously been Buddhist while running a Confucian court. even Islam was tolerated amongst the rulers' subordinates. in fact, the only people who seem to think Confucianism is a religion are uninformed westerners.

not that i'm saying i know 100% for sure, but do you have any sources that say that Confucians believed it was "immoral" to follow "other" religions?



There's actually a chapter in "analects", where one of this disciples asked him "master, what do you think about gods/ghosts/goblins..etc?"

And basically he replied, "I ready don't give a shit about them. I'm a scholar and that's all I care about".

and other confucian texts...

http://classics.mit.edu/Confucius

[yoMAMA]

Are those Confucius sayings that people quote actually true, or just stuff they made up?

http://classics.mit.edu/Confucius

the really corny ones, probably inventions by the charlie chan factory.

[SunWuKong]

There's actually a chapter in "analects", where one of this disciples asked him "master, what do you think about gods/ghosts/goblins..etc?"

And basically he replied, "I ready don't give a shit about them. I'm a scholar and that's all I care about".

and other confucian texts...

http://classics.mit.edu/Confucius

i ran a search for this in the Analects and did not find anything like this. but i did find he said we should respect spiritual beings.

anyway, i've never read anything that said that Confucians think it immoral to believe in "other" religions, or that Confucians think of their philosophy and code of conduct as a religion itself.

[Yeahman]

^Because we all know that this was put up by Chinese people and not the government. And I always thought that the 10 Commandments was a no-no at a court house because it sent a mixed message - are you there to be judged by man's law or not? The nativity scene issue is taking it a bit far though.
The Confucius statue stands on public property. I don't know if it was paid for by the government but the entire area is officially called "Confucius Plaza." Chances are the government did pay for it.

The 10 Commandments sends a mixed message. That's really pushing it. Do you really think you would be confused?

i am not aware of this. many Chinese rulers in the past have simultaneously been Buddhist while running a Confucian court. even Islam was tolerated amongst the rulers' subordinates. in fact, the only people who seem to think Confucianism is a religion are uninformed westerners.

not that i'm saying i know 100% for sure, but do you have any sources that say that Confucians believed it was "immoral" to follow "other" religions?
Look into Confucian persecution of Buddhists during the Joseon dynasty in Korea.

so where does it stop? does it violate the 1st Amendment for the government to promote a healthy diet? that's a belief, isn't it?

the clearest difference here is that there is no Confucian religious establishment. again, a better parallel would be a statue of Buddha.
There is no atheist religious establishment. Do you think it acceptable to promote atheism in our public schools?

A healthy diet has a secular purpose.

[SunWuKong]

Look into Confucian persecution of Buddhists during the Joseon dynasty in Korea.

looked it up on Wikipedia. according to the article, Buddhists were prosecuted because Buddhist establishments were supported by state funds and a whole bunch of people became monks and nuns only to avoid being taxed. tragedy, no doubt, but what happened is actually an argument for seperation of religion and state.

There is no atheist religious establishment. Do you think it acceptable to promote atheism in our public schools?

the problem with promoting atheism is not specifically the promotion of a religious belief, but the hindrance of all religious beliefs altogether. now, does Confucianism say that religion is false, like atheism does? how does Confucianism say that religion is immoral?

A healthy diet has a secular purpose.

so does Confucian philosophy.

[nameless]

The Confucius statue stands on public property. I don't know if it was paid for by the government but the entire area is officially called "Confucius Plaza." Chances are the government did pay for it.

Point is that I seriously doubt someone is going to walk by the statue and think that our government is pushing for Confucian reform.

The 10 Commandments sends a mixed message. That's really pushing it. Do you really think you would be confused?

Not as confused as having to swear on a Bible, but the larger religious message is still there to be interpreted. Not the case with the Confucius statue right now.

Curious, but what do you think the 10 Commandments are there for?

in fact, the only people who seem to think Confucianism is a religion are uninformed westerners.

lol burn

[Yeahman]

in fact, the only people who seem to think Confucianism is a religion are uninformed westerners.
I think quite the opposite. I think people who have only a history class exposure to Confucianism regard it as merely a philosophy. In Asian countries, when you ask people what religion they are, Confucians won't think twice.

It's hard to imagine how a belief system which teaches that abortion is immoral and which has temples where religious-like rituals are held, is somehow just a philosophy.

I think the confusion may be that when most people say "religion" they think of the traditional Western religions. By Western definitions, even Buddhism may not be a religion.

My point about atheism, was that we don't equate religion with a deity necessarily. A promotion of atheism hinders the practice of other religions? The promotion of Islam hinders the practice of Christianity. The promotion of evolution hinders the practice of Creationists.

That distinction doesn't help us at all.

BTW, my point is that the statue of Confucius should stand. As should the 10 Commandments and Nativity scenes. And a Buddhist statue would be fine by me too. They don't hinder the practice of other religions. The test is whether or not it serves a primarily secular interest. It doesn't have to be an important secular interest either. What is the purpose of the angel on top of NYC's Municipal building? It's decorative. It's primary purpose obviously wasn't to evangelize.

The 1st Amendment was never meant to remove all cultural imagery and language that can be traced back to a religion. Nor do I think it should be interpreted that way.

Point is that I seriously doubt someone is going to walk by the statue and think that our government is pushing for Confucian reform.
Nor do I think people hear a public official say "God bless America" and think he wants a theocracy. But there are plenty of people out there who want to remove any inference to a religion out of the public sphere.

Curious, but what do you think the 10 Commandments are there for?
For the same reason we have Christmas trees, Valentine's Day cards, Halloween decorations, and countless other symbols and sayings. You have to be out of your mind to buy the claim that it's to promote religion. It's part of our secular American culture. The 10 Commandments one of the most well known body of codified law among Americans with a long cultural tradition. It's as appropriate in a courthouse as a statue of a snail would be in a post office or a bust of Caesar in the White House.

[yoMAMA]

It's hard to imagine how a belief system which teaches that abortion is immoral and which has temples where religious-like rituals are held, is somehow just a philosophy.



any proof?

[snailpoo]

For those against 10 Commandments in courthouses and Nativity scenes on public lawns, what do you think about the statue of Confucius in NY's Chinatown?

Confucius Statue (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ae/Confucius_Statue_von_Liu_Shihs_II.JPG)

Ooo... interesting.

Religious depictions in public places are ok... when they're inclusive. The objections to Christmas trees, Ten Commandments, and whatnot have been because they're exclusive (thereby violating the establishment clause). ...or that's the (overly simplfied) reasoning that allowed Moses and the Ten Commandments to appear next to Confucius on the east entrance to the Supreme Court.

http://www.christianindex.org/569.tenmoses2.jpg.image

[SunWuKong]

BTW, my point is that the statue of Confucius should stand.

yeah i know. i just don't agree with labeling Confucianism as a religion. and i guess i can't speak for other Confucian societies like Korea, but Chinese people don't even think of "Confucianism" as a seperate entity. much of the values taught from the Confucian school of thought is just part of Chinese culture, and usually the context of "Confucianism" is taken from what specific prominent Confucian scholars have said and taught throughout history. by the way, i don't even personally like most of Confucianism, because it reinforces a strict social class structure.

and i also have my own opinions about people who think of Buddhism as only a philosophy. they're people like Richard Gere and Steven Segal, in other words, they're like Hollywood Buddhists. they think Buddhism is a hobby. the reality is that there is Buddism in practice and Buddhism in philosophy. Buddhist monks and nuns go through rituals and worship even as they learn the philosophy.

[Yeahman]

any proof?
For Confucian temples? Google "Confucian temple."

[SunWuKong]

Ooo... interesting.

Religious depictions in public places are ok... when they're inclusive. The objections to Christmas trees, Ten Commandments, and whatnot have been because they're exclusive (thereby violating the establishment clause). ...or that's the (overly simplfied) reasoning that allowed Moses and the Ten Commandments to appear next to Confucius on the east entrance to the Supreme Court.

http://www.christianindex.org/569.tenmoses2.jpg.image

is that Confucius? somebody like Han Fei from the school of Legalism probably would have been a better choice for the Supreme Court. Confucianism emphasised rule based on virtue, but Legalism emphasised rule of law. i guess they just picked the most famous Chinese philosopher to put on that thing.

[Yeahman]

Ooo... interesting.

Religious depictions in public places are ok... when they're inclusive. The objections to Christmas trees, Ten Commandments, and whatnot have been because they're exclusive (thereby violating the establishment clause). ...or that's the (overly simplfied) reasoning that allowed Moses and the Ten Commandments to appear next to Confucius on the east entrance to the Supreme Court.

http://www.christianindex.org/569.tenmoses2.jpg.image
But Moses receives a more prominent placement than the others. Also I am deeply offended that it doesn't include the greatest Catholic legal mind in history, St. Thomas Aquinas or the patron saint of lawyers, St. Thomas More.

[yoMAMA]

here's an article written by an American that specificly addressed the reason why confucianism is a philosophy, not a religion.


Confucianism is much misunderstood. The United Nations, for example, classifies it as a religion. Big mistake. Confucianism is a philosophy, not a religion. What's the difference? Religion believes in god as the final answer.

Philosophy comprehends life as a question. Confucianism is a disciplined ethical inquiry — a moral philosophy.

http://theseoultimes.com/ST/?url=/ST/db/read.php?idx=4616

[Yeahman]

"Confucianism is a philosophy, not a religion. What's the difference? Religion believes in god as the final answer."

What a dumbass. Go tell a Buddhist that he has no religion.

[didu]

"Confucianism is a philosophy, not a religion. What's the difference? Religion believes in god as the final answer."

What a dumbass. Go tell a Buddhist that he has no religion.

WordNet has the following definitions for "philosophy":


1. (12) doctrine, philosophy, philosophical system, school of thought, ism -- (a belief (or system of beliefs) accepted as authoritative by some group or school)
2. (8) philosophy -- (the rational investigation of questions about existence and knowledge and ethics)
3. (1) philosophy -- (any personal belief about how to live or how to deal with a situation; "self-indulgence was his only philosophy"; "my father's philosophy of child-rearing was to let mother do it")


In this regard, it may be reasonable to regard religions as philosophies. In other words, religions are specific types of philosophies. However, it would be wrong to equal philosophy with religion. For example, if you say that Asians are a specific type of human being, that would be fine; but if you say Asians and human beings are exactly the same thing, that would be wrong -- because there are other types of human beings who are not Asians.

It would be inaccurate to say that there is no supernatural theme in confucianism, because the past Chinese rulers have certainly promoted the idea that Confucius was a saint with supernatural powers. However, it would be even more inaccurate to treat confucianism in the same regard as Christianity or any other religions, especially in the modern world.

Confucius is mostly regarded as a philosopher or scholar, his philosophy mostly deals with people's positions in the society. Confucius also does not believe in ghosts or after life. Therefore, confucianism does not entice people with empty promises of an eternal happy after life or better next lives. Instead, confucianism just tells people what they are and it's wrong to not be what they are supposed to be.

The confucius temples in China are mostly cultural sites for commemorating the scholarship and historical influence of Confucius. They are not places of worship such as churches or mosques. Chinese people don't pray to Confucius -- not even students. I don't deny that there are still superstitious and uneducated Chinese who regard Confucius as some sort of saint or god. However, the mass majority of the Chinese population would tell you that Confucius is just a human being who was an influential philosopher but has never has had any divine or supernatural powers.

The symbolic meaning of a Confucius statue is much closer to that of an Washington statue or Newton statue, and much different from a status of Jesus or Buddha.

Confucius represents a significant part of Chinese culture. Jesus represents a signficant part of Christianity. If you cannot equate Chinese culture with Christianity, then you shouldn't equate a statue of Confucius with a statue of Jesus.

[AliBabaIncorporated]

Whether it's a religion, an ideology, a philosophy, or whatever other blue-blooded Greco-Latin word you want to use for it, it shouldn't be getting support from the government. If private citizens or foundations want to waste their money on venerating it, fine with me, but, just like Christianity, Islam, etc., there's enough people out there who disagree with Confucianism and find it to be oppressive and backwards ...

[BeTheReds]

Well damn, we might as well not put any statues of any great men and women up anywhere then, as there would definately be people offended by some aspect.

[didu]

Whether it's a religion, an ideology, a philosophy, or whatever other blue-blooded Greco-Latin word you want to use for it, it shouldn't be getting support from the government. If private citizens or foundations want to waste their money on venerating it, fine with me, but, just like Christianity, Islam, etc., there's enough people out there who disagree with Confucianism and find it to be oppressive and backwards ...

That's a bit extreme. It's like saying that governments shouldn't spend money on teaching science in schools because that could offend religious people who think the science is wrong.

[AliBabaIncorporated]

Well damn, we might as well not put any statues of any great men and women up anywhere then, as there would definately be people offended by some aspect.
I'd be much happier without government-sponsored cults of personality telling me who's supposed to be a national hero and going around putting up statues and naming airports and buildings and streets after him.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FSalonica-City-Ghosts-Christians-1430-1950%2Fdp%2F0375727388%2F&tag=languagehat-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325
Places thus acquired names according to an entirely locally generated logic. Many small alleys and cul-de-sacs were nameless, or known by such helpful terms as "Rocky Place," or "Behind the Square of the Graveyard." Larger streets changed name several times as they wound their way past mosques and shrines...

But at the very end of the nineteenth century, this localized way of naming space was challenged by new conceptions of what place-names should do... The municipality eventually issued the first street names in May 1898, although their usefulness for strangers was initially limited by their being written only in Turkish. A more fundamental problem was that those choosing the new names had not properly understood the logic which was supposed to lie behind them. It was as well they had only been in Turkish—for what would Europeans have made of the "Street that Leads to Miltiades' Coffeeshop," or the "Street of the Greengrocer Constantine"? Local journalists tried to explain to the authorities the error of their ways:

[i]We know that in Europe streets are given names of celebrated men whose memory it is wished to honour or those of noble citizens who have rendered useful service to their country. But we do not see how the said Constantine with his plums and his bad coffee, or M. Miltiadis, pouring out his raki, can raise the prestige of the city so far as to be honoured by the municipal scribe.

In Europe, squares and wide avenues carry as an honorific title the dates of national triumphs, the names of cities where the national army covered itself in glory, or where great generals are illustrated: the Boulevard Magenta and the Avenue de la Grande Armée in Paris, the Strada Manin in Venice, Trafalgar Square in London, are monuments which speak to the hearts of patriots. Each crossroads is a lesson and History is written on the walls. And is the history of our dear country so lacking in these glorious occasions? ("Les noms de Rues," Journal de Salonique, 26 May 1898)

One conception of the past—the past which linked the city dweller's pride in his country to that in his city—was coming to impose itself on another—the past as local memory. No longer was it thought appropriate to commemorate random fires, the Old Horsemarket, the Old Quarantine, the Pasha's Baths or the Old Telegraph Station. Emperors, notable officials and elevated political values would be written over the plane trees, the bath-towel makers and the religious benefactors of the past who had made the city their own. These names were stamped with the authority of the new municipal bodies and conformed to European norms. Ironically, although they were more transparent than those they replaced, they proved far less durable. In the twentieth century, wars, revolutions and sudden changes of regime led names to be discarded and replaced with ever-increasing frequency. The civil servants and bureaucrats were kept busy, but the city's inhabitants were left little if any better off than they had been before.

[AliBabaIncorporated]

That's a bit extreme. It's like saying that governments shouldn't spend money on teaching science in schools because that could offend religious people who think the science is wrong.
Science itself is not an ideology. It doesn't try to assert that some atavistic way of ordering society is the "most proper". Individual scientists may try to make such assertions, but that's something else. This is completely different from Confucianism, with its explicit hierarchies and reams of moral tales teaching values which are completely inappropriate to a modern society ...

[SunWuKong]

come to think of it, i don't know why they decided to put a statue of Confucius there. i'm suspecting because it is the most prominent symbol of Chinese people in the Western mind. but that makes NYC have exactly one more statue of Confucius than probably most Chinese or Chinese-majority cities in Asia. maybe it was done to attract tourism, but now it's just a hangout spot for pigeons and old Chinese people.

[Yeahman]

So I was at a state courthouse the other day and to my shock I saw not only the 10 Commandments but every conceivable Judeo-Christian symbol!
It was a ceiling painting of Western political history from the Greeks onward. There was the pope and the Vatican seal, a cross, a Chi-Rho, and Martin Luther. The SCOTUS has said that these types of displays are constitutional and it's hard to imagine that any court would interpret the 1st Amendment to ban historical montages. What do you think?

[Faithless]

Is there something recent about the Confucius statue that warrant its placement in current events? Or is this more of a rant?

I'm looking at this link (http://twi-ny.com/twiny.02.01.06.html) and it says "Liu Shih’s fifteen-foot-tall statue of the Chinese philosopher, teacher, government official, ethicist, and leader known as Confucius (551-479 BC) was presented to New York by the Consolidated Benevolent Association in 1976 in honor of America’s bicentennial."

Who paid for it? And is it on government property?

[Yeahman]

Move it to rant.

It was paid for privately but placed on government property.

[Faithless]

I'm still trying to get the agency to respond to that.

Maybe people just minimize the religious aspect because it doesn't seem to be significant to them. Whereas, the ever present Christianity just seems to naturally attract the scrutiny.