1.1 Traditional Philosophies, Ideals and Values in...
Confucianism and Taoism have been two fundamental native philosophies in Chinese culture.Confucianism advocates that maintenance of harmonious interpersonal relationships is the result of abiding by a strict social hierarchy.For example, the boundary should be clear between the father and the son, the king and the officials.“Ren (benevolence),”“Yi (righteousness),”“Li(rites)”are three spokes of the wheel of equilibrium (Zhong),which is the foundation of harmony.According to D.C.Chen (1987),G.M.Chen and Chung (1994), Ren refers to showing love and affection to one’s counterparts in social interaction.Yi is the internal criterion of appropriateness in displaying one’s love and affection.In addition, Yi guides individuals’ behaviors by stipulating what one ought and ought not to do in the process of interactions to prevent them from deviating from social norms.Li is the fundamental regulatory etiquette of human behaviors and refers to propriety and respect for social norms (Yum, 1988).
The doctrine of Taoism is that all people are integral parts of nature (Tian Ren He Yi) (Yang, 1989).Tao is the pivot of the universe and is surrounded by the harmonious natural equilibrium made up of the systems of interaction of all individual entities(Fang, 1980).According to Chu (1974), Zhong (equilibrium) refers to the lack of bias towards either side and refers to the correct course to be pursued by all under heaven.The Doctrine of the Mean is embedded in both Confucian and Taoist thought (W.H.Zeng, 1989), and indicates that equilibrium and harmony are two sides of the same coin (G.M.Chen, 2002).The axis of the wheel of equilibrium and harmony is Chen (a sincere and honest mind).G.M.Chen states that this wheel “has been running in Chinese society for over two thousand years and continues to influence Chinese behavior in the contemporary age”(p.7).
When harmony and equilibrium is disturbed, conflict arises.This marks the corruption of the ideal state in the Chinese paradigm.The Chinese tend to keep harmonious relationships with other people.However, G.M.Chen (2002) notes, it is a mistake to think that conflict in Chinese society is rare.He states that the Chinese just deal with conflict differently from the westerners in that they are more “nonconfrontational, avoiding, obliging,integrating, and authoritarian in the process of conflict resolution”(p.14).The thirty six stratagems used for compliance gaining in Chinese conflict resolution have been conceptualized by G.M Chen (1995) as eight categories: delusion, referring to the method used to confuse opponents; borrowing, referring to the use of others’ strength to achieve one’s goal; misleading;threatening; retreating, referring to escape; termination,referring to cutting away all possible resources to prevent opponents from reviving their strength; espionage; and agitating.Other researchers also identified strategies that Chinese use in conflict resolution (G.M Chen & Zhong, 2000; Chiao, 1988; C.N Chu, 1991, Kao, 1976; Senger, 1988; S.C.Wang, 1990; J.P.Yu & Yu,1995).
Is Chinese mediation a reflection of traditional values? I will review three events in contemporary Chinese history, which greatly diverted the progressive trajectory of Chinese traditional values towards their adaptation to the modern time.The first of these events occurred on May 4th, 1919.After the World War I,Chinese government signed a treaty to let Japan rule Shandong province.This treaty ignited the anger of Chinese people,especially intellectuals, businessmen and workers.A protest was initiated by college students, aiming to overturn what they perceived to be cowardly actions by the government.This event had great impact on the feudalist culture at that time.Confucian and Taoist values that the government relied on were criticized for exploiting and suppressing the population.Revolutionary youth movements held up the flags with the terms “science”and“democracy,”and proposed replacing “the old morals”with “the new morals,”and “the old culture”with “the new culture.”Westernization was advocated.Marxism was introduced and adopted by some people during this event.
The second event of interest is the founding of People’s Republic of China in 1949.With the slogan of “overthrowing the three big mountains”, the Communist Party decided to remove the influence of the Confucianism and Taoism as feudalist outdated values.“Today mainland Chinese faithfully follow the admonition of Mao Tse-Tung that ‘dispute among the people’ (as distinguished from enemies of the people) ought to be resolved, whenever possible by, ‘democratic methods, methods of discussion, of criticism, of persuasion and education, not by coercive,oppressive methods’”(Cohen 1966 cites Mao, 1957).
The third event from Modern Chinese history is the “Cultural Revolution”which occurred between 1966 and 1976.The national movement of “destroying the four ‘olds’”almost uprooted Confucianism as one of the “four olds.”Anything related to Confucius was smashed, burnt or otherwise destroyed.Confucian scholars were beaten and publicly humiliated.After the Cultural Revolution, the “gang of four”(Qing Jiang, Chunqiao Zhang,Wenyuan Yao and Hongwen Wang) was overthrown, but Confucianism lost its original status in the spiritual and moral sphere.(https://www.daowen.com)
These three events in contemporary Chinese history had a detrimental impact on the place of traditional values and ideals in everyday life.After Deng Xiaoping’s opening and reforming policy was implemented, the western concept of law-governed society has replaced the concept of people-governed society.A movement to educate the population in the concepts of law was carried out on a national level.
When the Republican regime was established, the Communist government was highly critical of the Confucius social practices on the grounds that they lacked modern law and legal institutions.Since then, there has been a growing interest in law in the post-cultural revolution period in the People’s Republic of China(Diamant, 2000).
Today, the government proposes to “establish a socialist harmonious society,”and some elites have advocated re-establishing the important position of the doctrines of the Confucius and Meng Tze (the predecessor of the Confucius).However, restoring the damaged traditions and values requires many years of efforts, and is not an instantaneous event.Therefore, two questions arise in my study of Chinese mediation.The first one is: Do today’s mainland Chinese people still value Confucius and Taoist thought in mediation as some scholars have claimed even after three major national historical events have attempted to eliminate Confucius and Taoist traditions, do modern mainland Chinese people still value these traditional notions in mediation? The second question is: Given that there has been greater effort by the government to have conflict settled by rule of law over traditional mediation, do modern mainland Chinese people prefer the traditional mediation route?
In order to answer these questions, a review of the history of Chinese mediation is necessary.According to Wall and Blum (1991) and G.Li (2004) Chinese mediation can be traced back to Confucius time (551-479 B.C.).Pei (1999) even states that Chinese mediation was recorded in folklores that can be traced back to 4000 years ago.Chinese mediation is a product of Confucius’ thought.Confucianism highly valued compromise and persuasion as well as the intermediary who were able to secure them (Cohen 1966 cites Wall & Blum,1991).In Confucius’ Analects, the famous book on Confucius thought, it is recorded that Confucius states, “Although I listen to cases as other judges do, I must make my best effort to instruct people to live without litigation.”(子曰: “听讼, 吾犹人也, 必也使无讼乎!) According to Pei (1999), under Confucius ideology, “the prevailing glory of the people was having no lawsuit in their area because that showed they had good ethical relationship in their community”(p.34-35).During the Song Dynasty (960 – 1279 CE),some families gave advice to interfamily disputants (Shiba, 1970).“Rulers during the Ming dynasty (1368 – 1644 CE) actively encouraged village leaders and elders (li-lao) to solve petty disputes within and between families”(Wall & Blum, 1991, p.4).In reality, “very few disputes went beyond the village”(Wall &Blum, p.5).According to Cohen (1966) and Van Der Sprenkel (1962),this is due to the prevailing social and economic structure of the Chinese society.Most Chinese people at that time were farmers and lived in remote areas that were far from the magistrate’s office.Therefore, it was neither convenient nor affordable for them to travel to the magistrate’s office to bring forth a trial.Importantly, the magistrate was usually incapable in trying the cases due to his lack of knowledge of local customs and dialects(Chang 1955; Cohen 1966).Magistrates often tortures disputants in order to obtain evidence (Ch’u 1961).In the Ming dynasty(1368-1644), village leaders and elders were often responsible for
resolving disputes among families.Emperors and their administrators support this approach (Chesneaux, Bastid &Bergere, 1976).Records from 1800’s reveal that many local groups served as mediators.Specifically, the ruling gentry (landowners)acted as arbitrators and mediators for civil disputes (Wall 1993 cites Yang, 1969; Chesneaux, Bastid & Bergere, 1976).During the 19th century, the major conflict resolution method was informal and unofficial, and disputes were often resolved within families,clans and villages without resorting to more senior officials (Wall& Blum, 1991).