Weighing the Way: Metaphoric Balance in Analects 9:30

Dr. John Berthrong
Boston University School of Theology

The essay is an attempt to apply two different Western hermeneutic tools to the exegesis of Analects 9:30. The two hermeneutic methodologies are (1) the new metaphoric philosophy of George Lakoff and Mark Johnson and (2) the renewed casuistry described by Albert Jonsen and Stephen Toulmin. My thesis is that these two forms of contemporary Western philosophic hermeneutics can illumine the debate on how to understand Kongzi's statement about the role of quan in moral reasoning. Analects 9:30 is an important passage for Ruist moral philosophy because of Kongzi's use of the term quan. The root metaphor for quan is that of balance; by extension or analogy it is taken to mean assessment, weighing, and the discernment of the right course of action for difficult moral situations. Along with fascination with what Kongzi might have meant by quan, the term is often used to expand the range of Ruist moral philosophy into what can only be called Ruist casuistry. Because if its metaphoric root, Analects 9:30 is a perfect target for the hermeneutic application of modern metaphor philosophy and revived casuistry.

The scope of the application of the two Western methodologies will be further circumscribed by reading the original passage in Analects 9:30 in terms of Zhu Xi's daoxue commentaries. Not only Kongzi's original passage but also Zhu Xi's explanations make extensive use of metaphors. I will argue that a great deal can be said about the philosophic import of these metaphoric prototypes via the Lakoff and Johnson model of philosophy as metaphoric discourse. Furthermore, the use of metaphoric philosophy neatly links with a renewed interest in the medieval and early modern art of casuistry. In fact, attention to the role of metaphors as fundamental to the conceptualization of philosophy and casuistry has a great deal to recommend these two hermeneutic methodologies in an increasingly pluralistic philosophic world.