Harmony and Ren : A Response to L eung Yat-hung’s Critique of The Confucian Philosophy of Harmony

Chenyang Li responds to Yat-hung Leung by pointing out Leung draws on three distinct notions of benevolence, or ren, none of which on its own is a serious contender against harmony as the concept of central importance to Confucian philosophy. Ren cannot be all three of these at once, and no particular conception of ren in fact has all these qualities. Li further clarifies that it is not his aim to establish that harmony is of exclusively highest importance among Confucian concepts and values, but rather merely to restore its place among the various central Confucian values. He elaborates on the essential role harmony plays when one properly values the virtue of benevolence, which itself requires or implies harmony, specifically harmonious coordination, in its practice and realization. Finally, Li argues that we cannot see the Confucian conceptions of benevolence Leung champions as possessing more practical value for contemporary life than the Confucian conception of harmony, and identifies the fundamental grounds and motivation of Leung’s criticisms to lie in allegiance to Song-Ming neo-Confucian orthodoxy, which grounds itself in philosophically empty postulates.