Lines and Circles, West and East

NOTHING IN THE WORLD IS ABSOLUTE. Everything is relative, cultural difference being no exception. Culture, as the total pattern of human behavior and its products, oversteps geographical limits and historical conditions in many ways, and it is characterized by its strong penetrativeness and fusibility.

The advancement of the globalized economy and the rapidity and ease of modern communication, transportation, and mass media have resulted in an ever increasing exchange between cultures, unprecedented in scale, scope, and speed. Consequently, an increase in universality and a reduction in difference between cultures is an inevitable trend. It is no surprise to see phenomena characteristic of one culture existing in another. As a result, some people even fear that the world will become a dull place when all the different nationalities behave exactly alike.

Nevertheless, the “cultural sediment” formed through long-range accumulation is not to be easily removed, and the cultural tradition handed down from generation to generation shows great consistency and continuity. The cultures of different regions and nations still have their own distinctive peculiarities, and therefore significance still needs to be attached to the study of the individualities of different cultures against the background of their universality.

By and large, linearity and circularity can be used to indicate the major difference between Western and Chinese cultures. “Western culture” here is a general term, putting aside its interior regional diversities in order to contrast it with Chinese culture. A circle is a round enclosure. A line is a narrow continuous mark. The contrast between the linearity of Western culture and the circularity of Chinese culture embodies itself in such aspects as worldview, core value, outlook on time, and mode of thinking.

Worldview: Linear Division and Circular Enclosure
A line divides an area while a circle encloses one. As far as worldviews are concerned, Western linearity is displayed in the general belief that the Universe is divided into two opposites with a clear-cut demarcation line drawn between the two: man and nature, subject and object, mind and matter, the divine and the secular. Chinese circularity manifests itself in the prevailing viewpoint of combining the two opposites and enclosing them. Although opposites are acknowledged in both cultures, Western culture emphasizes their coexistence and opposition, whereas Chinese culture stresses their interdependence and integration.

The linear nature of the Western worldview can be traced back to such ancient Greek philosophers as Thales, Heracleitus, Plato, and Aristotle. They all advocate dividing the world into two opposing parts: element and soul, reality and reason, matter and form. Their theories laid the foundation for the further development of the one-dividing-into-two view adopted by Western culture. Archimedes said more than two thousand years ago, “Give me but one firm spot on which to stand, and I will move the earth.” A proverb says, “Nature is conquered by obeying her.” Conquering or obeying, human beings in the West consider Nature as their opposite.

Christianity holds that God creates human beings and human beings sin against God. Throughout the Bible the theme of the redemption of mankind is developed. There exists a clear division between God and humanity. Later hypotheses like those of Descartes and Hegel consolidated the theoretical basis though they introduced different notions, such as matter and mind and real object and absolute spirit. The dividing worldview is the starting point of Western culture’s exploring and transforming Nature and explains the rapid development of science and technology in the West.

The circular Chinese worldview originates from the notion of Tao in the proposition “Tao consists of Yin and Yang” in the Book of Changes (about 600 BC). Lao-tzu, who lived about 500 years before Christ, further enunciated the concept of Tao in chapter 42 of his Tao Te Ching: “Tao gave birth to the One; the One gave birth successively to two things, three things, up to ten thousand. These ten thousand creatures cannot turn their backs to the shade (Yin) without having the sun (Yang) on their bellies, and it is on this blending of the breaths (both Yin and Yang) that their harmony depends” (Arthur Maley’s translation). It is obviously the One, the blending, and the harmony that are emphasized in the explanation of Tao.

Two centuries after Lao-tzu, Chuang-tzu (369 –286 BC) used orderly philosophic discussion rather than poetic intuition to clarify the concept of Tao. He believed in “the One reality which is all men, gods, and things: complete, all-embracing, and the whole; it is an all-embracing unity from which nothing can be separated” (Gardener Murphy’s translation). When it comes to the relationship between humanity and Nature, he proposes that “the perfect man has no self because he has transcended the finite and identified himself with the universe.” Thus the concept that human beings are part of Nature is rooted in the minds of the Chinese people. Dong Zhongshu (179 –104 BC), a philosopher of the West Han dynasty, again developed the Oneness worldview. He assumed that “the energy of heaven and earth is a unified one. It consists of Yin and Yang and manifests itself in four seasons and five elements.”

A number of Chinese expressions mirror the idea of identifying human beings with Nature rather than separating them. Here are some examples:

Nature affects human affairs and human behavior finds response in Nature (Tian ren ganying).
The law of Nature and the feelings of humanity are in unison (Tian li ren qing).
Nature accords with human wishes (Tian cong ren yuan).
Nature is angry and people are resentful (Tian nu ren yuan).
Nature’s will brings about human affinity (Tian yi ren yuan).
Nature and humankind turn to one. (Tian yu ren gui).

The Chinese character “tian” is translated as “Nature” in the above expressions, although “tian” carries a wider sense than the English word. “Tian” (Nature) and “ren” (human) always react to and comply with each other. They can never be separated. The Oneness worldview also finds expression in Chinese poems:

Flowers smile on the happy occasion.
Birds sing with the joyful congregation.
(Wang Wei)

Trees sway in a mournful gale.
Waves surge like hill and dale.
(Cao Zhi)

Catkins scattered by wind, my motherland is being disintegrated.
Rain striking duckweed, I sink against the tide, broken-hearted.
(Wen Tianxiang)

As the above lines show, things in Nature like flowers, birds, trees, waves, wind, and rain all respond to such human feelings as happiness, sadness, anger, and sorrow. Humanity and Nature blend into a harmonious identity.

Core Value: Linear Individuality and Circular Integrity
A line is a point moving continuously onward, whereas a circle is a centripetal ring. In terms of core value, Western linearity is embodied in the priority given to developing individual potentialities, realizing individual objectives, and seeking individual interests; Chinese circularity is embodied in the importance attached to harmonizing community relationships, actualizing community objectives, and safeguarding community interests.

For most Westerners, individualism is undoubtedly a positive core value. In fact, the social systems of various Western nations, and especially the United States, are based on “rugged individualism,” as described by Herbert Hoover in 1928. The pursuit of individual rights and interests is considered utterly legitimate. Self-actualization and the maximal realization of individual potential are supreme aims in life. It is fully justified for individuals to protect their private interests when they are in conflict with those of the community or the state. Weight is given to the individual rather than to the community, as Margaret Thatcher said in a speech in 1987: “There is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women.” Westerners prefer to discipline themselves rather than be disciplined by others. They take pride in their independence and their right to make their own decisions. They go their own way, not caring much about what others might think about their doings.

In Western culture, an individual is like an independent point, moving forward continuously in a self-chosen direction, forming a line of self-fulfillment. If different people’s lines run parallel, they will each smoothly attain their own aims in life. As one American professor put it: “You are selfish and I am selfish, but you don’t stand in my way and I don’t stand in your way. We are both selfish, and we are both happy.”

However, if two lines intersect, the stronger line must cut off the other one in order to keep moving on itself, thus conforming to the law of the survival of the fittest. Guided by linear competition-oriented value, everyone seeks independence and self-reliance, and everyone feels insecure and makes unremitting efforts. The linear road of an individual’s life is made and extended by the individual’s own feet, and success is achieved through individual effort.

Chinese culture, on the other hand, takes circular integrity as the basis of its value. An individual is incorporated into the integrity of the whole. The center of the circle represents the community’s interests and serves as the common objective of all its individual members. The individual exists in the community and finds the meaning of his existence through it. An individual in isolation has no meaningful existence.

More than two thousand years ago, Confucius advocated that “a public spirit should rule everything under the sun and a gentleman should put others’ interests above his own.” An ancient Chinese would consider it the primary aim in life “to cultivate his own moral character, put family affairs in order, administer state affairs well, and pacify the whole world.” It is evident that the interests of the small circle (family), the intermediate circle (state), and the large circle (world) come above one’s own, and one has to cultivate one’s own moral character and to exert oneself in order to achieve the goal of serving the community’s interests. A couplet from a Ming dynasty academy of classical learning says, “The sounds of wind, rain, and reading each come into my ears; the affairs of family, state, and world are all kept in my mind.” Fan Zhongyan, a Song dynasty poet, expressed his desire “to show concern over state affairs before others and enjoy comforts after them.”

It has been a widely accepted motto that “everyone has a share of responsibility for the fate of his country.” In present-day China, prioritizing community interests remains the mainstream value, in spite of the importation of different values from other cultures. Jean Brick, as an outsider who has come inside for some time, has observed the circular group-oriented Chinese value with keen cross-cultural awareness. She says in her book China, “Private interests are vested in the group, that is in the family or in the community, and not in the individual. True self-fulfillment for the individual lies in fulfilling social responsibilities to the greatest extent possible. In fact, the establishment of harmonious social relations is seen as an absolute necessity, without which any development is impossible.”