Self-Cultivation as the Basis of Person Making: A Confucian Perspective Illustrated by a Case Study of Zeng Guofan

Abstract

As a model of self-cultivation in accordance with the Confucian theory of Xinxing-Gongfu (心性-功夫论), Zeng Guofan (1811–1872), a well-renowned Confucian scholar and successful minister of the Qing Dynasty (1636–1912) in China, is a prime exemplar of ‘self-cultivation as the basis of person-making’ (修身为本). Considerable historical data proves he consciously strove to perfect himself in a systemic way. By examining his Diaries, Family Letters, and Reading Records, this study identifies that he had three interrelated practices of self-cultivation: (a) The establishment of the moral self. With the proposition that ‘if you are not a sage, you are a beast’, Zeng advocated improving one’s character through self-reflection, self-blame, self-discipline and self-encouragement. (b) Individual moral practice and the learning of moral knowledge. Zeng believed that one could strengthen one’s moral cultivation by keeping a diary, meditating, reading Confucian classics, extracting and reciting famous quotes from former sages, writing essays and practicing calligraphy. (c) The construction of family and cultural community. Zeng’s experience provides illustration that cultural communities can be constructed through the process of a father delivering life experiences to his children, friends and colleagues, and that self-criticism can be used in the service of self-enhancement in Confucian psychology.

Keywords

Confucian psychology Zeng Guofan self-cultivation self-improvement self-criticism

Introduction

Cultural differences between the East and the West, and their effects on cultural psychology and national character, are important issues. Comparison between Eastern and Western methods of constructing ‘the good self’ was proposed by Shinobu Kitayama (1997) from cultural and social psychology, arguing that Western cultures, represented by the USA, place more emphasis on self-esteem and self-enhancement, whereas East Asian cultures, represented by Japan, emphasise more on the view of face and self-criticism, tending to construct the self in a socially interdependent manner. In the field of philosophy, comparative philosopher Roger T. Ames considers Western philosophy a systematic philosophy with logocentrism as its core and knowledge and metaphysics as its main content, while Chinese philosophy is a non-dualistic, disembodied (transcendental, essential), relational and generative process philosophy. Thus, unlike Western ethics, which is based on a set of prior, abstract principles, values and virtues, Confucian role ethics is ‘contextual-pragmatic’ behaviour fostered in the context of concrete roles, relationships and situations (Ames, 2011, pp. 13–18, 76, 121–122, 180; Hu & Ding, 2006, pp. 112–119).

The above two approaches, reflecting contemporary scholars’ understanding of the socio-cultural peculiarity of East Asian culture, also bring out one question: Can the Confucian idea of self be realised only in interconnected social relationships? Confucian scholars themselves may disagree. Mencius (372–289 bce), known as the ‘Second Sage’ and one of the most important thinkers of Confucianism, who pioneered the five core relationships of Confucian ethics (Zhu, 1983, p. 259),¹ proposed a famous proposition: If a child is about to fall into a well, there is no doubt anyone would be horrified and sympathetic. It is ‘human-heartedness’ (ren 仁), a moral instinct that drives people to feel in this way, rather than instrumental desires like wanting to be a friend with the child’s parents, gaining social fame or hating the sound of a child crying. Another famous Confucian thinker, Zhu Xi (1130–1200) in Song Dynasty (960–1279), also agreed Mencius’ view of ‘a man without “human-heartedness” (ren) could not be called a human’. In his Neo-Confucian theory, the nature of human beings is ‘human-heartedness’ (ren), and every human being has an innate goodness (Zhu, 1983, p. 367). Although Confucian scholars value community and the ethical relationships that result from it, they assert more emphasis on the universal, intrinsic, absolute and non-utilitarian ‘human-heartedness’ (ren) that precedes and transcends all real ethical relationships. One can realise the development of self on the ontological basis of ‘human-heartedness’ (ren) without this being predicated on specific ethical relationships. It is in this sense that the theories of Shinobu Kitayama and Roger T. Ames might not fully represent the essence of Confucian tradition and East Asian culture—a humanist tradition focused on an ontology of ‘human-heartedness’ (ren) (Chan, 1969, pp. 14–17).

This article is targeted at developing an indigenous psychology on the basis of Confucian self-development theory. By reviewing the relevant views of early Confucian scholars and the further development of these views by Song Dynasty Neo-Confucianism, it attempts to construct a theoretical model of self-development that can fully embody Confucianism to distinguish it from the theories of Shinobu Kitayama and Roger T. Ames. Taking the experience of Zeng Guofan’s self-cultivation as a prototypical example, how Confucian self-development is described in theory and implemented in practice is illustrated. It concludes by highlighting the features, limitations and implications of Confucian self-development theory through dialogue with other indigenous psychologies as well as mainstream psychology.

Theories from Confucianism

‘Self’, philosophically speaking, is a free moral subject from which the norms of the world derive, and self-cultivation can be realised through learning (Huang, 2017, pp. 107–110). The practical postulates of Confucian psychology proposed by James H. Liu (2017), following in the philosophical footsteps of Kant, suggest that self-cultivation could be based on three basic premises: yin-yang cosmology, human-heartedness and relational ethics (pp. 137–149). We seek to use this theory as the basis to further the theory of Confucian self-cultivation.

Human-Heartedness (ren) and Moral Self

It was Confucius (551–479 bc) who first established the Confucian thought system with human-heartedness (ren) as its core idea. Although human-heartedness (ren) was already a recognised virtue before Confucius’ time, it was he who first ‘established ren as the highest principle of morality’ (Zhang, 1989, pp. 157–58). ‘Loving people’ (airen 爱人), presented in Chapter 22 of The Analects, is regarded as an essential description of human-heartedness (ren). The great Song Dynasty Confucian master Zhu Xi (Zhu, 1983, p. 139) defines ‘ren’ in two directions: ‘ren’, as the superior virtue, is the inner basis of ‘love’, and ‘love’ as emotion and behaviour is the manifestation of ‘ren’; the second point is that ‘loving people’ is the extension of ‘ren’ in real human relationships. The practice of “ren” merely requires consciousness of the moral subject, and this is why Confucius emphasises: ‘The realization of ren needs only the effort by oneself (without any other conditions from outside)’ (weirenyouji 为仁由己) (Zhu, 1983, p. 131). These illustrations are even reflected in the formation of the Chinese character ‘仁’. According to etymology, the character ‘仁’ is composed of ‘human’ (人)and ‘two’(二), suggesting a relationship between the self and others. In a bamboo sketch from the Guodian Chumu (郭店桚墓) unearthed in 1993, scholars found that more than 70 characters for ‘ren’ in early Confucian texts were written as ‘’ (身,the body; 心,the mind), meaning ‘the unity of body and mind’. As one knows how to love oneself, one knows how to love others (Wang, 2006, pp. 5–14). In this context, the whole self can be realised through cultivation. Confucius also suggested that ‘human-heartedness’ (ren) could be achieved by always following the requirements of ‘propriety’ (li礼) (Zhu, 1983, p. 131), and accordingly, ‘propriety’ includes two dimensions: one is the cultivation of one’s body, appearance and behaviour, and the other is the principle of interpersonal relationships, where self-development takes place within a social order, governed by regulative norms and rituals.

Confucius’ closest students also articulated the concepts of ‘conscientiousness’ (zhon 忠) and ‘altruism’ (shu 恕) to explain what Confucius meant by ‘human-heartedness’ (ren) (Zhu, 1983, p. 72). ‘Conscientiousness’ (zhong) means to fully respect, follow and manifest one’s own ‘human-heartedness’ (ren), while ‘altruism’ (shu) means to treat other people by following one’s own ‘human-heartedness’ (ren) (Gu, 2011, p. 305), and ‘forgiveness’ (kuanshu 宽恕) is one of many derivatives of ‘altruism’. Confucian concepts of ‘human-heartedness’, ‘propriety’, ‘conscientiousness’ and ‘altruism’ all reflect moral philosophy.

As mentioned earlier, Mencius, is the main successor to Confucius as a theorist, who regarded ‘human-heartedness’ as human nature. His main opponent in the debate, Gaozi (告子), opposed this view, pointing out that human nature is the instinct of survival and reproduction. Targeting this point, Mencius argued eloquently that cows and horses have the innate instincts of survival and reproduction, so can we say that human nature is the same as the nature of animals (Zhu, 1983, p. 326)? This is precisely one of the core propositions of Confucian moral philosophy: ‘What is the difference between man and beast?’ There is no difference between human being and animal in terms of the instinct to survive and reproduce, and it is only ‘human-heartedness’ (ren) that makes a human being human, and ‘human-heartedness’ (ren) can only be the universal moral attribute given by Heaven and inherent in human beings. Therefore, the nature of human beings can only be moral, not biological. The ‘gentleman’ whom Confucianism especially praises is one who is aware of this and takes effective measures to preserve and develop his moral attributes (Zhu, 1983, pp. 293–294). Based on this universal and intrinsic ‘human-heartedness’ (ren), everyone can become a gentleman² theoretically. Properly fulfilling one’s ethical obligations and realising good interpersonal relationships are the key to achieve the character of a gentleman. But a better understanding of the moral nature of the self in the state of unity of mind and body, and acting in accordance with its provisions, is a prerequisite for fulfilling ethical obligations (Zhu, 1983, p. 284). The development of the self is also a process of understanding the true nature of the self, which leads to the understanding of the supreme goodness of human nature and the Heaven that gives it meaning (Zhu, 1983, p. 349).

Yin-Yang and the Real Self

Early Confucian scholars argued that each person possesses an innate moral self, yet the problem is there has always been actual evil in human society and history. How does purely good human nature give birth to evil? This is the core issue of Neo-Confucianism in the Song Dynasty. As a master of Song dynasty Neo-Confucianism, Zhu Xi (1130–1200) further perfected the Confucian theory of ‘self’. He pointed out that there are two parts associated with the ‘self’. One is called ‘Decree of Heaven’ (tianming 椩命), a term from the Confucian text, The Doctrine of the Mean (an early Confucian work of more than 2,000 years, referring to the pure goodness of the ‘Principle of Heaven’ (tianli 椩理) as the essence of the whole universe and all things. Through this, humans are endowed with heavenly reason and thus have the endowment to be good. The concepts of ‘Decree of Heaven’ (tianming), ‘Principle of Heaven’ (tianli), ‘physical nature (tianming zhixing 椩命之性)’ and ‘human-heartedness (ren)’ are in fact simply references to the same ontology from different perspectives (Li, 1994, pp. 82–83). The other part of the Confucian self is called ‘original nature’ (Gazi 气质之性). ‘Material force’ (qi 气), similar to Aristotle’s ‘prime cause’, is the most basic element of the material universe, and it moves in accordance with the provisions of the ‘Principle of Heaven’ (tianli) which constitutes humanity and all things. There are two types of ‘qi’: One is ‘yangqin’ (阳气), which is clear, pure, neutral and fluid. The other is ‘yinqi’(阴气), which is dull, impure, deviant and congested. The ‘original nature’ of human being is the concrete virtue resulting from the interplay of ‘nature’, ‘yin’ and ‘yang’ (Li, 1994, p. 64, 67). For all people, there is no difference in ‘nature’, but the proportion of ‘yin’ and ‘yang’ varies, which suggests that each person’s endowment is different. If there is more ‘yangqi’, the ‘nature’ will be more easily expressed, and this is what a sage and a good man is born with; if there is a lot of ‘yinqi’, the ‘nature’ will be covered up, and this is what makes an average person or an evil person. It is at the level of the ‘original nature’ that good and evil arises, and this mixed state of good and evil is the reality of human existence or ‘real self’.

In Zhu Xi’s view, the development of the self is a process of improving one’s ‘nature’ and returning to pure moral existence through ‘cultivation of the body’ (see Li, 1994, pp. 65–66, 69). Zhu proposed a universal system of self-cultivation, which structurally consists of two interrelated aspects: ‘yueli’ (约礼) and ‘bowen’ (博文). ‘Yueli’ is the realisation of self-consciousness of one’s moral nature and the adoption of a highly reverent attitude to fully fulfil the requirements of one’s moral nature; ‘bowen’ is the study of the Confucian classics and knowledge of everything under the Heaven in order to gain a thorough understanding of heavenly principles and human nature (see Li, 1994, p. 569).

Theoretical Model of Confucian Self-Development

Based on the cosmological view of ‘the unity of Heaven and humanity’ (tianren he yi 椩人合一) and the position of moral philosophy, Confucius, Mencius and Zhuzi jointly completed the construction of a theory of Confucian self-development. This theoretical model has been described in The Doctrine of the Mean. We can put it into a diagram (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Source: This is a self-drawn figure based on the understanding of Confucian thoughts revealed in The Doctrine of the Mean.

Table 1.

The Three-tiered Structure of Confucian Self-cultivation Theory.

What Heaven imparts to man is called human nature (椩命之谓性).	Heaven bestows human-heartedness on humanity, and humanity with this endowment forms their ‘nature’ or ‘moral self’.
Following our nature is called the Way (率性之谓道).	The sage’s ‘real self’ and ‘moral self’ are identical; They presuppose ‘moral self-consciousness’ in the full sense, following one’s own ‘nature’, and all words and actions will be in accordance with the ‘Way of’.
Cultivating the Way is called education (修道之谓教) (Zhu, 1983, p. 17).	The ‘real self’ of ordinary people obscures the ‘moral self’ to a certain extent; Presupposing a partial ‘moral consciousness’, and always following the ‘Way of Heaven’ through the study and practice of moral knowledge, ordinary people can also return to the original ‘nature’ and eventually become one with the ‘Way of Heaven’.

Source: Zhu (1983, p. 17).

Note: The latter part is Zhu Xi’s further explanation of the three propositions.

The theory of ‘inner-transcendence’ raised by Liu Shuxian (1934–2016), one of the representatives of modern New Confucianism, can also be used to interpret this model: ‘Heaven is the transcendental yearning’ in Confucian tradition. The inner human’s ‘human-heartedness’ or ‘human nature’ endowed by the Heaven, is the ‘transcendental and inner Way’, and it is also the source of all moral and political life in the present world. If a person can exert their human-heartedness, they will be able to transcend the limitations of ‘material force’ (qi 气), ‘from the finite to the infinite’, and finally realise ‘the fusion of the individual with heaven and earth’ (S. H. Liu, 2020, pp. 173–190). This point of view also illustrates the consistency between early Confucianism, Song Dynasty Neo-Confucianism and modern New Confucianism.

It is true that the theories of Shinobu Kitayama and Roger T. Amesdo, to some extent, illustrate the importance Confucianism attaches to real life and ethical practice. But our model also shows that Confucian self-cultivation is by no means merely a secular-oriented, relationships-oriented theory. There are two main differences between these points of view:

The co-existence of self-criticism and self-promotion. When the ‘moral self’, heaven-endowed and purely good, is viewed from the perspective of the ‘real self’, which is a mixture of good and evil, this demands continuous self-criticism and self-improvement. This constitutes the inner motivation for self- development and also confirms the theory of Shinobu Kitayama. Moreover, the ‘moral self’ is inherent in the ‘real self’, and through ‘moral cultivation’, each person can present infinite dignity and creativity, and ultimately, one can attain a status of union to heaven and earth through the cultivation of the ‘moral self’ (Zhu, 1983, p. 32). In this sense, self-criticism and self-promotion co-exist within the ‘moral self’, and this is also a manifestation of the traditional Chinese thinking that yin and yang are complementary.

The interdependent relationship between relationalism and transcendence. Moral practice in interdependent human relationships is crucial to Confucian self-development theory. Self-development cannot be acquired without imitation of moral exemplars; moral feelings are traditionally thought to be acquired through the father-son relationship and brother relationships (Zheng & Kong, 1980, p. 1594). The achievements reached by moral cultivation also need to be verified in various human relationships and ritual practices (Y. P. Liu, 2020). This undoubtedly corroborates the views of Kitayama and Ames. Confucianism is not just a set of secular ethical relations. Confucian self-development theory is, in fact, established on the transcendent meaning of ‘human-heartedness’, ‘nature’ and the ‘moral self’. To understand the nature of self partly or completely, constitutes the premise and goal of moral practice: moral practice in the context of ethical relationships, together with the acquisition of moral knowledge, is the concrete method of self-development. Therefore, ‘moral self-consciousness’ occupies a more prominent theoretical position than ‘moral practice’, and the latter proceeds from the former.

The problem is how is this theory put into practice and applied by ordinary people? In the following section, we introduce a recognised Chinese moral icon named Zeng Guofan (1811–1872) for a further interpreting Confucian self-cultivation.

Qing Dynasty Moral Icon Zeng Guofan (曾国藩)

Life of Zeng

Zeng Guofan is a historical figure of the late Qing Dynasty, the last dynasty of the Chinese imperial era. Born in rural Hunan province, he passed the imperial examination at the age of 28 and became a member of the civil bureaucracy, rising rapidly within 10 years to become deputy minister of one of the six main departments in the central government. As a Confucian follower and an important figure in the dynasty’s civil bureaucracy, Zeng left behind various family letters and writings that are still regarded as classics, and his career was closely associated with fighting against the Taiping Rebellion (1851–1864), a peasant movement launched by Hong Xiuquan and Yang Xiuqing versus the Qing Dynasty and foreign capitalist aggression. It was initially successful, controlling a large section of territory in central China, and though suppressed finally, was one of the bloodiest civil wars in the 19th century.

It was during the mourning of his mother in his native Hunan province that Zeng received the order from the Emperor Xianfeng (1831–1861) that local officials should organise local forces to resist the Taiping Rebellion. In response, Zeng formed the ‘Xiang Army’ in Hunan and began their military training. He made use of the slogan ‘Fight for Culture, Fight for Religion’ (Xiao, 2001, p. 21), believing that the Taiping’s worship of God, Jesus and other foreign religions would have a devastating impact on Chinese traditional social order. In order to protect tradition, Zeng led the ‘Xiang Army’ to launch a campaign against the Taiping Rebellion. There were many failures and successes over more than 10 years. In the end, the ‘Xiang Army’ successfully took Nanjing, the capital of the Taiping territory, the rebellion was put down. The Qing Dynasty entered another time of prosperity and stability called ‘Tongzhi Zhongxing’ (同治仒煴) before its final collapse in 1911. Due to his contribution in fighting against the Taiping Rebellion, Zeng became the Governor of Jiangsu and one of the nine highest ranking local officials of the Qing Dynasty, reaching the peak of his career. He was praised as among ‘the most distinguished of the famous ministers of “Tongzhi Zhongxing” period’ (Zhao, 1977, pp. 11918) according to the famous historiography Draft of the History of the Qing Dynasty (Qingshi Gao [渄史稿]).

Zeng’s Historical Influence in Chinese Society

It is thought provoking how and why an ordinary intellectual could save the late Qing government and achieve such great success. Liang Qichao (1873–1929), one of the most renowned modern Chinese thinkers, gave an answer in 1916, when he compiled and published a book called Zeng Wenzheng Gong Jiayanchao [Words of Zeng]. He (1916) pointed out in the preface that ‘Zeng was not born a genius, his qualifications were even somewhat mediocre, and was always in the midst of hardship and adversity’. The secret to his achievements in moral cultivation, political merit and learning is that he was able to transcend worldly pursuits, establish high aspirations, thirst for knowledge and firmly practice the truth, thus demonstrating the virtues of ‘modesty, diligence, fortitude, constancy, sincerity and simplicity’ (p. 502). In other words, Zeng’s accomplishments were attributed to his moral cultivation, and he is therefore amoral icon worthy of emulation (Liang, 2018, p. 502).

Liang’s book had a tremendous impact on young students and intellectuals interested in changing the status of China in the early 20th century. In 1917, young Mao Zedong (1893–1976), the founder of the People’s Republic of China, wrote to his teacher the following: ‘People nowadays are always in danger of tipping over due to their ignorance of fundamental learning (referring to the study of self-cultivation). For modern people, I admire Zeng Guofan the most for his pulling down the Taiping Rebellion almost to the point of perfection’ (Editorial Group, 2008, p. 73). Interestingly, Mao’s rival, Jiang Zhongzheng (1887–1975), the later long-time leader of the Republic of China, likewise looked to Zeng as a model of self-cultivation. He transcribed the quotations of Zeng and adopted them as his own principles of moral conduct. He followed Zeng’s reflecting by way of a diary on how to deal with such negative feelings as being cranky, impatient, flamboyant, frivolous, greedy, stingy, angry, lascivious, tricky, narrow-minded, etc. (Yang, 2002).

Up to this day, Zeng Guofan remains to be one of China’s most valued moral icons, and the book market in China nowadays is flooded with biographies of him. Among them, a three-volume historical novel about Zeng, published in 1990, by Tang Haoming, was dramatically popular. More than 10,000,000 copies of the collection have been purchased, which is an indication of Zeng’s widespread influence among the Chinese public.

Revolutionaries and conservatives, the elites and ordinary people alike, all attribute Zeng’s extraordinary achievements to his character-driven self-cultivation. This suggests that a special socio-cultural psychology could arise from the influence of the Confucian tradition, more suited to the egalitarian ethos of the world today, where anyone can transcend personal identity, interpersonal relationships and life circumstances to develop their moral self (not just elites). In Confucian psychology, one path to development would be through the guidance and the study of moral exemplars. This is also what The Great Learning, one of the four Confucian classics, tells us: From the emperor to the common people, all should take self-cultivation as their foundation (Zhu, 1983, p. 4). In the following section, we will take Zeng Guofan’s experience as an example to illustrate how the Confucian theory of self-cultivation actually works.

Zeng’s Self-Cultivation Practice

Zeng Guofan was renowned as a practitioner of Zhu Xi’s self-cultivation theory. We may explore how Zeng achieve self-development based on the first-hand materials such as The Diary, The Family Letters, and The Book Report. The Diary is a record of Zeng’s daily reflections on study, political affairs, and how he treated people,³ and particularly, the diaries of 1841–1851, are a complete record of the whole process of his self-cultivation practice. The Family Letters is a compilation of his letters to his parents, elders, brothers and children,⁴ among which many letters of 1858–1859 show how he shares his experience of cultivation of character with his family. The Book Report records his study of Confucian classics and literary works,⁵ relating closely to moral knowledge. Based on these texts, we find that his practice of self-cultivation is consistent with the three-dimensional method mentioned previously (Figure 1).

The Awakening of the Moral Self

As indicated by the Confucian theoretical model of self-development, moral cultivation presupposes moral self-awareness. Zeng’s Diary is a picture vividly presenting us with the entire process of his moral self-awakening. He started keeping a diary the year (1839) after he was awarded first prize in the highest imperial examination, and it was only about daily trivia at the very beginning. One year later, on 22 April 1840, he realised the fact that he had nothing significant to record was due to being slothful, negligent and lazy in his everyday life. He recalled the experience of changing his name to ‘Disheng’ (涤生) in 1831, this name means to wash away the mingled elements of the old temperament in order to be reborn (Zeng, 2015a, p. 40). After this self-reproach and introspection, he gradually paid attention to the way of cultivating oneself. In his diary for 22 April 1840, he wrote that he learned more about the ways of self-cultivation and what to read from his teacher, the Neo-Confucian scholar Tang Jian (1778–1861). He described his feelings as if a child had been enlightened (Zeng, 2015a, p. 92). From then on, Zeng began to keep a day-by-day record of his study of Confucian scriptures and historical books. On 1 October of the following year, he met with Wo Ren, one of the most prominent ministers of the time and a scholar of Neo-Confucianism, who imparted to him his own experience of Confucianism and reminded him to cultivate himself by keeping ‘daily lessons’ (日课), a special kind of diary that recorded daily self-cultivation activities. Zeng accepted this advice, and for the next three months, he focused on recording his own understanding of Confucianism and self-reflection instead of recording the trivialities of life. On 2 October, for example, he argued that in meditation one must maintain one’s inner equanimity and the harmony of one’s breath as well as contemplate the ultimate moral realm that parallels heaven and earth and nurtures all things; if one allows one’s innate dullness (yinqi) to obscure one’s moral nature, the real self will never be improved (Zeng, 2015a, p. 113).

After a 10-year period of self-reflection and cultivation, Zeng finally realised a key to his approach to Confucian self-development. On 7 July 1851, he said that the fundamental difference between the sage and the common man is that the sage could know, admit and correct his faults immediately, while the common people were often unclear, manipulative and self-concealing. Two weeks later, he made a duilian (a traditional literary form with paired lines of verse written vertically down the sides of a doorway that are symmetrical and rhyme with each other) as his motto:

If you are not a sage, then you are a beast (不为圣贤，便为禽兽); Do not ask about the harvest, but ask about the plowing and weeding (不问收获，只问耕耘). (Zeng, 2015a, p. 238)

The first line is clearly a realisation of Mencius’ statement on the ‘distinction between man and beast’, that is, in the process of self-development. If one can realise the essential nature of the moral self, then one can take the path to holiness (Zeng, 2015a). If one cannot perceive this, one is bound to follow one’s own biological nature and thus be indistinguishable from an animal. In this context, vigilance against becoming a beast is undoubtedly a form of self-criticism, while wishing to become a sage represents self-promotion, and the two are closely intertwined. Taking the ploughing of a farmer as a metaphor of moral cultivation, Zeng claimed that the duty of a farmer is to cultivate the field, which is the category of ‘Decree of Heaven’, and the final harvest as a result of different climate and land condition belongs to the category of ‘Destiny’. The moral subject should adopt a similar attitude, that is, cultivate moral nature unceasingly on the basis of the ‘Decree of Heaven’ without considering what life circumstances will come. As for the problem of one’s social status, longevity and so on, they are determined by the circumstances of ‘Destiny’, and the motive or purpose of moral cultivation is not associated with it. This motto conveys a purely moral, non-utilitarian concept, suggesting a true awakening of the moral self.

Zeng’s diary is not only a record but also an effective way of promoting moral self-awakening. As mainstream psychology suggests, self-regulation is facilitated when a person autonomously chooses a particular topic for expressive writing (Pennebaker & Chung, 2007, pp. 267–268). On the premise of moral self-awakening, Zeng sees negative things, such as the individual’s desire for fame and fortune, hobbies like smoking and playing chess, conflicts in interpersonal relationships, and even negative emotions such as anxiety, anger and insomnia resulting from losing a war, as products of the real self’s lack of moral cultivation.

Cultivating the Moral Self through Daily Practice and Knowledge Learning

‘Daily lessons’, suggested by Wo Ren, is the way Zeng Guofan adopted to promote his moral cultivation. Similar to the Christian ‘liturgy of the hours’, ‘daily lessons’, consist of chanting, praying and singing hymns, similar to the devotions of Buddhist monks or Taoist priests. Around the Ming Dynasty, Confucian scholars incorporated the tradition of religious daily classes into the Confucian system of self-cultivation but, unlike religious daily classes, the Confucians do not emphasise consistency to the system but rather give the practitioner more autonomy due to the fact that each person’s ‘nature’ is different. Thus, the approach needed to transcend the limits of one’s ‘nature’ naturally differs. On 7 December 1842, Zeng Guofan made 12 ‘daily lessons’ for himself, including the ones mentioned in Table 2.

Table 2.

Contents and Interpretation of Zeng's Daily Lessons.

Seriousness (敬)	An all-round requirement for one’s body and mind, and a prerequisite for all other work; it means to keep one’s body neat and tidy, one’s mind reverent and attentive, as vibrant and lively as the rising sun.
Meditation (静坐)	Sitting in silence for an hour a day, for the purpose of pondering the principles of Confucianism, experiencing the existence of the moral self, and reflecting on the inadequacies of the real self.
Early rising (早起)	Getting up early in the morning and not craving comfort.
Intensive reading(读书不二)	Reading one book with great attention and dedication and never to read another book until it is finished; to read at least 10 pages a day.
History reading(读史)	Reading through all 23 official history books of the 2,000-year history of the Chinese Empire, at least 10 pages a day.
Careful speech(谨言)	Expressing his opinions after careful consideration, a common requirement for ministers at the time.
Nature (qi 气)nourishing(养气)	Removing one’s own selfish and evil yin qi and nurturing and expanding one’s clear and upright yang qi; similar to the careful wording, nurturing qi is also considered to be a form of cultivation consistent with one’s status as a minister.
Exercising (保身)	Don’t overwork, indulge in sexual desire or overeat, and cherish your body like a person who is ill.
Daily learning(日知所亡)	Copying at least two quotations from the sages every day and to appreciate the depth of their meaning.
Monthly summary(月无所忘)	Writing poetry and article every month to validate his moral achievements, but never indulge in literary creation that would obscure his moral pursuits.
Calligraphy (作字)	Practicing calligraphy for an hour after breakfast; even if it is a courtesy calligraphy, treat it as an exercise related to cultivation.
Avoid going out at night (夜不出门)	No more going out in the evening to socialise or hang out, so as not to delay homework or get tired (Zeng, 2015a, p. 137).^a

Source: Zeng (2015a, p.137).

Notes: ^aThe latter part is the commentary made by Zeng himself, and we have done further rewrites for a better understanding of the reader.

Many religious figures, scholars and political leaders have been known for their strict adherence to a daily schedule, such as Kant (1724–1804), Abraham Lincoln (1809–1865) and Gandhi (1896–1948). Zeng Guofan could certainly be included in this list. However, his ‘daily lessons’, being very Confucian, with no mandatory time requirements, are more concerned with the moral meaning behind the act. These complex ‘daily lessons’ can be summarised into two categories: The first is about individual moral practice, corresponding to moral practice or ‘yueli’ (约礼) in the Confucian model of self-development, which includes mediation, getting up early, careful wording, nature nourishing, exercising and not staying out at night. The second is about the study of moral knowledge or ‘bowen’ (博文), including reading the classics and history books, practicing calligraphy and creating literary works.

‘Seriousness’ (jing 敬), on the other hand, runs through both moral practice and knowledge learning and occupies a fundamental position in Confucian self-cultivation (Zeng, 2015a, p. 43). The core of ‘seriousness’ is to focus on the moral self and to maintain the unity between the mind as the master of the real self and the realisation of moral self (Li, 1994, p. 208). This is called the manifestation of moral consciousness. The specific content of ‘seriousness’ is extremely rich, including respecting the Decree of Heaven as the sages did, and focusing on the moral self-endowed by Heaven (Zhu, 1983, p. 38); reverently worshipping heaven and earth, mountains and rivers, spirits and ancestors (Zheng & Kong, 1980, p. 1285, 1409, 1442); respecting one’s parents, elders, friends and emperors and so on (Zhu, 1983, p. 56; Zheng & Kong, 1980, p. 1415). Due to its importance in the Confucian system, Zeng Guofan placed ‘seriousness’ as the first of his daily tasks.

The application of meditation appears extremely distinctive in the moral practice of the individual. Early Confucianism did not emphasise meditation, and Song Dynasty Neo-Confucianism regarded it as an important method of cultivation work most likely under the influence of Buddhist meditation (Wang, 2015, pp. 145–147). In contrast to Buddhist meditation, Confucian meditation focuses on understanding Confucian principles, examining the moral nature of the self and rethinking one’s own shortcomings. In the Northern Song Dynasty, the two brothers Cheng Hao (1032–1085) and Cheng Yi (1033–1107) taught people to sit in meditation (Zhu, 2002a, p. 216). Zhu Xi also said that after reading, one should sit in meditation; if one can sit in meditation for half a day and read for half a day, and persist for a year or two, one will definitely make great progress (Li, 1994, p. 2794, 2806). In his diary of 12 November 1841, Zeng recorded that he learned meditation from a doctor (2015, p. 109), and practiced it almost every day afterwards, even during the period when he commanded an army to fight the Taiping Rebellion.

The study of moral knowledge can not only help scholars to enhance their understanding of Confucianism but also to develop elegance in one’s manner. Confucianism regards the practice of calligraphy as one of the six oldest forms of self-cultivation (see Kao et al., 2021), called the ‘six arts’, namely, rituals, music, archery, charioteering, calligraphy and mathematics. It is said that before Confucius, the aristocrats used the ‘six arts’ to nurture their sons’ social etiquette, military prowess and life skills. And one of the earliest definitions of Ru (儒) was someone who was proficient in these six skills (Guo, 2013, p. 12). Buddhism, when introduced into China, promoted the belief that respectfully copying the classics would bring various benefits, such as promoting the Buddha’s teachings, praying for good fortune and recommending the deceased, etc., and at the same time, it was also the way to practice the ‘Six Paramitas’, which means giving, holding Buddhist precepts, enduring humiliation, meditating and being wise. From the six dynasties to the Tang Dynasty, before the widespread use of printing, copying the classics was extremely popular, as evidenced by the approximately 30,000 volumes of Dunhuang Sutras transmitted as a cultural legacy for today.

Influenced by these two traditions, the Northern Song Neo-Confucianist Cheng Hao reinforced the relationship between calligraphy and the cultivation of the body, suggesting that calligraphy was a concrete way to implement the cultivation of ‘seriousness’ and that artistic achievement was of secondary importance (Zhu, 2002a, p. 210). Zhu Xi also agreed on this, and he compared the calligraphy of two prime ministers of the Song Dynasty based on both artistic and moral perspectives: Wang Anshi’s (1021–1086) calligraphy was impatient and chaotic, while Han Qi’s (1008–1075) calligraphy was quiet and graceful. So, he claimed that calligraphy, though a trivial matter, was closely related to human virtue (Zhu, 2002b, p. 3957, see also Kao et al., 2021). Zeng inherited the Song Dynasty’s Neo-Confucian view of using calligraphy to test one’s attentiveness (‘seriousness’) and making use of calligraphy to cultivate inner peace and reverence (Zeng, 2015a, p. 148). Commenting on the 100 characters he wrote on 4 October 1842, he said that his strokes were scattered and jumbled because of being very restrained and urgent (Zeng, 2015a, p. 114). He was so intoxicated with the way of nourishing the mind with calligraphy that he even wrote more than 100 words of ancient texts on the night his wife gave birth to their daughter on 29 October 1844 (Zeng, 2015a, p. 208).

Zeng Guofan kept this ‘daily lessons’ for almost his entire life, only making excuses when life circumstances intervened. In 1851, he added another four issues, the handling of official business, teaching children, visiting or receiving visits from officials or literati and writing back to others to his normal ‘daily lesson’ of reading, meditation, literary creation and doing calligraphy (Zeng, 2015a, p. 231). In conclusion, the primary way of Zeng’s self-cultivation is developing moral practice and moral learning according to the ‘daily lesson’ and then recording day by day what he learned through engaging in self-criticism and also evaluating others.

Construction of Cultural Community and Neo-Confucian Family

According to the views of Confucius and Mencius cited in the second section, fulfilling one’s ethical obligations is also a key factor in the development of the self and the realisation of ‘human-heartedness’ (ren). And it is accepted that the thoughts, feelings and behaviours of people in East Asian societies are the product of relationships (Hwang, 1987). Confucianism advocates a relationship of master and apprentice and friendship with the goal of moral cultivation and knowledge enhancement, believing that the development of the self must be guided by a teacher or supported by a friend, otherwise one will be lonely, shallow and narrow-minded (Zheng & Kong, 1980, p. 1523). Zeng Guofan (2015b) was well versed in this tradition and also valued the help of his mentors and friends (p. 36). He divided his teachers, peers and friends into four categories: those who were concerned with moral practice such as Tang Jian, Wo Ren and Wu Tingdong; those with expertise in the Confucian classics such as Wu Zixu and Shao Huixi; those who could discuss poetry, articles and calligraphy with like He Shaoji; and those who were ambitious, talented and heroic, such as Tang Haiqiu and Huang Zishou. He emphasised the importance of making friends in order to make up for his own shortcomings, rather than to flaunt them for the sake of vanity (Zeng, 2015b, p. 42). In the early phase of his moral cultivation from 1841 to 1842, it was from teachers such as Tang Jian and Wo Ren that he learned the methods of moral cultivation, and he made a pact with his friend Feng Zhuohuai that they would both start writing and reviewing their ‘daily lessons’ at the same time (Zeng, 2015a, pp. 125–126). Throughout his life, Zeng discussed Confucian texts and related doctrines almost every day with his teachers and friends. He and his friends formed a cultural community with the goal of cultivating moral virtue and promoting the cultivation of virtue in the process of interacting with one another.

Zeng Guofan constructed an ideal ‘Neo-Confucian family’ (Yan, 2015) according to Confucian ethics, taking it as the basic arena for the moral cultivation of family members. Despite his long career as an official, he still took on the obligation to support his parents and elders and educate his younger brothers and nephews through his letters. The Letters of Zeng Guofan are rich in content, involving expressions of filial piety and love, discussions of political and current affairs, specific family matters and discussions of military deployment during the Taiping Rebellion warfare. One consistent theme of the letters was that the hope for long-term family harmony and prosperity rested on the moral cultivation of each member of the family. He constantly discussed with his family members how to build a proper Confucian-style family full of father’s love, son’s filial piety, brother’s friendliness and respect, how to carry out self-cultivation activities best, and how to pass on his own cultivation experience to the younger members of the family. For example, he sent home his own copy of Wo Ren’s Book of Daily Lessons, as well as his own diary, in the hope that his younger brothers and nephews would cultivate themselves as well (Zeng, 2015b, p. 35, 361). He also urged his nephews to carry out self-cultivation activities based on the principles of ‘seriousness’ and ‘altruism’: If they could perform ‘seriousness’, they would not have arrogant and lazy habits, and if they could perform ‘altruism’, they would not be selfish, and their inner mind would turn kind and generous (Zeng, 2015b, pp. 362, 385–386). He also asked his nephews to report on their homework in letters and to give instructions in response. In the year 1858 and 1859, when the war with the Taiping Rebellion was at its peak, his correspondence with his son Zeng Jize (1839–1890) always revolved around two things: ‘reading’ and ‘writing’. He gave detailed instructions on what to read, how to read, how to compose poems and even how to hold a pen and how to make a turn when practicing calligraphy (Zeng, 2015b, pp. 361–430).⁶ And nowhere is he more famous than when he summed up the family motto passed down from his grandfather in the eight-character instruction (Figure 2/Table 3):

Figure 2.

Source: Changsha Shengyan Museum; photo credits to Dr E. Liu.

Table 3.

Contents and Interpretation of Zeng Family Mottos.

Early rising (早)	Getting up early in the morning
Sweeping (扫)	Cleaning of the house and garden.
Sacrificing (考)	Honouring ancestor rituals, including the three generations of deceased parents, grandparents and great-grandparents.
Treasuring (宝)	Treating relatives and neighbours well and caring for them in matters of marriage, death, poverty and illness.
Reading (书)	Reading the Confucian classics, historical books, works of various scholars, and collections of writings from the past.
Vegetable-growing (蔬)	Cultivating the vegetable field so that there is no scarcity of vegetables.
Fish-raising (鱼)	Reinstating fishponds for better fish-raising.
Pig-farming(猪)	Repairing the pigsty for better pig-farming (Zeng, 2015b, pp. 480, 489)

‘Early-rising’, ‘sweeping’, ‘vegetable-growing’, ‘fish-raising’ and ‘pig-farming’ reflects the needs of traditional family life in an agricultural society, while ‘sacrificing’, ‘treasuring’ and ‘reading’ presents the views of the scholarly elite on family, society, cultural responsibility. This is a practical programme for moral cultivation and family building rather than theory. Under the influence of Zeng Guofan, the Zeng family became a famous family in Chinese history, especially in the field of diplomacy and cultural and educational achievements: His first son Zeng Jize (1839–1890) became a famous diplomat in modern times, serving as an ambassador of the Qing government to Britain, France, Russia and other countries. His second son Zeng Jihong (1848–1881) was a famous mathematician in the late Qing. His grandson Zeng Guangquan (1871–1940) served as a counsellor of the Qing government in Britain and minister of Korea. He was also a translator and publisher. His great grandson Zeng Yuenong (1893–1986) was the founding president of Donghai University in Taiwan, and his brother’s great grandson Zeng Zhaoxuan (1899–1967) was the founder of the Chinese discipline of chemistry, the first academician of the Academia Sinica, and vice minister of higher education and education in the People’s Republic of China.

Equally remarkable is the family of Liang Qichao, who, as mentioned earlier, was the compiler of Zeng Guofan’s works. His sons, Liang Sicheng (1901–1972), a famous architectural historian, and Liang Siyong (1904–1954), a famous archaeologist, were both elected to the first Academia Sinica. Another son, Liang Sili (1924–2016), was an expert on missile and rocket control systems and an academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. The letters and articles he wrote to his children, entitled On Family Education (Liang, Q. C. 2020), have also been compiled for the recent publication by Shanghai Ancient Books Publishing House this year.

Discussion

Self-development runs through the various domains of traditional Confucianism including cosmology, moral philosophy, epistemology and ethics. Following the Confucian theory of self-development, scholars throughout the ages in Chinese society, such as Zeng Guofan, have developed the practice of self-cultivation and achieved practical results not only proving the theoretical basis and inner mechanism but also developing a set of specific methods. It is on the basis of these theories and practices that we are able to categorise it as a ‘Confucian psychology’ and to highlight its significance in dialogue with other indigenous psychologies and mainstream psychology.

First, Confucian psychology should be a kind of ‘virtue psychology’ with ‘human-heartedness’ (ren) as the core. The inner transcendent moral self-represented by ‘human-heartedness’ is the prerequisite for any individual to realise moral consciousness and develop moral cultivation and is also the ultimate goal of Confucian self-development theory. This theoretical model has structural similarities with the indigenous Indian psychological model. In Confucian tradition, there is the moral self of ‘physical nature’ and the real self of ‘original nature’ (the social self, which is dependent on the network of interpersonal relationships, is included in the real self); while in Indian indigenous psychology, there is also the moral self of metaphysical self, contrasting with more ephemeral aspects of the self, like the physical body and the social self (Bhawuk, 2008, pp. 394–395). However, the differences between the two are also extremely clear. Hindu is emphasising transcending cognition, emotion and behaviour through the practice of karma yoga, giving up all desires and finally reaching atman, a transcendent connection with deeper reality (Bhawuk 2008, p. 402). Confucianism, on the other hand, seeks to rationalise emotion, speech, behaviour and social order in terms of the moral self and considers this to be an expression of the cosmic order. The former reveals the true self through negation and dissolution, focusing on the inner journey, while the latter constructs the moral self through rationalisation of moral self-construction in harmony with external reality. This means that in the context of the globalisation of indigenous psychology (J. H. Liu, 2015), the two approaches can profitably communicate with each other based on complementary content, and they can also have dialogue with Western psychology on the basis of structural similarities that distinguish them from the secular forms of modernity prevalent there.

Confucianism’s insistence on the ‘distinction between man and beast’ still has a modern meaning, although biology proves the genetic similarity between humans and animals, and modern Western psychology also often uses animals to study human nature. Confucian theory can embrace the biological similarities between humans and animals without conflicting with modern science. Guo (2013, pp. 79–80) argues that the ‘moral self’ is the essence of human being only in the realm of moral philosophy or ethics. It can be treated as a practical postulate for the construction of Confucian psychology as a human science of aspiration, rather than a natural science of description (J. H. Liu, 2017). Positioned at the crossroads between natural science and moral ethics, Confucian psychology offers a humanistic perspective that can be applied to explain and to enact human moral existence and self-development, thus complementing scientific Western psychology. Even though the ontological positions of Confucian moral philosophy, such as the ‘Decree of Heaven’ and the ‘Theory of Good Nature’, are not easily accepted by other civilisations and religions, the meaning of ‘human-heartedness’ in the dimension of ethics is more universal. It has parallels with the Aristotle an idea of phronesis, for example, (Flyvbjerg, 2001; Hopner & Liu, 2020). As Liu J. H. (2017) argues, if ‘human-heartedness’ is taken as a practical postulate, that is, if human moral existence is seen as an attainable aspiration from the perspective of human agency (p. 143), ‘human-heartedness’ can not only contribute to an indigenous Chinese psychology of science and practice but also transcend religious and civilisational differences and take on a more universal character.

Second, Confucian psychology is a ‘height psychology’ that emphasises self-improvement (J. H. Liu, 2017, p. 143). In religious civilisations such as Christianity and Islam, the salvation of the self is premised on the belief in God and Allah. Traditionally, Christianity, Islam and Buddhism, all make clear the distinction between religious and secular activities (S. H. Liu, 2020, p. 180). The Confucian theoretical model of self-development and Zeng’s experience of self-cultivation suggest that the tension created by the distinction between the inner, transcendent ‘moral self’ and the ‘real self’, which is a mixture of good and evil, constitutes a continuous driving force for self-improvement, giving every ‘self’ the power to realise the ‘moral self’. Reality and sacredness, self-criticism and self-promotion are two sides of the same coin in the process of self-improvement. This means that one does not need to rely on an external transcendence to have an abundant developmental power within oneself, nor does one need to seek a religious life to improve oneself in terms of moral character and ethics in action. Therefore, Confucian psychology is open to every individual equally, regardless of race, nationality or religious beliefs. However, it should be noted that Confucian humanism is not opposed to religious spirituality, what it fills in is the void in society, culture, consciousness and spiritual practice after the secularisation of society and the marginalisation of religion in such forms of modernity (Inglehart & Baker, 2000).

There is also room for dialogue and mutual enrichment with Enlightenment thought since Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679), René Descartes (1596–1650) and Baruch de Spinoza (1632–1677). In contrast to the Enlightenment’s preoccupation with rationality, Confucian psychology, with its focus on rationalised secular life and continuous self-improvement, offers an answer focused on the ‘moral self’. The resultant pluralistic interaction among morality, religion and reason may help to awaken the historical and cultural resources of the major civilisations and attempt to find a balanced middle way between unity and pluralism, truth values and interconnectedness (S. H. Liu, 2020, p. 180), so as to facilitate the formation of a consensus on the future development of human civilisation at a time when civilisational conflicts and dialogues co-exist.

Conclusion

It must be acknowledged that Confucianism in its development also reveals its own limitations. The cosmology of yin-yang was often used to explain the known universe without initiating an innovative modern science; Common people’s imitation of sages and the worship of collectivism inhibited individuality led to slowness of development over the course of history. The path to realisation of lofty moral ideals was not measurable or controllable, and only a few geniuses or extremely diligent and self-disciplined individuals like Zeng Guofan were able to make recognised moral achievements, whereas most ordinary people may have lost the moral spirit behind the rituals passed on to them. It was these deficiencies that led to the withdrawal of Confucianism from the intellectual centre of the shattered empire on the eve of the fall of the Qing Dynasty and the fierce criticism of traditional Confucianism by thinkers from several schools that lasted almost 100 years.

However, modern New Confucianism has made a remarkable creative transformation based on dialogue with and acceptance of advances made by other civilisations worldwide. Confucian psychology, based on this theoretical foundation, is not merely the application of New Confucian theories in the field of psychology but may also offer improvement of Confucianism at both theoretical and practical levels. Thus, Confucian psychology may be able to assume the theoretical responsibilities of both psychology and Confucian philosophy and construct a space for the development of both fields.

Footnotes

Acknowledgement

Special thanks to Professor James H. Liu for his detailed guidance of this paper, to the two reviewers for their constructive comments and to Dr Tian Xie for his support and assistance.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

The project was supported by the National Social Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 20BZX060).

Notes

References

Ames

R. T.

(2011). Confucian role ethics: A vocabulary .The Chinese University Press.

Bhawuk

D. P. S.

(2008). Anchoring cognition, emotion and behavior in desire: A model from the Bhagavad-Gita. In Rao

K. Ramakrishna

(Ed.), Handbook of Indian psychology (pp. 390–431). Cambridge University Press.

Chan

Wing-tsit

. (Trans. & Ed.). (1969). A source book of Chinese philosophy . Princeton University Press.

Flyvbjerg

(2001). Making social science matter (S. Sampson, Trans.). Cambridge University Press.

Y. W.

(2011). Collected writings of Gu Yanwu (Vol. 18). Shanghai Classics Publishing House.

Guo

Q. Y.

(2013). The spirit of Chinese Confucianism . Fudan University Press (in Chinese).

Hopner

, & Liu

J. H.

(2020). Relational ethics and epistemology: The case for complementary first principles in psychology. Theory & Psychology .https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354320974103

Z. H.

, & Ding

S. X.

(2006). Discerning the difference and viewing the same: Interview with Professor Roger T. Ames. History of Chinese Philosophy , 4, 112–119.

Huang

J. J.

(2017). The history of Confucianism and renology in East Asia . Taiwan University Press (in Chinese).

10.

Hwang

K. K.

(1987). Face and favor: The Chinese power game. American Journal of Sociology , 92(4), 944–974. https://doi.org/10.1086/228588

11.

Inglehart

, & Baker

W. E.

(2000). Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of traditional values. American Sociological Review , 65(1), 19–51.https://doi.org/10.2307/2657288

12.

Kao

H. S. R.

, Min

, & Kao

T. T.

(2021). Calligraphy, psychology and the Confucian literati personality. Psychology and Developing Societies , 33(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/0971333621990449

13.

Kitayama

, Matsumoto

, Markus

H. R.

, & Norasakkunkit

(1997). Individual and collective processes in the construction of the self: Self-enhancement in the United States and self-criticism in Japan. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 72(6), 1245–1267. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.6.1245

14.

J. D.

(1994). Classified utterances of Zhuzi . Zhonghua Book Company (in Chinese).

15.

Liang

Q. C.

(2018). Collected writings of Liang Qichao (Vol. 17, Z. J. Tang & R. Z. Tang, Eds.). Renmin University of China(in Chinese).

16.

Liang

Q. C.

(2020). How can we be fathers today: On family education . Shanghai Ancient Books Publishing House (in Chinese).

17.

Liu

J. H.

(2015). Globalizing indigenous psychology: An East Asian form of hierarchical relationalism with worldwide implications. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour , 45(1), 82–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12058

18.

Liu

J. H.

(2017). Neo-Confucian epistemology and Chinese philosophy: Practical postulates for actioning psychology as a human science. Asian Journal of Social Psychology , 20(2),137–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12168

19.

Liu

S. H.

(2020). Collected writings of Liu Shuxian (Vol. 6 & 8, Guo

Q. Y.

Z. H.

& Yao

C. G.

, Eds.). Renmin University of China(in Chinese).

20.

Liu

Y. P.

(2020). Ming-Qing ritual-based society under the influence of Zhu Xi’s doctrine of ritual: The dimension of outer kingliness in Neo-Confucianism. Confucian Academy , 7(1), 49–60.

21.

Mao

(2008). Early texts of Mao Zedong (1912.6–1920.12) . Hunan People’s Publishing House (in Chinese).

22.

Pennebaker

J. W.

, & Chung

C. K.

(2007). Expressive writing, emotional upheavals, and health. In Friedman

& Silver

(Eds.), Handbook of health psychology (pp. 263–284). Oxford University Press.

23.

Wang

X. Q.

(2015). Meditation, reading and the body: A study of the Gongfu theory of Neo-Confucianism . Wanjuanlou Book Co. Ltd. (in Chinses).

24.

Wang

Z. J.

(2006). The unity of body and mind (ren) and Confucian virtuous Ethics: The character ‘in the bamboo scroll and the formation of Confucian human-heartedness (ren). History of Chinese Philosophy , 1, 5–14.

25.

Xiao

Y. S.

(2001). Biography of Zeng Guofan . Hainan Press (in Chinese).

26.

Yan

Z. Z.

(2015). Neo-Confucian family. Female elders. The way of regulating family: Interpretation of ‘Grandmother Mo’s family motto’ of the Hu Clan in Bashan County of Yuyao City in the Song Dynasty. In Historical Documents (19th Series). Shanghai Classics Publishing House (in Chinese).

27.

Yang

T. S.

(2002). Song-Ming Neo-Confucianism and Chiang Kai-shek’s early cultivation: Reading Chiang Kai-shek’s unpublished diary. Shanghai Archives , 5, 57–59.

28.

Zeng

G. F.

(2015a). Dairies of Zeng Guofan (Vol. 1, Tang

H. M.

, Ed.). Yuelu Press (in Chinese).

29.

Zeng

G. F.

(2015b). Family letters of Zeng Guofan (Vol. 1, H. M. Tang, Ed.). Yuelu Press (in Chinese).

30.

Zhang

D. N.

(1989). Key concepts in Chinese philosophy .China Social Sciences Press (in Chinese).

31.

Zhao

E. X.

(1977). Draft of the history of the Qing Dynasty (Vol. 39). Zhonghua Book Company (in Chinese).

32.

Zheng

, & Kong

Y. D.

(Cmt.).(1980). Commentary on the book of rites. In Ruan

Yuan

(Ed.), Commentaries on the thirteen classics (Volume II). Zhonghua Book Company (in Chinese).

33.

Zhu

(1983). Commentaries of the four books . Zhonghua Book Company (in Chinese).

34.

Zhu

(2002a). Collected writings of Zhuzi (Vol. 13). Shanghai Classics Publishing House & Hefei/Anhui Educational Press (in Chinese).

35.

Zhu

(2002b). Collected Writings of Zhuzi (Vol. 24). Shanghai Classics Publishing House & Hefei/Anhui Educational Press (in Chinese).