Analects (Confucius) - 1.1-1.4

The first couple verses of Book 1: That was a strange experience. It was like reading Leviticus from the Bible: a string of seemingly unrelated pieces of advice (or in Leviticus's case, laws). I see what the introduction meant about the disorganization. According to the introduction, this book was meant to be a brief introduction to the basic tenets of Confucianism, which makes sense, because the topics covered were broad and not yet examined in depth. I will describe my experiences with each verse. You can find the verses here, for reference.

...

1.1

Although it initially took a moment or two to get my head around what this guy was saying, I feel like this opening verse resounded with me a lot. Oftentimes, I feel slighted and sometimes even bitter when my abilities are unrecognized; it feels unjust. However, the verse points out, 'To study and at due times practice what one has studied, is this not a pleasure?' If I do the things I love, I should find joy in recognizing and being self-content my own ability. I shouldn't need the validation of others to feel contentment

However, sometimes the validation of others is necessary for advancement in society... perhaps there will be more word on this later? Maybe Confucius struggled with this as well; after all, he was job-seeking for forty years.

1.2

Here, Master You basically equates the relationships between filiality towards parents and obedience of the ruling superior. You asserts that a filial attitude towards parents and respect towards elders is the basis for all virtue, of which one is obedience to a ruler. I agree that a good person must be filial towards their parents and respectful towards elders. If a person is not respectful to their closest family members, after all, they probably don't go showing around too much respect for others, either.

However, I don't think that this is binding; if a parent is abusive, for instance, they don't deserve respect. I wonder what Confucius thinks about this? Perhaps these are just general guidelines, and exceptions are allowed. After all, it's not always wrong to oppose a 'ruling superior,' as MLK's 'Letter from a Birmingham Jail'--and earlier, Thoreau's 'Civil Disobedience'--point out.

1.3

He's essentially saying that sly and conniving people are not virtuous. That intuitively makes sense, and I agree with it generally.

This viewpoint contrasts with Machiavelli's 'The Prince' (which, of course, also contrasts with almost every other ethics standpoint), which dictates that a good prince will use underhanded methods if necessary to preserve the stability of the state. I agree somewhat that what's 'good' isn't always clear—life's decisions are often more complex than black and white.

1.4

These are great pieces of advice for maintaining strong, positive relationships. I find 'trustworthiness,' which more or less means 'reliability' here, is one of the most important aspects of a healthy relationship.