Peimin Ni

Unlike typical journal articles that deal with specific issues in detail, this article offers a sketchy comprehensive re-description of the Confucian Way of family that serves the purpose of providing a bird’s-eye view to grasp the fact that, for Confucianism, family is not merely a part of the puzzle of human life, nor merely an ontological entity that serves as the foundation of the Confucian theory, but more a “Way” of living or gongfu 功夫 that comprised of values toward which cultivation of the person is practiced, an art of life to be mastered, and a model of social order to be implemented.

Unlike typical journal articles that deal with specific issues in detail, this article offers a sketchy comprehensive re-description of the Confucian Way of family that serves the purpose of providing a bird’s-eye view to grasp the fact that, for Confucianism, family is not merely a part of the puzzle of human life, nor merely an ontological entity that serves as the foundation of the Confucian theory, but more a “Way” of living or gongfu 功夫 (aka kung fu) that comprised of values toward which cultivation of the person is practiced, an art of life to be mastered, and a model of social order to be implemented.

This paper tries to explore a gongfu ethics on the basis of traditional Chinese ethical theories. Used in the sense that the Song-Ming Neo-Confucians did, “gongfu” means the art of life in general and not merely the martial arts, although martial arts can be taken as a paradigm example of gongfu. The paper begins with the question “can bad guys have good gongfu,” which leads to three answers, each representing one stage of the dynamic relationship between morality and gongfu: The first is yes, since gongfu and morality belong to two different categories, i.e., the art of life and moral responsibilities. The second is no, because each moral goodness or badness corresponds to a respective gongfu virtuosity or the lack of it. The third answer is that moral persons, as long as they still have to invoke morality, are not true gongfu masters. Those who have real good gongfu transcend moral duties and become amoral. The analysis suggests a gongfu ethics that can include, but goes beyond moral goodness. The rest of the essay articulates the rich implications of this gongfu ethics by comparing it with virtue ethics, consequentialist ethics, and relativism-subjectivism.