Does Xunzi's ethics of ritual need a metaphysics?

Abstract

Contemporary philosophers working on Chinese Philosophy, Confucianism in particular, disagree about the status of metaphysics in early Confucianism. Some maintain that metaphysics are absent by pointing to the overwhelming emphasis on practical concerns – ethical and political – in the early Confucian texts. Others insist that even if there were no explicit metaphysical discussion or theorizing, metaphysical assumptions are inevitable. However do these assumptions point to one definite metaphysical system, or are they so vague and ambiguous that different mutually incompatible metaphysics could be constructed from them and attributed arbitrarily to the early Confucians? The latter situation would weaken the connection between ethics and metaphysics in early Confucianism but could work to its benefit insofar as contemporary viability is concerned, since "metaphysical flexibility" means that in case whatever metaphysical assumptions made by early Confucian thinkers turn out to be unacceptable today in some way, it would then be possible to substitute a different acceptable or more defensible metaphysics to support the ethical claims, if one believes that any viable ethical claims require a coherent and viable metaphysics.