[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"archetype-name-map":3,"tradition-confucianism":100},[4,7,10,13,16,19,22,25,28,31,34,37,40,43,46,49,52,55,58,61,64,67,70,73,76,79,82,85,88,91,94,97],{"slug":5,"name":6},"anarcho-capitalist","Anarcho-Capitalist",{"slug":8,"name":9},"establishment-progressive","Establishment Progressive",{"slug":11,"name":12},"patriotic-progressive","Patriotic Progressive",{"slug":14,"name":15},"progressive-activist","Progressive Activist",{"slug":17,"name":18},"techno-progressive","Techno-Progressive",{"slug":20,"name":21},"conservative-democrat","Conservative Democrat",{"slug":23,"name":24},"moderate-conservative","Moderate Conservative",{"slug":26,"name":27},"reform-conservative","Reform Conservative",{"slug":29,"name":30},"religious-conservative","Religious Conservative",{"slug":32,"name":33},"traditionalist","Traditionalist",{"slug":35,"name":36},"national-populist","National Populist",{"slug":38,"name":39},"left-nationalist","Left Nationalist",{"slug":41,"name":42},"moderate-liberal","Moderate Liberal",{"slug":44,"name":45},"pragmatic-centrist","Pragmatic Centrist",{"slug":47,"name":48},"authoritarian-left","Authoritarian Left",{"slug":50,"name":51},"authoritarian-right","Authoritarian Right",{"slug":53,"name":54},"welfare-nationalist","Welfare Nationalist",{"slug":56,"name":57},"democratic-socialist","Democratic Socialist",{"slug":59,"name":60},"christian-socialist","Christian Socialist",{"slug":62,"name":63},"market-socialist","Market Socialist",{"slug":65,"name":66},"trad-socialist","Trad Socialist",{"slug":68,"name":69},"civil-libertarian","Civil Libertarian",{"slug":71,"name":72},"compassionate-libertarian","Compassionate Libertarian",{"slug":74,"name":75},"left-libertarian","Left Libertarian",{"slug":77,"name":78},"traditional-libertarian","Traditional Libertarian",{"slug":80,"name":81},"classical-liberal","Classical Liberal",{"slug":83,"name":84},"social-liberal","Social Liberal",{"slug":86,"name":87},"national-conservative","National Conservative",{"slug":89,"name":90},"neoconservative","Neoconservative",{"slug":92,"name":93},"techno-authoritarian","Techno-Authoritarian",{"slug":95,"name":96},"market-liberal","Market Liberal",{"slug":98,"name":99},"independent-thinker","Independent Thinker",{"tradition":101,"thinkers":108,"definingArchetypes":122,"sharedArchetypes":123},{"id":102,"slug":103,"name":104,"short_description":105,"long_description":106,"era_marker":107},478,"confucianism","Confucianism","The Chinese tradition that grounds political order in cultivated character, ritual propriety and reciprocal obligation between ruler and ruled rather than in law or force.","The Chinese tradition holding that political order rests on the cultivated character of those who govern rather than on law, coercion or institutional design — that a ruler who is genuinely virtuous is obeyed as naturally as the stars turn about the pole, and that one who relies on punishment will get compliance without shame.\n\nConfucius (551-479 BCE) taught during the collapse of Zhou authority, and the Analects, compiled by his disciples after his death, present less a system than a set of commitments: ren, humaneness toward others; li, the ritual propriety that makes social life legible and restrains power by binding it to form; xiao, filial obligation, from which wider political duty is extrapolated; and the junzi, the exemplary person, defined by conduct rather than birth — a genuinely radical reassignment of nobility.\n\nThe tradition's deepest internal split concerns human nature. Mencius held that people are innately good and that rulership is a trust which a tyrant forfeits, giving the tradition an explicit right of rebellion through the mandate of heaven. Xunzi held that nature is crooked and that ritual and education exist to straighten it — a position from which his students Han Fei and Li Si moved to Legalism, abandoning moral cultivation for law and punishment and helping build the Qin state that briefly suppressed Confucianism outright.\n\nAdopted as state orthodoxy under the Han and institutionalised through the imperial examination system, Confucianism became both the ethical vocabulary and the bureaucratic machinery of Chinese governance for two millennia, reworked philosophically by Zhu Xi and the Neo-Confucians. The May Fourth intellectuals of 1919 attacked it as the ideology of a feudal order, and it was suppressed again under Mao. Its current revival — official promotion in China, and academic arguments for Confucian political meritocracy — has reopened the tradition's oldest question: whether it constrains rulers by holding them to a standard, or legitimates them by supplying one they can claim to meet.","6th century BCE to present",[109],{"is_primary":110,"thinkers":111},true,{"id":112,"era":113,"name":114,"slug":115,"one_line":116,"is_living":117,"birth_year":118,"death_year":119,"portrait_url":120,"sort_priority":121},655,"Ancient","Confucius","confucius","Confucius was the Chinese philosopher who grounded political order in cultivated character and ritual obligation rather than law — and whose transmission to Europe gave the Enlightenment a working model of government by merit without a priesthood.",false,-551,-479,"\u002Fimages\u002Ffigures\u002Fwebp\u002Fconfucius.webp",5,[],[124],{"archetype_slug":32,"shared_thinker_count":125},1]