Dear Sir,

I refer to your article on Confucius and Mr. Tan Boon Tee’s subsequent letter to The Economist. Mr Tan's letter demonstrates a commonly-held misconception about Confucius and his teachings. Confucius lived in a time of great political uncertainty and oppression, when monarchs held absolute power over life and death, and the values and ideas expressed in his philosophy have to be understood in the context of the times in which he lived. His famous ‘five relationships’ emphasize not only obedience by a subject to a ruler, but also the ruler’s responsibility to his people. He believed that if people became conscious of their responsibilities to each other, and followed good practices (‘ritual’) in their behaviour with each other, a harmonious society would result.

Sadly, Confucius’ teachings have been interpreted quite literally, perhaps in the same way that the pro-gun lobby in the USA interprets the second amendment. Confucius’ teachings are now routinely used to justify a strong paternalistic state and obedience to power, not least in places like Singapore. As a fellow Singaporean, I sympathize with Mr. Tan but I fear that Confucius, like many other philosophers and religious figures before him, has had his words interpreted to serve the purposes of those who would use them to justify their actions. As your article showed, Confucius is valued not for his inherent wisdom but as a way to justify the continued rule of the Chinese Communist Party. Rather than seek an inviolable text, I suggest we use it as a starting point for examining our own lives.

Yours Faithfully,

PJ Thum
Oxford