Analysis Of Mencius And Hsün Tzu's Patterns Of Culture

747 Words3 Pages
Mencius suggested that everyone was inherently good and the environment around that person made him/her evil. On the other hand, Hsün Tzu contradicted Mencius and suggested that everyone was inherently evil but rituals, laws, and rites took men in a good direction. However, I believe that people are born neither inherently good nor evil. A person’s mind is born as a “blank slate” (Locke 100). Everyone, at birth, possesses instincts that as babies, we were not aware of. Similarly, the environment plays a big role in determining someone’s behavior. If a person grew up in a bad environment, he would likely have a similar behavior; in addition, if a person grew up in a good environment, he would have a similar behavior. I agree with what John Locke said in his book “Essay…show more content…
In “Patterns of Culture” Ruth Benedict argues that people are the product of culture. Culture shapes humans into people. It teaches people the values and what is “right or wrong”. She took Locke’s idea and enlarged it to show how culture adds in with sensation and reflection. I agree with her when she said, “Most people are shaped to the form of their culture because of the enormous malleability of their original endowment” (115) because people shape themselves the way they see others and “the form they are presented to” (115). She also argued that every culture has different “right” and “wrong”. There is no common good or evil in all cultures of the world. In fact, every culture has a different definition of good and evil. Some culture might believe certain behavior as evil, but it might be completely fine in others. Coming from India, I can say that it is quite different in the USA. It has been three years, yet I learn something new about the culture every day. Even if a person is from a different culture, the culture he/she is brought up in or is living in can have certain amount of influence on molding the
Open Document