Professor Gilbert:

Here is the article, ‘“Virtue” in Bone and Bronze’, which is included in The Ways of

Confucianism: Investigations in Chinese Philosophy, which is a collection of essays by David S. Nivison,

edited by Bryan W. Van Norden. I will quote Van Norden’s comments on the article:

‘“Virtue” in Bone and Bronze’ begins with what seems, at first, an unpromising starting point for

philosophical discussion: the cryptic pronouncements on the “oracle bones” used for divination in China some

three thousand years ago. However, Nivison uses this, and other early sources, to construct and defend a

powerful interpretation of one of the key terms in early Chinese philosophy: dé 德. Dé is the “power” or

“charisma” by which a king rules without needing to resort to force or violence. Dé is also related to what

Western philosophers would call “virtue”. What is the connection? Humans typically feel gratitude for gifts.

However, in some societies, this feeling becomes magnified, so that my gratitude to you comes to seem like a

force you exert over me. [footnote: For an illustration of the extreme significance of gift-giving in another East

Asian culture, see Jack Seward, Japanese in Action, (New York: Weatherhill, 1983), pp.130-132] Dé was

originally this “force”, which the Chinese kings acquired through their willingness to make “sacrifices” to the

spirits of their ancestors and for their subjects. However, there is an important difference between a gift given

sincerely, and one given with the intention of gaining control over another. Consequently, dé became connected

with humility, generosity, and (in general) the “virtues”. Furthermore, it became clear that others besides the

king could sincerely sacrifice themselves for others. At that point, dé was no longer the king’s prerogative

alone.

So this article is really about the origin of the concept of dé, or “virtue”, and not about the

concept of “owing”, and I’m sorry to have misled you. But Nivison explains this concept with ideas such

as “”debt of gratitude” and “gratitude credit”, and given this explanation there is some association

between dé and “owing”. I had a discussion about “owing” with someone, and used this article to make

my points, so I wrongly came to think this article was about “owing”. (I also include the discussion.)