What sort of vision of the good life does Confucius recommend? In this episode, we explore one of the most intriguing passages in the Analects (11.26), where Confucius asks four disciples about their deepest aspirations. Three students offer increasingly modest political goals—from Zilu's grand vision of governing a besieged state to Zihua's humble wish to serve as a minor functionary in ritual ceremonies. But a fourth student, the musical Zengxi, describes something completely different: a spring day spent with friends and younger students, bathing in the Yi River, enjoying the breeze at the Rain Dance Altar, and returning home singing.

Confucius's response—a deep sigh and "I am with Zengxi!"—reveals surprising insights about Confucian approaches to happiness and human flourishing. We examine why the Master favors this vision of ritual performed naturally and relationships lived wholeheartedly over more conventional paths to recognition and success. Does this passage suggest that political work misses the point entirely? Or does Zengxi's answer represent a different kind of political vision—one focused on community, joy in ritual, and human relationships as the foundation of social order and good governance?

Drawing on historical commentary from the Confucian tradition and contemporary scholarship, we unpack why this passage has captivated readers for centuries and what it reveals about the relationship between personal fulfillment and social harmony.

Many thanks to The Hong Kong Ethics Lab for sponsoring this podcast series.

Want to continue the discussion? Need links to some of the sources mentioned? Go to the support page for this episode on Warp, Weft, and Way.

We thank Lena Li (LI La 李拉 ) for her expert editing and sound engineering. We also thank the blog Warp, Weft & Way for hosting the discussion for this episode.

Want to skip to the episode's primary philosophical issue? Go to

7:57 Preview of today's topic, or
10:48 Part II -- The good life in the Analects

Co-hosts:
Richard Kim's website
Justin Tiwald's website

This episode is our first on the classical Confucian philosopher Xunzi 荀子 (3rd century BCE), who was famous for arguing that human nature is bad and for casting doubt on the more supernatural or superstitious justifications for traditional Confucian rituals, among many other things. Since this is the first episode on an important philosopher, we spend some time in part I discussing his "big picture" philosophical worldview. In part II, we turn to the following question: does Xunzi think of the Confucian Way as something that sages discover or invent? A little reflection on this question shows that it has major implications for how we think about ethics and its foundations, and how much ethical values depend on human convention.

Many thanks to The Hong Kong Ethics Lab for sponsoring this podcast series.

Want to continue the discussion? Need links to some of the sources mentioned? Go to the support page for this episode on Warp, Weft, and Way.

We thank Lena Li (LI La 李拉 ) for her expert editing and sound engineering. We also thank the blog Warp, Weft & Way for hosting the discussion for this episode.

Want to skip to the episode's primary philosophical issue? Go to

15:00 Overview of Xunzi, or
30:23 Part II -- Is Xunzi's Way discovered or invented?

Co-hosts:
Richard Kim's website
Justin Tiwald's website

One influential justification for becoming Buddhist is to end suffering, starting (it seems) with the Buddhist practitioner's own suffering. Does this indicate that Buddhist practitioners are selfish? After Buddhism became popular in China, many Confucians argued that Buddhism puts personal salvation before ethics, and is thus selfish in that respect. Some Confucians also objected to the particular sort of compassion that Buddhists were supposed to adopt ("unconditioned compassion"), insisting that it was fundamentally incompatible with the special attachments needed for important human relationships between family members and close friends.

In our first show before a live audience, Justin presents two criticisms of Buddhism, Jenny Hung 洪真如 defends Buddhism against the criticisms, and Richard moderates. The show was held at a meeting of the American Philosophical Association, and many wiser scholars in the audience weighed in as well. Join us for the lively (and quite friendly) "debate."

Many thanks to The Hong Kong Ethics Lab and the Pacific Division of the American Philosophical Association for sponsoring this podcast series. Thanks also to Dana Jae Audio Collective (especially Casey Hudson and Maüxe Madden) for staging and recording the event, and to Lena Li (LI La 李拉 ) for her editing and mixing. They are consummate professionals.

Want to continue the discussion? Need links to some of the sources mentioned? Go to the support page for this episode on Warp, Weft, and Way.

Jenny Hung's website

Want to skip to episode's primary philosophical issue? Go to
- 4:19: preface to today's discussion, or
- 5:39: part II

Co-hosts:
Richard Kim's website
Justin Tiwald's website