Fraternal societies (everything from "greek" societies in universities to the Masons and elk lodges) did this quite well until recently, collapsing membership along with other communal organizations.

I think we still have rituals. Rituals are often invisible to the participants, so it wouldn't surprise me if ours were invisible to us. I can't think of strong ones off the top of my head. Perhaps social media rituals, like posting certain content to "appeal to the algorithm".

There is an argument to be made that the current loss of a sense of community and the meaninglessness epidemic can (at least in part) be attributed to a lack of shared rituals. S. Junger (https://amzn.to/4nSaxfY) and M. P. Some (https://amzn.to/4eB5sUW) do a great job of making this point from somewhat different (and non-eastern) perspectives.

After virtue is definitely going on my reading list. The idea that we use moral language vacuously because we don’t share the same worldview as the people who invented it is fascinating.

I’m concerned about theories that state that a larger society-wide effort has to be made to bring ethics back to life though. This is because I’m gay and historically societies haven’t always had a great outlook on me. Maybe I could live in a world that had a coherent telos for gay men that didn’t involve them being stoned to death.

"We Chinese have lost the ritualistic practices that undergirded society 2500 years ago. Let us therefore just come up with a new set?

That sounds sensible to me.

"Who have been the most successful at inventing new rituals for our age? The Axis Powers starting with the 1936 Olympics. Hmm."

I don't know where that train of thought is going but the 1936 Olympics is generally considered a fact but not a happy one. Jesse Owens was a shining light there ...

"new rituals hubristic and naive."

I think the author handles this by pointing out the constant in change: human nature which does not change plus change itself.

In that context ritual symbology has a half life in human nature. It needs to be periodically made anew.

Ritual becomes form without substance or becomes corrupted eg.Martin Luther's grievances to the church.

As another writer (I believe Joyce) once analogized, periodically there's nothing left but to pick up the broken shards of colored glass from the cathedral and reassemble it making anew partly connected to past but mostly reconfigured to now.

Whence the 64 million dollar question here: why broken?

> Let us therefore just come up with a new set?

This is one of the purposes of 中国式现代化.

Thanks for sharing. This is the key point in rituals. They mark important actions and thoughts with intention. Especially important in contemporary life where everything moves so fast and our attention is diluted - taking the time to slow down and notice an occasion with something more than a passing thought is a special act.

I think there is actually a large amount of overlap with "culture" itself.

“Tradition”, perhaps, although that word is also weighed down with the kind of baggage that is likely to trigger the same negative responses that “ritual” did here.

“Ritual” is part of Xun Zi’s interpretation of Confucianism. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xunzi_(philosopher)

Confucianism itself was attacked during the Cultural Revolution. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticize_Lin,_Criticize_Con...

Now, it appears Confucianism is being pushed by the Chinese government. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confucius_Institute

for me, the value of the xunzi isn't that it's old or that it's eastern, but that it's a sophisticated text which describes a system of morality, statecraft, and international relations which I largely (but don't entirely) agree with

the period he came from was extremely intellectually fertile, and you can find advocates for everything from rational totalitarianism to postmodern anarchism, ethical egoism, hippie utilitarianism, and jeffersonian pastoralism. I think an "east vs west" lens doesn't really capture it well, because the codification of what we would consider "eastern" took place long after this period, over the course of many centuries

there are things xunzi gets wrong, and after I finish writing commentaries on the essays by him I think are most important, I'll probably write a critique on that. I think of him more as a starting point than an ending point

I've read quite a bit of classical Chinese philosophy, and in my opinion that major piece that is directly translatable to Western concerns is the discussion of management principles. Confucian and legalist scholars recognized that statecraft was fundamentally a management problem, and they included a lot of wisdom about that sort of thing in their writings. This includes:

- One of the most important jobs of a leader is to find the talented people and give them work worthy of their talents

- Large projects start by laying a foundation which will facilitate later work

- Resource and disaster management are central problems of government

- If someone makes a bad decision, it is probably because they didn't see the value of the better decision. Instead of criticizing the path they chose, show them the superior value of the one they overlooked.

In the past you had organized shysters from India who took their business to the West like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prem_Rawat

Today you have more interest in the literature of the East. I'm somewhat surprised at how little important Chinese literature is available in translation.

In a time when many people are cut off from the ancient history of the West for various reasons (look at the 'bro veneration of Rome and the knee-jerk anti-Romanism it engenders) I think we need as large a cultural database to work from as we can get.

Educated-but-ignorant progressives find most of the people who ever lived are dead to them because they don't accept 100% of the ideas that were fashionable in the last 30 seconds. Go to India and the sinosphere and they might find something that bypasses their defenses.

Cultural conservatives need to realize they'll hit a ceiling so long as they remain stuck on a book that claims God made the world 6000 years ago (God is not great!) and cares about a few people on a postage stamp in the Middle East more than the rest of us -- Confucius could put them on a rational basis that people will listen to.

> "it's old, and it's eastern"

Somewhat of a tangent, but an interesting thought if one is inclined toward the old and Eastern: Christianity is old and Eastern.

And yet you can find a Christian community practicing very ancient rituals right here in the United States. You can celebrate those rituals in English, or various ancient languages, or a combination of both. Rituals are available every day, but the most elaborate and meaningful ones are saved for the most convenient day of the week: Sunday.

[deleted]

I don't really disagree with anything you said, but none of this is even presented as "wisdom you can apply to your life". It's discussing an ideology for the ruling class, by the ruling class. The 0.01% and maybe people who aspire to join them are the only audience.

> This, I think, is the core assumption of authoritarianism, and, I think, is false.

It is very effective at scaring people into believing the state has their interests at heart more than their neighbor does, regardless of all the evidence to the contrary.

the idea that the state is purely a construct of laws enforced by threat of violence is closer to legalism and not something xunzi favors. he sees law and punishment as a last resort for eliminating the minority of people who can't be handled any other way, but trying to rule principally on the basis of coercion is doomed to failure. one of his essays is an extended lecture on why the qin state (to become the qin dynasty) will be overthrown unless they stop trying to govern this way

for xunzi the main tool to run the state is that nebulous word "ritual." roughly this means the government should behave virtuously to inspire civic duty and pride, encourage people to cultivate themselves and behave properly in the context of their personal relationships, and use the tools of civic religion (in his time sacrifical rites, sumptuary laws, military ceremonies) to impress people with majesty rather than instill fear. on the mundane end it should make punishments light, lower taxes, handle natural disasters, and maintain a military that mostly fights defensive or just wars. through this he believes people will mostly act virtuously through a felt sense of obligation to and appreciation for each other, ie social trust and social responsibility

there are legitimate points of criticism though, I think the main ones from a western individualist democratic perspective would be that he considers a hierarchical (albeit strictly meritocratic) social structure to be absolutely essential, and that the confucian social network style behavior regulation may depend inherently on social shame, which tends to be smothering

xunzi's dim view of human nature is superficially similar to hobbes (and both came from similar times of brutal civil war) but while hobbes says "and the people have to agree to give absolute power to a dictator" xunzi says "and the people need a model for how to be better"

any confucian system is necessarily grounded in virtue, so you still have the classic problem of "what if the ruler isn't virtuous." I do think this is fundamentally unsolvable though. at the end of the day no clever government structure can work around the fact that whoever holds the final say is ultimately sovereign. checks and balances evaporate in times of crisis and we've just been lucky most of the presidents so far who got that supreme authority (lincoln and fdr being the most notable) were relatively virtuous

Greco-Buddhism relevant?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhism

Possibly important to Western philosophy for inspiring cynicism and skepticism.