Is it a truth prior to law, or something the law grants, that no person can be another's property? When a system treats a human as a thing, where is the ground for saying that freedom was not permitted by anyone but was that person's own from the first?
THE QUESTION THE FILM ASKS
Do I regard a person's dignity as something granted by another, forgetting it was his own from the first?
THE CLASSIC'S ANSWER · ORIGINAL
我固有之也
仁義禮智 非由外鑠我也 我固有之也
📜 THE CLASSIC'S ANSWER
Benevolence and righteousness are not fused into me from without; I possess them from the first.
💡 TL;DR
Mencius held that the root of our humanity is not conferred from without but is ours from the first.
📝The Classic Answers
Mencius held that the root of our humanity is not conferred from without but is ours from the first. So too are freedom and dignity. When a system treats a person as a thing, what he seeks to reclaim is not a newly won right but a place that was his from the beginning. No one becomes human by another's permission. I withdraw the gaze that sees dignity as a favor granted, and look again from where it was his own all along.
— ONGO · Curator
🌱Apply It Today
If you treated someone's right today as something you 'grant,' remind yourself again that it was his to begin with.
📖 Classic Source:
Mencius, Gaozi I.
Ancient text in the public domain; rendered and interpreted independently by ONGO.
The film is honored as an equal questioner; its plot is rendered only as a universal dilemma. The classic source is an ancient text (Public Domain), and the reflection is 100% original ONGO content.
✦
A Bridge Between Eras — the wisdoms this question threads
Reading the new through the old — classics this question awakens.
