Of three ancient thinkers with great impact on history, Kong Fuzi (Confucius), Jesus of Nazareth, and Socrates, we only know them by their disciples. In the case of Confucius, we know him through the Analects compiled by his direct disciples, and through Mencius, who elaborated and explained Confucius' philosophy. Of Jesus of Nazareth, we have the direct Gospels, and then we have Paul of Tarsus. Of Socrates, we have Plato, Plato, and more Plato, and a few dialogues of Xenophon.
Paul made Christianity available to the gentiles, arguably, and certainly established the concept of a Christian church as we today understand it, with bishops and all that. Alternatives include Ebionite, Gnostic, and the mystical Christianity of the Desert Fathers. Plato's Socrates, as we may all remember, was imbued with a mystical quality and a divine mission to annoy the Athenians. He is concerned with the welfare of immortal souls (paving the way for Platonic forms) and believed that virtue could be caught but not taught. Mencius emphasized the moral basis of Confucius as resting on man being innately good, and that it was only a lack of cultivation that led to this innate goodness to wither. Politically, Mencius is also responsible for the Chinese doctrine of the "Mandate of Heaven," the notion that only good rulers are fit to rule and the rest are to be thrown out, and a greater focus on the common man than Confucius himself.
But each teacher also had another student, or students, who could have become the dominant interpretor of the teacher...
Xenophon's Socrates is a proponent of natural law, and at the same time presents the first teleological argument (i.e. "the universe is too orderly NOT to have been created") in Western philosophy. His Socrates defiantly tells the jury that he is better of dying rather than suffering the pains of advanced age (especially the mental degradation), rather than giving a piestic plea that he was sent as a messenger. Socrates' inner voice, in Xenophon, is positive (telling him what to do) rather than negative (telling him what NOT to do).
Confucius adminstered also to a man named Xun Zi, who's writing style was much closer to Western philosophers (extended essays, although not Socratic debate). Xun Zi argued that Heaven had no moral will, and to try and seek one was pointless, rather, humans should focus on the social world. This is because humans are fundamentally selfish and cruel, and one needs morality as a social invention to prevent anarchy. He was a hardcore fan of "nurture" in the nature v. nurture debate, and made no qualms about cutting the line. His direct students were the legalist philosophers Li Si and Han Fei, anti-Confucian to sometimes extreme ends.
And Jesus the Christ had a veritable *grab bag* of alternate interpretations. Arianism, Manachianism, Gnosticism, the Ebiotes...seriously, take your pick.
What I'm getting to is...how would the world have changed if non-Pauline Christianity had taken hold, rather than the works of St. Paul? If we held up Xenophon's Apology and Symposium, rather than Plato's? How would Confuicianism have looked different, how would other schools look different, would it have become the dominant philosophy of East Asia, if Xun Zi's thoughtful and pessimisitc essays replaced Mencius' pithy aphorisms as the standard interpretation of Confucius?
Answer for one or all. It'll be fun either way!
Paul made Christianity available to the gentiles, arguably, and certainly established the concept of a Christian church as we today understand it, with bishops and all that. Alternatives include Ebionite, Gnostic, and the mystical Christianity of the Desert Fathers. Plato's Socrates, as we may all remember, was imbued with a mystical quality and a divine mission to annoy the Athenians. He is concerned with the welfare of immortal souls (paving the way for Platonic forms) and believed that virtue could be caught but not taught. Mencius emphasized the moral basis of Confucius as resting on man being innately good, and that it was only a lack of cultivation that led to this innate goodness to wither. Politically, Mencius is also responsible for the Chinese doctrine of the "Mandate of Heaven," the notion that only good rulers are fit to rule and the rest are to be thrown out, and a greater focus on the common man than Confucius himself.
But each teacher also had another student, or students, who could have become the dominant interpretor of the teacher...
Xenophon's Socrates is a proponent of natural law, and at the same time presents the first teleological argument (i.e. "the universe is too orderly NOT to have been created") in Western philosophy. His Socrates defiantly tells the jury that he is better of dying rather than suffering the pains of advanced age (especially the mental degradation), rather than giving a piestic plea that he was sent as a messenger. Socrates' inner voice, in Xenophon, is positive (telling him what to do) rather than negative (telling him what NOT to do).
Confucius adminstered also to a man named Xun Zi, who's writing style was much closer to Western philosophers (extended essays, although not Socratic debate). Xun Zi argued that Heaven had no moral will, and to try and seek one was pointless, rather, humans should focus on the social world. This is because humans are fundamentally selfish and cruel, and one needs morality as a social invention to prevent anarchy. He was a hardcore fan of "nurture" in the nature v. nurture debate, and made no qualms about cutting the line. His direct students were the legalist philosophers Li Si and Han Fei, anti-Confucian to sometimes extreme ends.
And Jesus the Christ had a veritable *grab bag* of alternate interpretations. Arianism, Manachianism, Gnosticism, the Ebiotes...seriously, take your pick.
What I'm getting to is...how would the world have changed if non-Pauline Christianity had taken hold, rather than the works of St. Paul? If we held up Xenophon's Apology and Symposium, rather than Plato's? How would Confuicianism have looked different, how would other schools look different, would it have become the dominant philosophy of East Asia, if Xun Zi's thoughtful and pessimisitc essays replaced Mencius' pithy aphorisms as the standard interpretation of Confucius?
Answer for one or all. It'll be fun either way!