STS and Business Ethics 2021/2022

Meilin Lyu

Virtual Ethics Implications From Aristotelian and Confucian Perspectives 

on Social Life and Business



I. Introduction 
Sison et.al (2020) and Koehn (2020) have both offered important insights into how Confucian ethics
converges and diverges with Aristotelian ethics tradition, which representing generally the Western and the
Eastern traditions respectively. Aristotle (384-322 BC) was a Greek philosopher during the Classical period
in Ancient Greece and his writings have covered many subjects; where Confucius (551-479 BC) lived in a
time when the Chinese regime was in turmoil and his moral teachings were aspired to restore the hierarchical
social order based on kinship and seniority and therefore reconstructing the friendly relations within the local
communities (Sison et.al 2020, 245).

This essay is structured in three sections: the family structure and social relationships perceived by two
virtue ethics traditions, interpretive application of family theories in leadership style and corporate culture,
and finally some reflections on both papers I have selected for this essay.

II. Family and Social Life 

Specifically, Sison et.al (2020) analyse virtue ethics through constructs and logic of family science, which
investigates the ways family structure and relationships influence entrepreneurship and organisational styles.
Business is closely tied up with family, not individuals since a person belongs to families and he engages in
business activities primarily to provide for his families. Vice versa, business is dependent on families for
human resources and as consumers (242). To apply theories of families in the explanatory business
framework, we first need to comprehend that the approach of Confucian tradition prefers metaphors and is
more fragmentary compared to the Aristotelian tradition of an organised ethical system. In the Aristotelian
tradition, primarily focuses on achieving the concept of „eudaimonia“ or human flourishing (243), which
can only be gained at the level of political community. Hence, the analysis of families or any other social
groups exists only for the wellbeing of the larger political community. Noticeably, virtues by themselves
(internal goods) are subordinated to politics and therefore cannot bring the ultimate happiness either. The
condition for the study of families in the Aristotelian tradition is the economy (external or material goods),
which acts as the other pillar to politics. As the etymology of economy in Greek means „the law governing
the household“ (243), several „natural“ relationships are necessary for the well-functioning of a household.
Specifically, the relationship of husband and wife is needed to procreate and raise children, as future citizens;
the relationship of father and son was important in the fourth century B.C. Athens, where a father was seen as
the master of the house in the patriarchal society; and finally, the relationship of master and slave is essential
to manage the household daily. According to Aristotle, these natural relationships satisfy the basic human
needs and the villages that include other neighbours is natural as well for long-term self-preservation.
Ultimately, the political community arises as a „natural institution“ (244) when several villages unite
1 of 6
 STS and Business Ethics 2021/2022
Meilin Lyu

together, and consequently, all the daily and lifelong needs of an individual can be met by the political
community to live a prosperous life. In the art of household management and economy proper, Aristotle
distinguishes further the „natural“ wealth-production from the „unnatural“ one. He stresses the appropriate
use of material goods recognises a limit and money is intended for exchange in a primitive economy,
whereas a censurable act is when money is used to increase personal interest and therefore accumulate the
material possessions with no limits (244). As such, we can observe in Aristotelian belief, the quest for
happiness can be achieved when the desires of wealth and pleasure are restrained.

In the Confucian tradition, the political community is an extended version of the family, which holds
absolute primacy, and thus Individual’s ambition should cohere with the wellbeing of the family. Similarly,
Confucius has also set out five cardinal virtues possessed by the Gentleman-Sage represented in family and
individual ideal. In particular, the virtues are composed of „benevolence (ren)“, „righteousness (yi)“, „ritual
propriety (li)“, „wisdom (zhi)“, and „trustworthiness (xin)“ (Sison et.al 2020, 245). Benevolence is the
central theme from which all other virtues derive, where it implies goodness and humanness in thoughts and
behaviours when treating one another. Further, righteousness signifies knowing right and wrong, the
appropriateness of one’s action attributed particularly between the elder and younger brothers and obedience
to authorities. Ritual propriety could be interpreted as compliance to social rules so that each one coheres to
the hierarchical order of the society by performing his designated role. Finally, the virtue of wisdom entails
understanding both the dimensions of benevolence and righteousness, while the virtue of trustworthiness
denotes keeping one’s promises (Sison et.al 2020, 246). Consequently, the cultivation of a Gentlemen-Sage
is capable to help firstly his family, and then his nation or society through successful self-development.
Furthermore, the Gentlemen-Sage has a shared objective to bring the greatest moral accomplishment, the
notion of „Social Harmony (he xie)“, which represents „the perfect integration of individual, familial,
organizational, communal and political lives among all members of society“ (246, referred Wang and Juslin
2009). It is important to recognise that the virtue of filial piety, which is the duty toward parents, is the
foremost among all other virtues since parental guidance could lead to the proper development of the moral
self (246). In terms of household management, Koehn (2020) concurs with Sison et.al (2020) that the
primary interest of virtuous individuals is to bring about social harmony at all levels within society, and be
able to work effectively together from household scale and extending to larger social scale (206).

In comparison, although both philosophical thoughts acknowledge the formation of a family is innate to
human nature, in Confucian society it not only satisfies daily needs but also serves as a space where ritual
propriety and self-moral development can be learnt. Hence, we can say that the Confucian account of family
is equal to the Aristotelian political community where individuals could flourish within them (Sison et.al
2020, 246). Secondly, both traditions recognise that the development of virtues is not inherently innate, but
through proper education and self-regulation would individuals fulfil full flourishing (249). Just like the
Confucian tradition, one should actualise his role toward family and nation, the Aristotelian ethical tradition
also stresses effective actions taken by individuals in the political community to achieve the social
ideal, eudaimonia (Sison et.al 2020, 249). Koehn (2020) has further supplemented from an ontological
perspective that the Aristotelian virtues can be understood as a „capacity for excellence (first nature)“, in the
2 of 6
 STS and Business Ethics 2021/2022
Meilin Lyu

form of „a habit (second nature)“ (207). Whereas he also gives a metaphysical interpretation to Confucian
human nature with the analogy of flowing water, that there are no fixed ethical propensities, but an ongoing
process of thinking and talking with other members to achieve sagehood.



III. Business 
By Aristotelian traditions, if the political community is the only „natural institution“ where innate social
tendency can be fully developed through law and justice, the modern concept of „firm“ would be viewed as
an „artificial“ or „voluntary“ institution since it does not derive naturally from the human nature (Sison et.al
2020, 244) like families or villages. Hence, the Aristotelian business concepts are rooted in contractual terms
through organisational boundaries, since even Aristotelian families are seen as organisations where members
have legal rights as citizens (249). Koehn (2020) has further extended locating of the Corporate Entity and
offered the scenario where a corporation acts akin to a family, where the shared goal (corporate mission) is
profit-seeking through selling products and services (208). Koehn (2020) acknowledges that the corporation
is neither a large family since employees could get dismissed nor a small polis since it does not preserve
liberty or property rights when it comes to the final good of collective life. 


In Confucian accounts, since familial interests supersede individual for greater social harmony, the whole
society would be a form of „familial collectivism“ (Sison et.al 2020, 246) where relatives should help each
other due to the natural emotional attachments, the society would also favour particularism as opposed to
universalism where individual personal relationships prevail over his qualifications or abilities. This
distinction is particularly significant to understand that society and economic exchange are fundamentally
structured in terms of social networks. As such, the corporation can be legitimately posited in the Confucian
thoughts as a family larger than the nuclear one (Koehn 2020, 208). Also, the main emphasis on benevolence
implies the social relatedness dimension in a strong positive sense, and therefore individuals who are not
biologically related are obliged to help others achieve their life goal as „shared moral development“ (Sison
et.al 2020, 245).

The dimension of righteousness suggests governing people through a sense of shame and love, where the
people would correct the behaviours themselves. Further, derived from the Confucian’s moral teachings, we
would therefore expect that in Chinese business activities, individuals would naturally provide preferential
treatment based on blood-based relationships (guanxi) and gift-giving networking (or bribery) due to the
tight family relations which also later expanded to friends and acquaintances (Sison et.al 2020, 246). Hence
in Sison et.al (2020)’s opinion, individuals not practising nepotism would be considered untrustworthy
according to the protective nature of Confucian family ethos (250). Further, Koehn (2020) supplemented that
Confucian virtue ethics would see the firm as a „nursery of virtue“ (208), where a healthy corporation would
look beyond blood loyalties and the leader would act as a parental figure looking after the employees, to gain
their trust and loyalty.

3 of 6
 STS and Business Ethics 2021/2022
Meilin Lyu

Furthermore, by applying the family systems theory, which explores the patterns and rules in family
member interactions (Sison et al. 2020), Confucian families are seen to be inflexible since their role
relationships are static. The distinct characteristics of these families are „high closeness, loyalty, dependency,
and subject to strict leadership and discipline“ (247). In terms of business culture, it could subject higher
successful successor development in the family business and subordinates responsiveness to changes in
organisational design. Secondly, in terms of communication and the associated mental health of family
members, Confucian families may be less open to discussing different topics due to high conformity to social
norms and maintenance of social harmony. As such, in family communication patterns theory (247, referred
from Fitzpatrick and Ritchie 1994), individuals may have weaker social skills and non-assertiveness in
business groups. Thirdly, the family-niche model of birth order (refereed from Paulhus et.al 1999; Sulloway
1996) may indicate the strict hierarchical order in Confucian culture. And fourthly, the parental control
theory (referred from Baumrind 1971; Steinberg et al. 1989) suggests that the result of extending paternalism
where a son must obey his father and a wife to her husband would account for significant implications for
authoritarian leadership style, where the superior would influence the subordinates with his standards and
values (248). Also, the paternalistic management style could be reflected in corporate culture, with respect
for seniority and a lifetime employment policy (250). Sison et.al (2020) has not elaborated on further
explanations, but we could predict that in contrast, Aristotelian families would allow a greater margin in
conservation acknowledging its democratic political regimes. Similarly, Aristotelian families also emphasise
primogeniture with a high level of conformity where members are expected to hold identical beliefs and
values. Moreover, Sison et.al (2020) has categorised the Aristotelian families in the range between
authoritarian and authoritative, since its patriarchal tradition accepts two-way communication and is more
lenient on the absolute authority of rulers over subjects (248).

Given the dominant vertical order of Confucian society, which is further concretised through the five sets of
superior-subordinate relationships (wulun): the father and son governed by closeness (qin), the ruler and
subject governed by justice (yi), the husband and wife governed by gender-specific roles (bie), the elder
brother and younger both governed by proper order (wu), and the relationship between friends governed by
trust (xin) (Sison et.al 2020, 246). We could make sense that the designation of „social roles“ has occupied a
prominent place in Confucian virtue ethics (Koehn 2020, 209). However, it must be extremely cautious as a
practical warning in Confucian ethics that all rules should not be applied mechanically, and rituals could be
put aside completely when they would endanger the foundation of human behaviour (Koehn 2020, 214). In
comparison, Aristotle also explicitly rejects the notion that virtuous behaviour is an art (technē) that has
„fixed, nonnegotiable responsibilities“ (209). As previously discussed, Aristotelian virtues are viewed as a
political pillar, which cannot be gained in habit acquisition, but through making practically wise actions to
the particular situations. Nonetheless, Aristotelian tradition would be sceptical of the Confucian notion that
corporations can operate as a nursery of virtue. So far, we can see that Confucius is more optimistic that a
large number of individuals can become virtuous, whereas, for Aristotle, practical virtues are habits of good
choice. Also, Confucius’ interests in the dimension of ritual performance have not been emphasised at all in
the Aristotelian cultivation of character (Koehn 2020, 210). The primary value of ritual propriety lies in its
transformative power of habituation, by doing something repeatedly, it provides eye-opening insights to
4 of 6
 STS and Business Ethics 2021/2022
Meilin Lyu

employees into what makes a healthy team and meaningful works by enriching employees’ understanding of
the firm’s business. 


Essentially, Koehn (2020) recognises that Confucian pragmatic ethics is „intrinsically variable“ (213), since
each individual has different sets of habits and skills, Confucius moral teachings would adjust in response to
the flows in each particular conversation. Within a dynamically evolving community, an ideal Confucian
administration would be that the leader adheres to the principle of WúWéi, referring to the power of
influencing others by the virtue of one’s example, and less about controlling others’ behaviours (212). Sison
et.al (2020), however, has not commented on the notion of WúWéi leadership, possibly because it largely
bridges with the typical Daoist thoughts. Further, Koehn (2020) has spent a fair amount of time analysing the
political-ethical requirement of a leader to scrutinise his own behaviour and trustworthiness before
instructing his subjects. In return, others would imitate this example by walking the dao (212). As such, we
can interpret that adjusting the self to propensities is rather opportunistic and far less systematic. In contrast,
Aristotle has not offered an example of virtuous individuals in the Nicomachean Ethics. We can say that he
does not believe in the spontaneous instructive power, but stressing on the particulars of situations, where
choice can be made deliberately through voluntary actions, to realise a plan through precise steps (212). As
such, Aristotelian tradition identifies that we cannot become courageous through imitation, but by
conscientiously finding and enacting the mean through feedback of reinforcement mechanism (Sison et.al
2020, 248). Eventually, virtues as a partially constitutive element of human flourishing, are necessary to
reach its final end and therefore derive „eudaimonia“.



IV. Paper Discussion and Conclusion 

In sum, both papers have adapted hermeneutical mode in the light of Confucian and Aristotelian virtue ethics
standards, and both have focused more extensively on Confucianism normative theories and applications to
business ethics and practices in many ways. Firstly, Sison et.al (2020) and Koehn (2020) recognise the
importance of Confucian familial conceptualisation, where each individual occupies a distinct position in the
social hierarchy, typically relying on the force of unwritten social norms. The societies in Confucian tradition
are structured in terms of social relationships, where the economic exchange is embedded in networks of
personal contacts and personal affection. Secondly, the central role of ritual propriety (li) in Confucian virtue
ethics is viewed as a way of promoting self-discipline and creating shared values, where Aristotelian
tradition offers little insights for rituals, but identifies the dimension of rationality in emotions (e.g. adequate
and excessive economical interest). Thirdly, WúWéi leadership might be recognised as another unique notion
in Confucian Ethics, referring to rigorous self-refinement and active inaction. Finally, both papers have
discussed the contrasting views in two traditions on a firm’s ability to serve as a nursery of virtue.

In my opinion, Sison et.al (2020) has explored in greater detail the comparative study of families in both
traditions and how they enshrine in different examples of business practices. However, it has offered fewer
explanations connecting with the business structure, organisation and dynamics. Koehn (2020) takes a more
critical approach reviewing different ethicists and management theories and further adding his own
5 of 6
 STS and Business Ethics 2021/2022
Meilin Lyu

understandings on aspects of differences between the two virtue ethics. The paper analyses from an abstract
point of view by interpreting some of the Confucian metaphors. Koehn (2020) has closely adhered to the two
philosophical thoughts and offered a diversified range of standpoints with detailed explanations when they
are applied in corporate entities. However, I think that Koehn (2020) has merged elements of the ethics
philosophy of Daoism and Buddhism into the Confucian virtue ethics analysis. 


Furthermore, considering the practicality of these theoretical discussions in modern business activities, I
think that some hermeneutical interpretations are generalised too quickly without taking globalism and
formal legal frameworks into account. Sison et.al (2020) has applied strict observance of the five superior-
subordinate relationships (wu lun) to the modern corporate environment, where he discusses the principles of
trust, reputation and reciprocity that have led to the commonplace practice of bribery and gift-giving. The
notion of guanxi is indeed a prevalent social phenomenon developed particularly in China, and Sison et. al
(2020) has uncovered many other interesting cultural awareness in relation, such as „ganqing“ (the emotional
attachment) and „mianzi“ (face and the importance of honour), etc (250). Nonetheless, it is fair to say that
amid the unique „Chinese characteristics“ interpreted through the Confucian virtue ethics tradition, the
institutional support for the compliance in China of contractual obligations also shares a de-personalised
nature and rests on legal frameworks, which are not only found exclusively in Aristotelian (Western)
societies.

All in all, this essay has reviewed two papers and explored the interpretations of two different virtue ethics
traditions in binding employees together in valuable and legitimate ways in different societies.

Word Count: 3,007




V. References
Κoehn, Δ. (2020). How would Confucian virtue ethics for business differ from Aristotelian virtue ethics? Journal of Business
Ethics, 165 (2): 205–219.

Sison, A.J.G., Ferrero, I. and Redín, D.M. (2020). Some virtue ethics implications from Aristotelian and Confucian
perspectives on family and business. Journal of Business Ethics, 165 (2): 241–254.


6 of 6