72 Henry Rasemzont, J1:

It is in this epistemologically and ethically extended meaning of the term

roles that the early Confucians would have insisted that I do not play or per-
f o m but, rather, carry and become the roles X live in consonance with orh-
ers, so that when all the roles have been specified, and their interconnections
made manifest, then I have been specified fully as a unique person, with few
discernible loose threads from which to piece together a purely ralronal, au-
tonomous, rights-holding individual self.
Here it is tempting to paraphrase one of the most famous passages in
David Humc's A Treattse orz Haman Nature:

I b r my part, wlien I enter rnast intirnatcly into wliat 1 call nzyseq, 1 a1ways
srurnble on some particular role o r other, of son o r father, lover o r friend, stu-
dcne, or teacher, brother or ncighbr~c1 never can catcli mysef, at any time apart
from a rule, and never can observe anything except from the viewpoint of a role.
. . . If anyone upon serious and unprejudiced reflection, eliinks he has a different
notion of hirnseF, f; lmust confess that X can no tonger reason with him. Aft that 1
can allow him is, that he may be in the right as well as 1, and that we are essen-
tialip different in this particular. H e may perhaps, perceive something simple
and continued, which he catts htmseg tcho" am certain there is no such princi-
ple in rne.l

To suggest such a notion of &c scli is not to deny our strong scnse of
being colztinwo~sselves. But as Catherine Keller has a r g u e d , l h e can have a
concept of "personal self-identity9'-as persons-without the philosophi-
cally more common (and paradox-generating) concc.pt of strict self-identity,
According to Keller, we can thus achieve at least "a light and loose sense of
the unity of the person."l7 (I will have more to say on the concept of strict
self-identity bclow.)
Moreover, seen in this socially contestualized w q , my own identity is, in
an important sense, not achieved by me; I am not solely responsible for be-
coming who 1am. Of course, a great deaf of personal effort is required ro bc-
come a good person. But nevertheless, much of who and what I am is deter-
mined by the others with whom I ix~teract,just as my efforts determirle in
part who and what &cy are, I f I am y d ~ gto my children and students, 1 am
yin to my parents and teachers. Personhood or identity, in this sense, is basi-
cally conferred on us, just as we basically contribute to conferring it on oth-
ers. Again, thc point is obvious, but the Confucian perspective requires us ro
state it in another tone of voice: My life as a teacher can be made signihcant
only by my students; in order to ire a friend, a lover, or a neighbor, I must
hnve a friend, a lover, or a neighbor; my life as a husband is made meaningful
only by my wife, my life as a scholar only by other scholars.
The Confucian ideal m s t of course be modified significantly if it is to
have any contemporary purchase in China o r elsewhere, for the eartier
charge of patriarchy is well taken. Confucius and his followers were indeed