Xunzi and Freud: How to Avoid Mistranslation and Misapplication in Comparative Philosophy

Abstract This paper examines translation-induced misinterpretations in comparative studies of Xunzi 荀子, where poor word choices mislead readers unfamiliar with the text’s cultural context. Such errors intensify when scholars uncritically adopt flawed translations and impose modern categories, notably Freudian ones, on ancient texts. A key example is misinterpreting Xunzi’s ren 忍 (restraint) and bi 蔽 (beclouding) as “repression” and “obsession.” Although “repression” originally meant restraint and “obsession” denoted persistent thoughts, their post-Freudian connotations—unconscious suppression and compulsive behavior—psychologize ren and bi as neurotic mental states, unsupported by Xunzi’s text. This approach further blurs the fundamental difference between Xunzi’s theory of li 禮 (propriety, ritual), an endeavor aiming at ethical cultivation and social harmony, with Freud’s theory of ritual as behaviors rooted in compulsive neurosis, overlooking the fact that Freudian ritual hinges on unconscious mental states, thus oversimplifying and distorting their respective frameworks. By addressing these translation-driven misconceptions, this paper clarifies the distinct ideas of Xunzi and Freud, advocating for translations and interpretations that respect Xunzi’s Confucian context and ensure comparisons with thinkers like Freud are grounded in their unique philosophical frameworks.