Human Action in the Order of the Living

In the notice addressed to the cardinals of the Congregation of Propaganda Fide in 1738, the Yi King is presented as a work whose significance extends beyond mere observation. The text does not confine itself to describing phenomena but offers a way of conceiving the relationship between humanity and its surroundings. The wisdom it conveys is not reducible to passive acceptance: it entails a form of participation in the world’s movements.

Participation in the Cycles

The Yi King does not prescribe an explicit method, but its approach suggests that humanity is not a detached spectator. The 1738 notice describes a book that, without issuing precise directives, invites us to regard transformations as a framework within which human action finds its place. The point is not to subject these transformations to an external will but to recognize them as an element with which to engage.

In de Guignes’ edition of P. Gaubil’s translation of the Shu, there is a notice on the Yi King sent in 1738 to the Cardinals of the Congregation de Propaganda Fide by M.

This notice does not detail the modalities of such participation, but it implies that the Yi King proposes a path where humanity is not set against natural cycles. There is no question of ignoring or constraining them but of accounting for them as a fundamental given. Human action, in this perspective, is not defined by its autonomy but by its integration into a larger whole.

An Ethics of Community

Aldo Leopold, in A Sand County Almanac, approaches the question of human action from a different angle. He begins with an ethical premise: the individual does not exist in isolation but as a member of a community. This community is not merely human; it encompasses all elements that compose the living world.

TO THIS DAY, every ethic rests upon a single premise: that the individual is a member of a community of interdependent parts.

Leopold does not merely acknowledge this interdependence. He makes it the foundation of a way of acting. If the individual is bound to the other elements of the community, their actions cannot be conceived independently of this relationship. The ethics he proposes is not a simple recognition of interdependence; it requires that humanity take it into account in its choices.

This approach does not deny the world’s transformations but considers them within a specific framework: that of a community where each part has a role. Human action, in this view, is not defined by its adaptation to change but by its capacity to preserve or restore the bonds that unite the elements of this community.

Two Paths to the Same Question

The Yi King and Leopold address human action from two distinct perspectives. The former proposes participation in natural cycles without seeking to dominate or alter them. The latter grounds ethics in the interdependence of beings, where humanity bears a responsibility toward the community of which it is a part.

These two approaches do not necessarily oppose one another. They respond to the same question: how can humanity act in a world that surpasses it? The Yi King suggests an answer through integration into a broader order, while Leopold proposes one through the recognition of a community in which humanity is an active member.

Neither prescribes a universal solution. The Yi King does not provide rules for action but a way of considering humanity’s place within the world’s transformations. Leopold, for his part, does not define a precise method but an ethical orientation: human action must account for the interdependence of beings.

These two paths do not converge in a synthesis, but each offers a way of thinking about human action without reducing it to a mere reaction to circumstances. One invites us to engage with cycles, the other to preserve the bonds that unite the living. They do not exclude one another but propose complementary responses to the same inquiry.