Criteria for selecting dialogue partners

In classical Western culture, what is considered appropriate is what is said or done in accordance with the vague rules of decorum — that is to say, what is ‘controlled, calm and polite’ (Cambridge Dictionary, ‘decorum’). Decorum implies caution and decency.

In classical Chinese culture, appropriate speech and behaviour are defined by the rules of ritual, which govern all conduct, including drinking alcohol or tea and conversing with a master.
These rules are set out in the Liji (Classic of Rites or Book of Rites), one of the five Chinese classics.
In the first chapter of his writings, ‘Exhortation to Learning‘, the philosopher Xunzi (298–238 BCE) recalls the principles to be observed in interactions between gentlemen willing to discuss « the methods of the Way ». We have introduced numbering and a segmented presentation.

1. 1. Do not answer one who asks about something improper.
   2. Do not ask questions of one who speaks on something improper.
   3. Do not listen to one who tries to persuade you of something improper.
   4. Do not debate with a person of combative demeanor.
   5. Only if people approach you in the proper way should you receive them. If they do not approach you in the proper way, then avoid them.
   6. And so, only if they follow ritual and are reverent should you discuss the methods of the Way with them.
   7. Only if their speech is calm should you discuss the methods of the Way with them.
   8. Only if their countenance is agreeable should you discuss the culmination of the Way with them.
   9. To discuss these things with those unfit to discuss them is called being presumtuous.
   10. Not to discuss these things with those fit to discuss them is called being secretive.
   11. To discuss these things without first observing the person’s manner and countenance is called being blind.
   12. The gentleman is neither presumptuous nor secretive nor blind; he carefully acts according to the other person’s character. The Odes says: The gentlemen are not indolent or haughty /Rewarded by the Son of Heaven shall they be.
       Xunzi_Hutton, 2016, p. 6-7

Xunzi’s recommendations are addressed to the Sage, who is approached by someone he does not know. This aspiring interlocutor with the Sage is evaluated as soon as he approaches him, in the first moments of the discussion.
This evaluation is based on his ability to conform to the ‘rite’. The terms ‘improper’ (1), ‘proper’ (2, 3, 5) and ‘ritual’ (6) refer to the notion of propriety, or ‘what is appropriate’, which conforms to the rules of ritual.
These meticulous rules define appropriate behaviour (4: demeanour) and facial expression (8: countenance). Aggressiveness (4: combative demeanour) is particularly frowned upon; argumentative personalities are undesirable and calmness is valued. This is a Confucian quality.

The Master was warm, yet severe; awesome, yet never harsh; reverent, yet calm.
Analects_Eno, 7.38

In the Confucian tradition, the Sage lives according to ritual, and therefore according to human nature:

Rules of propriety are not a body of ceremonies, but natural principles.
Chu Hsi, Lü Tsu Ch’ien. Reflections on things at hand, p. 128.

He can only be approached by someone who knows how to conform to it. The rite expresses the principles that define human beings and their activities. It provides the criterion for evaluating the degree of excellence of individuals, whether or not they are worthy of pursuing intellectual and spiritual research.

The parrot can speak, and yet is nothing more than a bird; the ape can speak, and yet is nothing more than a beast. Here now is a man who observes no rules of propriety; is not his heart that of a beast? But if (men were as) beasts, and without (the principle of) propriety, father and son might have the same mate. Therefore, when the sages arose, they framed the rules of propriety in order to teach men, and cause them, by their possession of them, to make a distinction between themselves and brutes.
Liji – Chap. 1, Qu Li “Summary of the Rules of Propriety – Part 1” §9

Nous sommes loin de la conception occidentale du rite comme mode d’organisation conventionnelle d’un type d’événements, voire comme symptôme névrotique. Cette vision du monde étant étrangère au monde occidental contemporain, il n’y aurait pas grand sens à rapprocher ces recommandations des règles de politesse (empiriques), ou de règles sur le dialogue argumentatif (normées par la raison), ou des règles conventionnelles explicites qui organisent les cérémonies occidentales.
Les grands systèmes occidentaux ne mentionnent pas de tels critères d’exclusion des discutants, à l’exception peut-être de Perelman & Olbrechts-Tyteca (1958), qui n’admettent pas n’importe quel interlocuteur

We are far removed from the Western conception of ritual as a conventional way of organizing certain types of recurring situation, or even as a neurotic symptom. As this Confucean worldview of ritual is foreign to us, it would not make much sense to compare these recommendations to our (empirical) rules of politeness, or to rules on argumentative reasonable dialogue.

The major Western systems do not mention such criteria for excluding discussants, with the possible exception of Perelman [2] & Olbrechts-Tyteca (1958), who explicitly do not admit just any interlocutor

There are people with whom any contact may seem superfluous or undesirable; there are people with whom we do not want to talk; there are also people with whom we do not want to discuss, but simply give orders. (1958, p. 20)

[1] Dans le lexique qui accompagne cette traduction de Mencius, Eno conserve le mot chinois junzi pour désigner le Sage ayant atteint un haut degré de développement moral et utilise le terme gentleman pour désigner le shi, simple aspirant à l’excellence morale (Mencius_Eno, p. 146). Nous assistons ici à la démarche du shi qui désire prendre un junzi pour modèle.

[2] Voir Plantin, Dictionnaire de l’argumentation, 2016 et 2021, art. Règles – Coopération – Rationalité et rationalisation – Normes – etc.