Can a Bad Example Teach You Something?

No One Has to Announce a Lesson

Three people are walking together. No one has offered to teach, yet Confucius says there is a teacher among them. Read this only as a reminder that everyone has strengths, and the second half remains unexplained. The saying finds a use for an unfavorable example as well as a good one.

The passage is attributed to Confucius (Kong Qiu) in Shu Er, a book of the Analects. This collection records sayings and conduct of Confucius and his disciples through later compilation and transmission. It is not a book he wrote himself or a verbatim transcript made during his lifetime. We use the common reference 7.22; some arrangements number the same passage 7.21.

Zhu Xi’s traditional commentary counts the speaker among the three walkers. A teacher here need not hold a teaching position. Someone’s conduct can give me an example through which to consider what to follow and what to correct. Three is not a minimum group size required before learning can begin.

Choose the Conduct, Not the Whole Person

The sentence includes a word for choosing: 擇. Learning from someone does not require accepting everything they do. There is still a judgment to make about which action deserves to be followed, and why.

Consider a modern situation invented by Rantap. On a neighborhood walking outing, one participant waits at each junction and checks that those behind have seen the route. This helps newcomers stay with the group. But the same participant repeatedly jokes in front of everyone about someone who took a wrong turn.

Must you copy the jokes to learn from the waiting? Must you dismiss the waiting because you dislike the jokes? You can distinguish conduct worth learning from and conduct you should not follow in the same person. This is a modern application of the choice in the passage, not an account of an outing Confucius took.

When the Uncomfortable Example Points Back at You

You might stop at finding the jokes unpleasant. But later you remember telling someone who asked about a familiar route, “How do you not know that?” The direction of attention changes. The issue now includes how you speak in a similar situation, rather than only the other person’s failing.

Our translation makes self-examination explicit with “correct in myself.” The Chinese does not spell out the word “myself” in that clause. Zhu Xi’s commentary quotes an explanation by Yin that an unfavorable example can prompt inward self-examination. It is not an instruction to go and reform the other person.

On the next walk, our imaginary participant could explain a landmark that only regular walkers recognize, giving useful directions instead of a judgment about the person asking. This is an illustration of observation leading to a change in one’s own conduct, not a procedure supplied by the ancient text.

Nor must you assume that every fault you notice is also yours. Examine what you actually do and correct a resemblance if you find one. Taking responsibility for your conduct is different from taking the blame for someone else’s.

A Lesson Does Not Excuse the Conduct

Finding something to examine in yourself does not make the other person’s action acceptable. Asking for the jokes to stop can coexist with checking whether you have embarrassed someone in a similar way. If harmful conduct continues, stepping back or seeking help is compatible with learning. These are Rantap’s modern distinctions for applying the passage to relationships.

Calling someone a good or bad person can end the observation too soon. The latter part of the saying turns attention from that verdict back to your own conduct. What matters is not only what you admired, but what you corrected in your own actions after looking.