Ritual Practice Robots: The Importance of Incorporating “li” ^†

Abstract

Confucian ethics, as a form of virtue ethics, focuses on moral practices and ritual norms, which differ significantly from utilitarian and deontological theories. Confucian ethics emphasize that moral norms are not only theoretically prescribed, but are also deeply embedded in etiquette practice, which is manifested through actual social behaviors. By integrating Confucian ethics into the design of social robots to form artificial intelligence with the function of etiquette practice, it provides an innovative solution to improve the quality of human–robot relationships and the morality of the society.

1. Introduction

Against the backdrop of the rapid development of contemporary artificial intelligence technology, social robots, as key carriers of human–robot interaction, have made their ethical design a crucial issue at the intersection of technological advancement and humanistic care. While traditional ethical theories such as utilitarianism and deontology offer distinct perspectives on moral judgment, each has its own limitations: Utilitarianism, centered on “the principle of maximum happiness”, emphasizes the optimization of outcomes, yet the complexity of quantifying individual happiness and interests often plunges it into practical dilemmas. Deontology, guided by the “categorical imperative”, focuses on the moral obligations of actions but tends to overlook the rationality of emotional needs and material foundations in real-world contexts. Either theory overemphasizes outcome calculation or rigidly adheres to abstract norms, and neither fully address the core question of “how morality can be put into practice” in human–robot relationships within the technological era.

Confucian “li” (ritual propriety) is more than mere ritual norms; it is a value system that connects individual virtue and social order. Through the cultivation path of “from the external to the internal, from oneself to others”, it transforms moral cognition into specific practices in daily behavior.

Based on this, this paper proposes integrating Confucian rituals into the design of social robots, aiming to construct artificial intelligence entities with ritual practice capabilities. The goal is to transcend their mere attribute as technical tools, enabling them to become carriers for cultivating human–robot virtues and enhancing social moral standards. The key to achieving this lies in deeply exploring the essence, practice paths, and social functions of Confucian “li”, and then translating these elements into the interaction logic and behavioral norms of robots. This design not only provides new theoretical support for the ethical framework of social robots but also offers innovative solutions for improving the quality of human–robot relationships and promoting social moral development. Ultimately, it points to the in-depth integration of “technology for good” and “humanities embedded in technology”.

2. Utilitarianism and Moralistic Ethical Thought

Utilitarianism germinated in the ancient Greek period. Initially, utilitarianism was associated with words such as happiness and pleasure, focusing on the close connection between morality and the reality of material life, affirming the individual’s material needs, and opposing the opposition between morality and material interests. Modern western utilitarianism is represented by Bianchin, Stewart, etc. They emphasize that the correctness of behavior lies in whether the result can maximize happiness or utility [1], and the core idea is “the principle of maximum happiness”, which focuses mainly on the maximization of the result rather than the intrinsic motives or norms of the behavior, and if a certain behavior can maximize the happiness and welfare of the society as a whole, then this behavior is the best way to maximize the happiness and welfare of the society as a whole [2]. If an action maximizes the happiness and welfare of society as a whole, then the action is moral. Utilitarianism is often applied in policy making and social decision making.

Deontology has grown up almost in tandem with utilitarianism. The word comes from the Greek word “deon”, meaning “necessity, duty”. Ancient Greco-Roman thinkers centered their thoughts on the purpose of life and happiness. In modern times, this school of thought gradually formed the moral theory represented by Spinoza, Kant, and so on, which believed that moral behavior should be judged according to the principle of reason and duty [3]. The “categorical imperative” put forward by Kant requires that people’s conduct should conform to the principle of universalization, i.e., if a code of conduct can be universally observed by all without contradiction, then the conduct is moral. On the issue of the relationship between morality and interest, Kant emphasizes morality and despises interest, denies the interest basis of morality, and believes that all moral values arise out of the rejection of material desires [4]. The theory of morality rejects sensual things and material factors, refers morality to interests, emphasizes the priority and supremacy of morality over interests, stresses the antagonistic relationship between righteousness and profit, and advocates sacrificing profit to achieve righteousness. This reflects the color of “moralism”, which is very different from utilitarianism.

3. The Idea of Ritual Propriety (li) in Confucian Ethics

Within the Confucian intellectual system, “ritual” (li) is by no means merely intricate ceremonies or superficial politeness. Rather, it constitutes a core value system that integrates moral substance with social order. It serves both as a ladder for individual ethical cultivation and a cornerstone for maintaining social harmony. Confucius emphasized in the Analects (Lunyu, “Yan Yuan” chapter): “To subdue oneself and return to ritual is benevolence”. This reveals the intrinsic connection between ritual and the highest moral state, “benevolence” (ren)—ritual is the externalized practice of benevolence, while benevolence is the spiritual core of ritual [5]. This practical nature of morality distinguishes Confucian ethics from abstract deontology and utilitarianism. It demands that moral understanding must be realized and expressed through the concrete, standardized behavioral system of “ritual propriety”. As stated in the Book of Rites (Liji, “Quli” chapter): “Benevolence, righteousness, morality, and virtue cannot be fully realized without ritual”. This profoundly illustrates that morality divorced from the concrete practice of ritual is nothing but a castle in the air. Understanding the profound connotation of “ritual” is the theoretical prerequisite for demonstrating the significance of integrating into it.

3.1. The Essence of Ritual Propriety

Confucian li encompasses three interrelated dimensions. First, there is the standardized expression of moral emotions. Li transforms abstract virtues such as ren (humaneness) and yi (righteousness) into visible, tangible, and practicable behavioral norms. Confucius’ attitude towards sacrificial rites illustrates this: “When sacrificing to the spirits, act as if the spirits were present”. This emphasizes that sincere reverence within the heart during ritual performance far outweighs external form, demonstrating that li is the external projection of internal moral sentiment. This “emotion-behavior” translation mechanism offers a core insight for robot design: moral norms should not remain at the level of abstract preaching but need to be conveyed through specific interactive behaviors to impart emotional warmth and value orientation.

Second, there is the orderly construction of social relationships. Through its function of “determining proximity and distance, resolving ambiguities, and distinguishing similarities and differences”, it establishes norms of interaction for the Five Cardinal Relationships (wulun): ruler–minister, father–son, husband–wife, elder–younger, and friend–friend. Confucius’ ethical injunction that “rulers must be rulers, ministers must be ministers, fathers must be fathers, sons must be sons” is precisely realized through the ritual system, ensuring each social role fulfills its specific responsibilities [5]. For robots, this means that their interaction logic needs to be adapted to different social relationship scenarios: when handling workplace consultations, maintaining a professional tone but without being overly intimate. This “relationship-behavior” adaptability design is precisely the extension of the social function of etiquette in technology.

Finally, there is the civilized sublimation of natural emotions. Li (ritual propriety) transforms humanity’s instinctive joys, angers, sorrows, and happiness into appropriate modes of expression. The “grief” in funeral rituals, the “reverence” in wedding rituals, and the “sincerity” in sacrificial rituals all exemplify how li channels and elevates emotions. This capacity for “emotion-to-civilization” transformation offers a key insight for robot design: technology must transcend mere “functional satisfaction” and, through ritual practice, guide users toward more civilized ways of expressing emotions.

3.2. The Practice of Ritual Propriety

The practice of li follows a cultivation path described as “from the external to the internal, and from the self to others”. At the individual level, li serves as the foundational discipline for “self-cultivation”. Daily behavioral norms—such as the “rites governing sitting, standing, walking”—are internalized into moral character through continuous practice, culminating in the self-perfection of “subduing the self and returning to ritual propriety”. At the familial level, ancestral rites reinforce the filial ethic of “treating death with reverence and remembering ancestors with devotion”. Wedding ceremonies construct the familial order of “righteousness between husband and wife”. Mourning rites cultivate the bonds of kinship through “communal sorrow”, thereby forming a familial ethical community characterized by “affection between father and son, harmony among brothers, and concord between husband and wife” [6]. At the social level, li (ritual propriety) serves as the foundation of governance. The Book of Rites puts forward the expansive logic of “cultivating the self, regulating the family, governing the state, and bringing peace to all under Heaven” [6]. The rural drinking ritual fosters harmony among neighbors through toasts and reciprocity between host and guest; the court audience and tribute ritual regulates political interactions through courteous salutations, deference, and proper movement—together forming a model of social governance where “li enables the practice of righteousness”.

3.3. The Functions of Ritual Propriety

Li possesses three core functions within the Confucian social vision. First, it constructs harmonious interpersonal relationships. The principle that “the function of ritual propriety lies in achieving harmony” is realized through concrete norms such as “respecting the elderly and cherishing the young” and “reciprocity in ritual conduct”. These provide both a measure for emotional expression and a buffer mechanism for conflict resolution during interactions between different social groups. Second, it establishes stable social order. Xunzi profoundly observed that “humans are born with desires; if desires are not satisfied, they contend; contention leads to disorder”. Consequently, “the ancient kings established ritual principles and righteousness to allocate distinctions” [7]. Li achieves order by “rectifying names and defining social status”, clarifying social divisions of labor and resource allocation. Regulations governing attire, carriages, horses, and ceremonial paraphernalia for different ranks serve to satisfy legitimate desires while preventing disorderly contention. Third, it transmits cultural and spiritual values. Various ritual activities function as living embodiments of ethical concepts: the capping rite proclaims adult responsibilities; the wedding ceremony symbolizes familial continuity; sacrificial rites transmit historical memory; the archery rite cultivates the demeanor of a noble person. Through their symbolic enactment, these ceremonies ensure the intergenerational transmission of core values such as “filial piety”, “reverence”, and “sincerity”, thereby forming the spiritual DNA of a cultural community.

The essence, practice, and function of Confucian “li” (ritual propriety) provide a unique ethical framework for the design of social robots. It requires technology not only to meet functional needs but also to transform abstract morality into concrete interactions through the paths of “behavioral practice”, “relational adaptation”, and “civilized sublimation”. This design concept is precisely the core of “the importance of incorporating li”.

4. Ritual Propriety Practice Design for Social Robots and Its Significance

4.1. Design of Ritual Propriety Practice for Social Robots

From the perspective of Confucian ethics, the design of social robots needs to transcend the limitations of “instrumentalism”, positioning them as cultural mediums and carriers of interaction norms rather than anthropomorphic moral subjects. The essence of Confucian “li” (ritual propriety) lies in the institutionalized expression of social relations; its core is not about replicating the specific forms of ancient rituals, but about extracting its inherent cultural genes—respect, harmony, moderation, and responsibility—and transforming these values into interaction logic that aligns with the contemporary context.

Specifically, the design needs to focus on the following dimensions: First, the digital expression of respect and modesty. The Book of Rites·Qu Li states, “Ritual propriety values reciprocity. To give without receiving in return is not propriety; to receive without giving in return is also not propriety”. Confucianism emphasizes the reciprocity of ritual interactions. Robots need to identify users’ emotions and needs through natural language processing technology, and demonstrate respect through appropriate responses. For example, when a user expresses dissatisfaction, the robot should avoid mechanical repetition of “sorry” and instead convey empathy by adjusting its tone; when a user shows excessive dependence, the robot can guide them to form healthy interaction habits by setting interaction boundaries. Second, the algorithmic implementation of harmony and the Doctrine of the Mean. The Confucian “the Doctrine of the Mean” is not eclecticism, but emphasizes the balance of situational adaptation. Robots need to judge interaction scenarios through situational perception technology and dynamically adjust their behavioral strategies. For instance, in family scenarios, more formal forms of address should be used when interacting with elders; in children’s education, concepts of order can be conveyed through gamified ritual teaching. Third, hierarchical design for cultural adaptation. Confucian “hierarchical order” does not imply rigid hierarchy, but emphasizes clarity of role responsibilities. Robots need to adjust ritual norms according to users’ identities: designing a “slow interaction” mode for elderly users to reflect care for elders; providing “multimodal ritual libraries” for cross-cultural users to reduce cultural misunderstandings.

In terms of technical implementation, as AI entities with a certain degree of autonomy, social robots can have their design and functions deeply integrate the practical characteristics of Confucian rituals [8]. “Embedding li in artifacts” constitutes the core of Confucian ethics of technology, emphasizing the embodiment and inheritance of the concept of li through the production and use of artifacts—this can be achieved through data-driven ritual learning. Robots can learn localized ritual norms through large-scale social corpora and optimize interaction strategies in combination with reinforcement learning (RL): when users provide positive feedback on a certain ritual response, the system will increase the weight of that behavior; otherwise, it will adjust accordingly. This “data-feeding-ritual” mechanism enables robots to dynamically adapt to cultural changes and avoid rigidly replicating traditional forms.

4.2. The Significance of Designing Ritually Compliant Robots

In contemporary China, although the specific forms of traditional rituals have weakened, the cultural genes within Confucian ethics still profoundly influence social interactions: people’s expectations for “respect”, “dignity”, and “harmony” have not diminished; instead, they have transformed into demands for “technology with warmth” and “rule-abiding interactions”. Developing ritual-practicing social robots is precisely an innovative approach to responding to this cultural and psychological need. First, optimizing the cultural adaptability of human–robot interaction. Current intelligent assistants are often criticized by users for their “mechanical feel”, the root cause of which lies in the lack of cultural sensitivity in their interaction logic. Robots integrated with Confucian rituals can reduce users’ sense of dissonance through “contextualized responses”, enabling technology to integrate more naturally into daily life. For example, during the Spring Festival, the robot can proactively prompt, “Today is Chinese New Year’s Eve; would you like me to send blessing messages to your family?” and provide templates that conform to traditional rituals. Second, promoting the implicit inheritance of social morality. The essence of Confucian “li” (ritual propriety) is “teaching without words”, which transmits values through daily interactions. Ritual-practicing robots can influence user behavior through “micro-interventions”: when users are rude to service staff, the robot can gently remind them, “Your tone just now might have made the other person feel disrespected; would you like to adjust it?” Such subtle moral guidance, like “moistening things silently”, is more easily accepted than didactic education. Finally, they can build a bridge for cross-cultural understanding. Against the backdrop of globalization, different cultures have significantly different definitions of “ritual propriety”. Ritual-practicing robots can switch through “multiple ritual modes” to help users understand and adapt to different cultural norms, reducing friction in cross-cultural interactions. To sum up, the design of ritual practice for social robots is not about anthropomorphizing robots; rather, it involves embedding the values in Confucian ethics that are adaptable to modern society into technical logic through the digital translation of cultural genes. This makes human–robot interaction more aligned with users’ cultural and psychological expectations, ultimately achieving the goal of “technology serving people and culture nourishing interaction”.

5. Conclusions

In the era where technology and humanities are deeply intertwined, the integration of Confucian ethics and modern artificial intelligence (AI) technology has opened up a new path for the etiquette practice design of social robots. The core of “ritual propriety” in Confucian thought, as a spiritual bond maintaining traditional social order, contains profound insights into interpersonal relationships and moral norms. When this ideological system is integrated into the design framework of social robots, these machines transcend their mere status as tools and evolve into “intelligent agents” capable of practicing moral codes and conveying humanistic care. This integration is by no means a simple superimposition of cultural symbols; rather, it transforms Confucian etiquette principles such as “respect and modesty” and “harmony and the Doctrine of the Mean” into executable algorithmic logic and interaction strategies. For example, when facing users with emotional fluctuations, robots draw on the reciprocal concept of “propriety values reciprocity” to soothe emotions with humble and peaceful responses, avoiding the escalation of conflicts; in intergenerational interaction scenarios, they guide users to establish benign communication patterns by simulating the ritual norms of “hierarchical order”.

From the perspective of social impact, this integration carries multiple values. It significantly enhances the naturalness and affinity of human–robot interaction, enabling social robots to capture human emotional needs more accurately and thus truly integrate into daily life. In the dimension of moral cultivation, robots serve as implicit carriers of moral education through consistent and standardized etiquette practices, subtly reinforcing users’ moral cognition and promoting the improvement of overall social moral standards. Meanwhile, the design and application of cross-cultural etiquette break down cultural barriers, providing intelligent solutions for pluralistic communication in the context of globalization. Looking to the future, with the iterative upgrading of AI technology, social robots are expected to demonstrate stronger adaptability and flexibility in etiquette practices, achieving more delicate emotional resonance and moral guidance in complex social scenarios. This development trend not only calls for breakthroughs in technological innovation but also requires academic and industrial circles to deeply excavate the modern value of traditional ethical thoughts, construct a development paradigm that integrates technical rationality and humanistic spirit, and enable social robots to truly become positive forces promoting social civilization and progress.