Intentionality as the core of ethical judgment

The maxim — “Intentional good deeds deserve no reward; unintentional wrongdoings warrant no punishment” — originates from Strange Tales from Liaozhai Studio: The Examination for the Post of City God (Candidate for the City God). It was Song Tao’s answer during his underworld examination.

This statement won the examiners’ approval for its incisive grasp of ethical judgment’s essence, ultimately securing Song Tao’s appointment as City God. Though seemingly simple, it crystallizes Pu Songling’s profound insight into morality: motivation, not consequence, lies at the heart of judging good and evil. It implicitly advocates for pure morality, condemns hypocrisy, and embraces human complexity–themes echoed throughout Strange Tales.

Critique of Utilitarian Goodness

The “intention” in “intentional good deeds” refers to motives driven by utilitarian aims: seeking fame, profit, avoiding misfortune, or currying favor–not genuine moral conviction. Though such “good” may yield positive outcomes, its impure motivation strips it of ethical authenticity, thus “deserving no reward.”

In “Kao Cheng Huang”(Examination for the Post of City God), this maxim serves as the core criterion for selecting a City God, implying that underworld adjudicators must discern the hypocrisy of utilitarian charity.

Tolerance for Human Frailty: Rejecting Consequentialist Rigidity

The “wrongdoing” (evil) in “unintentional wrongdoing” denotes mistakes, accidents, or ignorant acts without malicious intent. Despite causing harm, the absence of “intent to harm” justifies “no punishment.” This principle transcends rigid consequentialist judgment, acknowledging human complexity: To err is human. True evil lies in deliberate malice, not unintentional error.

Pu Songling repeatedly demonstrates tolerance for “unintentional wrongs” in other tales. For example:

In the story of The Cricket, Cheng Ming’s son accidentally kills his father’s prized cricket. “Terrified, he drowns himself,” an act that nearly destroys the family. Yet his motive was fear, not malice. His eventual reincarnation as a cricket to save his father metaphorically embodies “forgiveness for unintentional error.”