We have made great strides in understanding some important cultural differences.In the Rhetoric,we have come to see,Aristotle teaches about the individual,the victorious,and the rational,while in the Analects,Confucius teaches about the family,the deferent,and the conversational.We have come to a point,however,that we want to bemore careful so as to produce more useful generalizations.Take the characterizations of Aristotles and Confuciusteachings above as an example.It is true that Aristotle says the substance of rhetoric is the enthymeme,the rhetorical syllogism (1354a15),and that Confucius teaches through analogy ([近取譬,可謂仁之方也已.] 6.28),induction of sorts.But the conclusion that Confucius would have no idea of or any interest in rhetoric as Aristotle discusses it should be problematic to anyone who has read the Rhetoric and the Analects.Similarities and differences are intertwined;therefore,to untwine them for the purpose of understanding cultural differences,we must do so carefully.This paper presents a reading of Confucius teaching of ren,yi,and li in the Analects as both similar and different from Aristotles teaching of epiecia,kairos,and topoi in the Rhetoric.They both emphasize the dynamic relation between form and matter,but they value defining that relationship differently.I will first problematize the simplistic reading of Aristotles rhetoric and then explain Confucius rhetorical thinking.We understand cultural difference for harmony(和),which presupposes differences.Therefore,I challenge neither the existence of differences nor the value of knowing them.On the contrary,precisely because understanding differences is so crucial to our goal of harmony,we must be careful.The paper will conclude with examples of how this rhetorical reading helps with cross-cultural understanding.