墨子 (pīnyīn: Mò zǐ) – 470 BC-391 BC lived after Confucius. In ancient times his name has been closely associated with that of Confucius. Later it became less known, and a revival of his thinking happened during the 清 (pīnyīn: qīng) dynasty, in the late nineteenth century A.D.
The key book for the Moist School 墨家 (pīnyīn: mò jiā) – is the Mo Tzu – 墨子, that is attributed to Mo Tzu. There are however six chapters that are attributable to later Moists:
The key book for the Moist School 墨家 (pīnyīn: mò jiā) – is the Mo Tzu – 墨子, that is attributed to Mo Tzu. There are however six chapters that are attributable to later Moists:
- 墨經 (simplified: 墨经, pīnyīn: Mò jīng), chapters 40-41v
- 經說 (simplified: 经说, pīnyīn: jīng shuō), chapters 42-43
- 大取 (pīnyīn: dà qǔ), chapter 44
- 小取 (pīnyīn: xiǎo qǔ), chapter 45
- Argumentation – 辯 (simplified:辩, pīnyīn: biàn The Mo Tzu introduced the notion that ideas should be judged by pre-established criteria. Although these criteria may include tradition, they supersede it with criteria that although flawed, are more related to a behaviorist view, leading to a more utilitarian view of the world. (Mo Tzu – XXXV-2, 『然則明辨此之說將柰何哉?子墨子言曰:“必立儀,言而毋儀,譬猶運鈞之上而立朝夕者也,是非利害之辨,不可得而明知也。故言必有三表。”何謂三表?子墨子 言曰:“有本之者,有原之者,有用之者。於何本之?上本之於古者聖王之事。於何原之?下原察百姓耳目之實。於何用之?廢以為刑政,觀其中國家百姓人民之 利。此所謂言有三表也。』,“Now, how is this doctrine to be examined? Mozi said: Some standard of judgment must be established. To expound a doctrine without regard to the standard is similar to determining the directions of sunrise and sunset on a revolving potter's wheel. By this means the distinction of right and wrong, benefit and harm, cannot be known. Therefore there must be three tests. What are the three tests? Mozi said: Its basis, its verifiability, and its applicability. How is it to be based? It should be based on the deeds of the ancient sage-kings. How is it to be verified? It is to be verified by the senses of hearing and sight of the common people. How is it to be applied? It is to be applied by adopting it in government and observing its benefits to the country and the people. This is what is meant by the three tests of every doctrine.”)
- Utilitarianism – the Moist School put emphasis solely on the ideas of Accomplishment - 功 (pīnyīn: gōng) and Benefit - 利 (pīnyīn: lì). This emphasis was a direct critic to Confucian ritualism. Mo Tzu emphasizes an objective common good (based on a pessimistic view of the human nature) in opposition to the subjective Confucian altruism (that is based on optimistic view of the human nature).
- Universal Love – 兼愛 (simplified: 兼爱, pīnyīn: Jiān ài) – the Mo Tzu sustained that the major calamities in the world were caused by the failure of man to love one another. The practice of universal love not only benefits the one who is loved, but also the one that loves, through reciprocity. The Universal Love – 兼愛 is therefore based on utilitarian arguments. (Mo Tzu – XIV-4, 『若使天下兼相愛,-愛人若愛其身,-猶有不孝者乎?視父兄與君若其身,惡施不孝?猶有不慈者乎?視弟子與臣若其身,惡施不慈?-故不孝-不慈亡-有,猶有盜賊乎?故視人之室若其室,誰竊?視人身若其身,誰賊?故盜賊亡有。猶有大夫之相亂家、諸侯之相攻國者乎?視人家若其家,誰亂?視人國若其國,誰攻?故大夫之相亂家、諸侯之相攻國者亡有。』,“Suppose everybody in the world loves universally, loving others as one's self. Will there yet be any unfilial individual? When everyone regards his father, elder brother, and emperor as himself, whereto can he direct any unfilial feeling? Will there still be any unaffectionate individual? When everyone regards his younger brother, son, and minister as himself, whereto can he direct any disaffection? Therefore there will not be any unfilial feeling or disaffection. Will there then be any thieves and robbers? When everyone regards other families as his own family, who will steal? When everyone regards other persons as his own person, who will rob? Therefore there will not be any thieves or robbers. Will there be mutual disturbance among the houses of the ministers and invasion among the states of the feudal lords? When everyone regards the houses of others as one's own, who will be disturbing? When everyone regards the states of others as one's own, who will invade? Therefore there will be neither disturbances among the houses of the ministers nor invasion among the states of the feudal lords.”)
- Pacifism – Mo Tzu condemned war on the basis of that war is not beneficial, as a corollary of the Universal Love.
- Assimilation - 兼 (simplified: 兼, pīnyīn: Jiān) - the moist “assimilation” marks a difference with the Confucian altruism in the sense that it is more “egalitarian”, i.e. it does not put emphasis on the differences (between father and son, husband and wife, etc) that lead to the Confucian ritualism and etiquette.
- Government and Sanctions – although advocating Universal Love - 兼愛, Mo Tzu did not believe that men would spontaneously adhere to it. Religious and political sanctions were therefore needed to induce men to the proper behavior. (Mo Tzu VII-4, 『昔三代聖王禹湯文武,此順天意而得賞也。昔三代之暴王桀紂幽厲,此反天意而得罰者也。』,“The ancient sage-kings of the Three Dynasties, Yu, Tang, Wen, and Wu, were those that obeyed the will of Heaven and obtained reward. And the wicked kings of the Three Dynasties, Jie, Zhou, You, and Li, were those that opposed the will of Heaven and incurred punishment.”)
- Sense of Justice and Conformity to the Superior - 尙同(simplified: 尙同, pīnyīn:shàng tong) - would be the common denominator to govern the relations between the sovereign and the people
- Will of Heaven - 天 - as a moral guide. (Mo Tzu, VII-2,『然則天亦何欲何惡?天欲義而惡不義。然則率天下之百姓以從事於義,則我乃為天之所欲也。』,“What does Heaven desire and what does it abominate? Heaven desires righteousness and abominates unrighteousness. Therefore, in leading the people in the world to engage in doing righteousness I should be doing what Heaven desires.”)
- Anti-fatalism – although it uses the Will of Heaven – 天 as a guide in morality, there is a strong Anti-fatalism proposed by Mo Tzu – 非命 (pīnyīn: Fēi mìng). In fact, a doctrine that would give place to an impersonal fate would contradict the view of a Will of Heaven administering punishment to men. (Mo Tzu – IX-3,『然而今天下之士君子,或以命為有。蓋嘗尚觀於聖王之事,古者桀之所亂,湯受而治之;紂之所亂,武王受而治之。此世未易民未渝,在於桀紂,則天下亂;在於湯武,則天下治,豈可謂有命哉!』,“Some of the gentlemen of the world assume there to be fate. Now let us examine the deeds of the sage-kings. In ancient times, the confusion produced by Jie was replaced by an orderly government by Tang, the chaos of Zhou was turned into order by King Wu. The times did not alter and the people did not change, yet under Jie and Zhou the world was chaotic and under Tang and Wu it was orderly. Can it be said that there is fate?”)
Post a Comment