Both the Chuang Tzu - 莊子 and Han Fei Tzu -韓非子 mention three philosophers that claimed the Mohist tradition, but argued between them :Hsiang Li Ch’in - 相里勤 (pīnyīn: Xiāng Lǐ Qín), Teng Ling Zi - 鄧陵子 (simplified : 邓陵子, pīnyīn: dèng líng zi) and Hsiang Fu - 相夫(pīnyīn: xiāng fū). There are no direct writings from them, but it is currently thought that their contribution is in the Moist Canon 墨經 (simplified: 墨经, pīnyīn: Mò jīng), in particular in the chapters Exposition of the Canon - 經說 (simplified: 经说, pīnyīn: jīng shuō), Major Illustrations 大取 (pīnyīn: dà qǔ) and Minor Illustrations小取 (pīnyīn: xiǎo qǔ). Their main contribution was to advance the Mohist ideas through logic, as they tried to oppose the dialecticians using their own instrument: speech.
- Utilitarianism – the Later Mohists provided a psychological basis for the classical mohist utilitarianism, pushing the doctrine one step further.Therefore to move toward what is beneficial and away from what is harmful is inherent to man’s nature – (Exposition of the Canon - 經說, 『經上: 利，所得而喜也。 經說上: 利：得是而喜，則是利也。其害也，非是也。』, “Canon I:Li (benefit) is what one is pleased to get. Exposition of Canon I: If you are pleased to get this one, this is the beneficial one, and the harmful one is not this one.).
- From this viewpoint, the Mohist Canon establishes benefit for all morality (Exposition of the Canon - 經說, 『經上: 義，利也。』, “Canon I: To be yi (righteous/dutiful/moral) is to benefit.”)
- Discussions on Knowledge: to uphold common sense against the dialecticians logical views, the Later Mohists paid great attention to the nature of knowledge, classifying different types of knowledge, its origins and so on. (Exposition of the Canon -經說, 『經說, 經上: 知，聞、說、親，名、實、合、為。』, “Zhi (know). By hearsay, by explanation, by personal experience. The name, the object, how to relate, how to act. ”, 『知：傳受之，聞也；方不㢓，說也；身觀焉，親也。所以謂，名也；所謂，實也。名實耦，合也。志行，為也。』, “Having received it at second hand is knowing by 'hearsay'. Knowing that something square will not rotate is by 'explanation'. Having been a witness oneself is knowing 'by personal experience'. What something is called by is its 'name'. What is so called is the 'object'. The mating of 'name' and 'object' is 'relating'. To intend and to perform are to 'act'.”)
- Discussions on Dialetic –the Latest Mohist appropriate and improved the methods created by the dialecticians, and at the same time, they reduced these methods of handling language as an instrument to classify and analyse the world. (Minor Ilustrations - 小取 , 『夫辯者，將以明是非之分，審治亂之紀，明同異之處，察名實之理，處利害，決嫌疑。焉摹略萬物之然，論求群言之比。以名舉實，以辭抒意，以說出故，以類取，以類予。有諸己不非諸人，無諸己不求諸人。』, “Dialectic serves to make clear the distinction between right and wrong, to discriminate between good and disordered government, to make evident the points of similarity and difference, examine the principles of names and actualities, differentiate what is uncertain. It describes the forms of myriads of things, and in discussions seekes to compare various speeches. It uses names to designate causes, propositions to express ideas, statements to set forth causes, taking and giving according to classes. What one oneself has, one should not blame others for having, and what one is oneself without, one should not blame others for not having.”)
- Similarity and Difference is a theme developed by the Dialecticians. The later Mohists changed it fundamtentally. As the Dialecticians argued about the unity of “Similarity and Difference”, the Mohists talked about the separeteness of similarity and difference. They pushed the discussion further by establishing 4 methods of identifing similarity between things, which would enable us to pass from things we know to things we don’t know. (Minor Illustrations - 小取, 『 夫物有以同而不率遂同。辭之侔也，有所至而正。其然也，有所以然也；其然也同，其所以然不必同。其取之也，有所以取之。其取之也同，其所以取之不必同。是故辟、侔、援、推之辭，行而異，轉而危，遠而失，流而離本，則不可不審也，不可常用也。故言多方，殊類，異故，則不可偏觀也。夫物或乃是而然，或是而不然，或一周而一不周，或一是而一不是也。不可常用也。故言多方，殊類，異故，則不可偏觀也，非也，』, “There are ways in which things may be similar, without being thorough similar. The method of parallel between propositions comes to a point where it stops. Things are so, and there is a reason why they are so. They may be the same in what they are, while at the same time the reason why they are so may not be the same. Things are accepted, and there is a reason why they are accepted. They may be same inasmuch as they are accepted, whereas the reason why they are accepted may not be the same. Hence the methods of comparison, parallel, analogy and extension, when they are used, may lead to differences an d turn into difficulty; and when they are carried far, may lead to error. They may become loose and detached from their bases, and so cannot but be examined, and cannot always be used. Hence in speech there are many aspects, various classes and different causes, so that one cannot be one-sided.”)
- The dialecticians talked about the difference of Hard and White, and again, the Later Mohists took an opposite position, arguing about the unity of hard and white. (Exposition of the Canon - 經說, 『經上: 堅白，不相外也。』, “Jian bai (as hard to white/mutually pervasive) is not excluding each other.”, 『 經說上: 於石無所往而不得，得二，堅。異處不相盈，相非，是相外也。』, “Different positions do not fill each other. Not being each other is excluding each other.”).
- Arguments for Universal Love – The Later Mohists having made a detailed study of the methods of the dialecticians, used these methods to oppose all persons who attacked the Mohist doctrine of Universal Love.
Post a Comment