Legalism (Chinese philosophy)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Legalism
Shangyang.jpg
Statue of pivotal reformer Shang Yang
Chinese 法家
Literal meaning The two basic meanings of Fa are "method" and "standard". Jia can mean "school of thought", but also "specialist" or "expert", this being the usage that has survived in modern Chinese.[1][2][3]

Fǎ-Jiā (法家), or more rarely Xìng-Míng (刑名), usually (although inaccurately)[4][5] translated as Legalism is a classical school of Chinese philosophy. Termed in the Han Dynasty,[6] it groups thinkers crucial to laying the "intellectual and ideological foundations of the traditional Chinese bureaucratic empire",[7][8] tied together by their overriding concern for political reform,[9] aim of a realistic consolidation of the wealth and power of the state, army and autocratic ruler,[10] and generally arguing for fixed and transparent rules.[11] Often compared with modern social sciences,[12] they have been regarded by the Chinese as having three tendencies, synthesized by Han Fei:[13] the enforcement of law, the manipulation of statecraft, and the exercise of power,[14] articulating political technique that would ultimately form guiding principles for the First Emperor, Qin Shi Huang.[15] Highly effective in the short run, their dismissiveness of traditional culture, morality and "anti-ministerial" approach earned them enmity, and with the fall of the Qin dynasty the imperial administration would often be further overlaid with Confucian ideology and customs.[16][17]

"Legalism" remained highly influential in administration, policy and legal practice,[18] Endorsement peaked under Mao Zedong, hailed as a “progressive” intellectual current.[19] Far in advance of the rest of the world until almost the end of the eighteenth century, Sinologists Herrlee G. Creel and other scholars find influence of Chinese administration in Europe by the twelfth century, for example, in Fredrick II's promulgations, characterized as the "birth certificate of modern bureaucracy".[20][21][22] Modernly the "Legalist School" has been considered by some the Realpolitikal thought of the ancient Chinese,[23] often compared with Machiavelli.[3][7][24] Angus Charles Graham called the "Legalists" the "first political philosophers in China 'to start not from how society ought to be but how it is'". Their writings being "devoid of overarching moral considerations"[25] Creel[17] and Arthur Waley[26] used the term "Realist" to describe them.

Historical background[edit]

Terracotta Army
Further information: Warring States period

The earliest Zhou kings kept a "firm personal hand" on the government, depending on their personal capacities, personal relations between the ruler and his ministers, and upon military might. The technique of centralized government being so little developed, they deputed authority to feudal lords.[27] "Chinese feudal society" was divided between the masses and the hereditary noblemen, the former being "objects of an enlightened benevolent political trusteeship", the latter being placed to obtain office and political power. They owed allegiance to the local prince, who owed allegiance to the Son of Heaven.[28] When the Zhou kings could no longer grant new fiefs, their power began to decline and vassals began to identify with their own regions. An alliance between rebel nobles and unsinicized Rong ultimately forced the Zhou king east, resettling in Luoyang.[29] In the Spring and Autumn period officials began reforms in order to support the authority, states, and militaries of the kings.[30]

With the decay of the Zhou line schismatic hostility occurred between the Chinese states. In the Spring and Autumn period aristocratic families became very important, by virtue of their ancestral prestige wielding great power and proving a divisive force.[27] A new type of ruler emerged intent on breaking the power of the aristocrats and reforming their state's bureaucracies. Those that failed were conquered of deposed.[31][32] Disenfranchised or opportunist aristocrats were increasingly attracted by the reform-oriented rulers,[33] bringing with them a philosophy concerned foremost with organizational methodology.[31] Rulers began to directly appoint incumbent state officials to provide advice and management, leading to the decline of inherited privileges and bringing fundamental structural transformations as a result of what may be termed "social engineering from above."[3][34]

Each of the competing "schools" of the "hundred schools of thoughts" sought to provide an answer for the attainment of "sociopolitical stability".[35] Aside from the Confucian school, which was concerned with "goodness", the "Taoists" and "Legalists" were the most prominent. But the "Taoists" had little respect for mundane authority, taking the "cultivation of inner powers" for their object.[36][37][38] "Legalist" thinkers were at the "forefront of administrative and sociopolitical innovation", and some like Shang Yang (the Prime Minister of Duke Xiao of Qin) were "leading reformers of their age."[35] Figures like Han Fei were not philosophers per se, but statesmen. Han Fei's writings are almost purely practical, dealing in techniques of rule.[39][40]

Importance[edit]

That there is any evidence at all in the ancient world for a field of management is notable.[20] Early developing a highly centralized bureaucratic state, and selecting officials by civil service examination by the second century BC, it may well have originated in ancient China. Though Chinese administration cannot be traced to any one individual, figures like 4th century BCE reformer Shen Buhai, uninfluenced by either metaphysical or religious considerations, may have had more influence than any other, and might be considered its founder, if not valuable as a rare pre-modern example of abstract theory of administration. Sinologists Herrlee G. Creel writes that, in Shen Buhai, we have the "seeds of the civil service examination" and that "If one wishes to exaggerate, it would no doubt be possible to translate Shen Buhai's term Shu, or technique, as 'science', and argue that he was the first political scientist, though Creel does "not care to go this far".[41][42][43][21][44]

Widely regarded as China's first great general, the Wu-tzu text attributed to Wu Qi, seriously considering "all aspects of war and battle preparation", has long been valued as one of the "basic foundations of Chinese Military thought."[45] Passages from the Huainanzi suggest that Wu Qi "tried to implement typically Legalist reforms" in Wei.[46] His "impressive administrative contributions" are often ranked with Lord Shang, who served as a household tutor four decades after Wu left.[45]

Mark Edward Lewis once identified Shang Yang's reorganization of the military as responsible the orderly plan of roads and fields throughout north China. This might be far fetched, but Shang Yang was as much a military reformer as a legal one.[47] Much of "Legalism" was "principally the development of certain ideas" that lay behind his reforms, and it was these that lead to "Qin's ultimate conquest over the other states of Eastern Zhou China in 221BCE."[48][49]

The grouping together of thinkers that would eventually dubbed "Fa-Jia" or "Legalists" can be traced to Han Fei(280-236BCE).[20][50] Written around 240 BCE, the Han Feizi is commonly thought of as the greatest of all "Legalist" texts, bringing together his predecessors ideas into a coherent ideology.[49][51] They attracted the attention of the First Emperor.[52] It is believed to contain the first commentaries on Laozi in history.[53]

Guided by the "Legalists" thought, the First Qin Emperor Qin Shi Huang conquered and unified the China's warring states into thirty-six administrative provinces, under what is commonly thought of as the first Chinese Empire, the Qin dynasty. His Prime Minister Li Si unified the laws, governmental ordinances, and weights and measures, and standardized chariots, carts, and the characters used in writing. He created a government based solely on merit. He relaxed the draconian punishments inherited from Shang Yang and reduced the taxes.[54] Though the dynasty fell with the death of its emperor, the administration and political theory developed during the formative Warring States period would still influence every dynasty thereafter, as well as the Confucian philosophy that underlied Chinese political and juridical institutions.[55] The Records of the Three Kingdoms describes Cao Cao as a hero who "devised and implemented strategies, lorded the world over, wielded skillfully the law and political technique of Shen Buhai and Shang Yang, and unified the ingenious strategies of Han Fei."[56]

Introduction[edit]

Sinologist Yuri Pines considers an evolutionary view of history and a selfish view of human nature as the pillars of "Legalist" philosophy. Pines writes that the "evolutionary view of history" and the "emphasis that economic conditions can alter moral values", distinguish the "Legalists" from their opponents. They imply that "everything is changeable", as a product of changing socioeconomic conditions.[57] The Taoists and Confucians held a regressive view of history, the age being a decline from the era of the Zhou kings. The "Legalists" simply held this to have resulted from a scarcity of resources, prescribing statecraft.[58] For the Confucians, the Classics provided the materials necessary for perceiving, recognizing, analyzing and classifying. For Xun Kuang they contained the logical categories on which knowledge of things was based.[59]

By comparison, Shang Yang in particular considered there to be no "uniform model of orderly rule in the past". Han Fei added that such models could also not be verified,[57] saying of the Confucians "In their settled knowledge, the literati are removed from the affairs of the state... What can the ruler gain from their settled knowledge"?[60] Society "evolves, making behavioral modes, institutions, and even values of the past obsolete". Shang Yang and Han Fei propose a "comprehensive readjustment of the sociopolitical system", Shang Yang's model of state formation holding that a knowledgeable people can only be coerced by a powerful state.[57]

A majority of Warring States period thinkers tried to accommodate a "changing with the times" paradigm. But the "Legalists" were much more willing to dispense with "traditional modes of rule", questioning the "very relevance of the past to the present",[57] and have no interest in preserving or restoring it. The "Legalists" ruler's goal was conquest and unification of all under heaven.[6] The "Legalists" goal was to teach the ruler techniques to survive in a competitive world[61][6] through administrative reform - strengthening the central government, increasing food production, enforcing military training, or replacing the aristocracy with a bureaucracy.[62] Han Fei is not interested in questions like legitimacy, and does not justify "Legalism" apart from references to the Dao, but does hold that the populace fares better under a system of law than a Confucian system.[63][64]

Enlightened absolutism[edit]

In contrast with Confucianism, the "Legalist" approach is primarily at the institutional level, aiming for a clear power structure, consistently enforced objective rules and regulations, and in the Han Feizi, engaging in sophisticated manipulation tactics to enhance power bases.[65] Objective and rational principles had to be used to select talents, evaluate performance, and administer the state.[66] Shen Buhai sought impersonal administrative "techniques" (Fa) or "method" (shu) for recruiting candidates to office,[67] taken up by Han Fei.[68] Xuezhi Guo contrasts the Confucian "Humane ruler" (renjun) with the "Legalists" as "intending to create a truly 'enlightened ruler'". He is a "skilled manipulator and successful politician who uses means or 'technique' in achieving self-protection and political control", able to "effectively rule the masses and control his bureaucracy". He quotes Benjamin I. Schwartz as describing the features of a truly "Legalist" "enlightened ruler":[69]

"He must be anything but an arbitrary despot if one means by a despot a tyrant who follows all his impulses, whims and passions. Once the systems which maintain the entire structure are in place, he must not interfere with their operation. He may use the entire system as a means to the achievement of his national and international ambitions, but to do so he must not disrupt it's impersonal workings. He must at all times be able to maintain an iron wall between his private life and public role. Concubines, friends, flatterers and charismatic saints must have no influence whatsoever on the course of policy, and he must never relax his suspicions of the motives of those who surround him."[70][69] The ruler only hopes to benefit the people; if he abandons the law and behaves selfishly, there would be no difference between the ruler an the ruled.[71][72]

Han Fei intended his Dao (way of government) to be both objective and publicly projectable,[73] arguing that disastrous results will occur if the ruler acts on arbitrary ad-hoc decisions, such as those based on relationships or morality - the political tradition of the Confucians. Neither can he act on a case-by-case basis, and so must establish an overarching system, acting through legal codes (Fa). He says: "If one abandons law and techniques (Fa) and [attempts to] order the state based on one’s own ideas, in this way even Yao could not order a single state. If one discards the compass, carpenter’s square and measures (Fa) and acts based on one’s own rash ideas, even Xi Zhong could not complete a single wheel... If a mediocre ruler abides by laws and techniques, or if a clumsy carpenter abides by the compass, square, measurements, then in ten thousand tries, he never will go wrong. If the lord can... abide by what the mediocre and clumsy cannot get wrong in ten thousand tries, then the people’s power will be used to the utmost, and [the ruler’s] achievements and fame will be established."

As easily as mediocre carpenters can draw circles by employing a compass, anyone can employ the system Han Fei envisions.[74] The enlightened ruler restricts his desires and refrains from displays of personal ability or input in policy. The ruler that relies on his abilities is the worst ruler; capability is not dismissed, but the ability to use talent will allow the ruler greater power if he can utilize others with the given expertise.[75] Laws and regulations allow him to utilize his power to the utmost. Adhering unwaveringly to legal and institutional arrangements, the average monarch is numinous.[76][77] A.C. Graham writes,

(Han Fei's) ruler, empty of thoughts, desires, partialities of his own, concerned with nothing in the situation but the 'facts', selects his ministers by objectively comparing their abilities with the demands of the offices. Inactive, doing nothing, he awaits their proposals, compares the project with the results, and rewards or punishes. His own knowledge, ability, moral worth, warrior spirit, such as they may be, are wholly irrelevant; he simply performs his function in the impersonal mechanism of state."[78]

A component in a machine, his functions could be "performed by an elementary computer". The ruler simply checks "shapes" against "names" and dispenses rewards and punishments accordingly.[79] Submerged by the system he supposedly runs, the alleged despot disappears from the scene.[80]

As "Realists"[edit]

Some early modern scholars like Arthur Waley used the term "Realist", believing that said "Realists", rejecting all appeals to tradition and the supernatural, held that law should replace morality. A more critical examination of the written codes of the Warring States period reveals that they emerged from a religious and ritual background, oaths being the origin of control of the individual and household. The early "Legalist" text Guanzi couches it's arguments in undisguised moral language. But standard treatments of the "Legalist" school oppose law with the ritual of the Confucians, representing an idealized model of the feudalistic Zhou dynasty.[42][43][81] Waley contrasts what he terms the Realists with other the schools as largely ignoring the individual, holding that the object of any society is to dominate other societies,[82] and A.F.P. Hulsewé writes "(Shang Yang and Han Fei) were not so interested in the contents of the laws as in their use as a political tool... the predominantly penal laws and a system of rewards were the two 'handles'".[83]

Liang Zhiping theorized that law emerged initially in China, namely, as an instrument by which a single clan exercised control over rival clans.[84] In the earlier Spring and Autumn period, a Qin king is recorded as having memorialized penalty as a ritual function benefiting the people, saying "I am the little son: respectfully, respectfully I obey and adhere to the shining virtuous power, brightly spread the clear punishments, gravely and reverentially perform my sacrifices to receive manifold blessings. I regulate and harmonize myriad people, gravely from early morning to evening, valorous, valorous, awesome, awesome – the myriad clans are truly disciplined! I completely shield the hundred nobles and the hereditary officers. Staunch, staunch in my civilizing and martial [power], I calm and silence those who do not come to the court [audience]. I mollify and order the hundred states to have them strictly serve the Qin."[85]

As interpreted by Han Fei, Shen Dao is remembered for his slogan, "abandon knowledge, discard self", developing the concept of the natural dao, or the actual course of events, to undermine conventional appeals to systems of guidance. There are no standards apart from the influence of social leadership. These have no special value. An assertion of knowledge implies that one has the correct dao.[86] Shen Dao said that "'Law does not come down from Heaven, nor out of the Earth; it merely emerges in human society, and accords with people's minds." He considered a bad law better than no law at all.[87] Han Fei is "without even Xun Kuang's residual need for a cosmos" in which man finds a place for himself through patternizing ritual.[88] For Han Fei it didn't matter whether one had the "right way of government" as long as the options could be narrowed down to exactly one, eliminating controversy.[89] Order comes purely from authority. Patterns become acceptable through promotion by authority, and reward and punishment. Whatever the situation brings is the correct Dao.[90] Gaining the people's hearts has no place in good government,[91][92] though Shang Yang did say that "laws which are made without taking (the condition of the people) into consideration can not be implemented"[93] and Han Fei says that the system of rewards and punishments accords with human nature.[94]

On rare occasion Han Fei lauds such qualities as benevolence and proper social norms, nonmorally.[95] More recent scholars argue that "Han’s legal vision is informed by an expansive view of not only ethics but also justice... defined as a moral choice between personal interests and public obligations..."[96] But more generally Han Fei "eschewed ethics in favour of strategy."[6] Han Fei calls the Confucian teaching on love and compassion for the people the "stupid teaching" and "muddle-headed chatter",[97] the emphasis on benevolence an "aristocratic and elitist ideal" demanding that "all ordinary people of the time be like Confucius' disciples", and argues against moral considerations, which, as a product of reason, are "particular and fallible". Li, or Confucian customs, and rule by example are simply too ineffective.[98][99] The prince must make use of fa (law), surround himself with an aura of wei (majesty) and shi (authority, power, influence),[100][101] and make use of the art (shu) of statecraft. The ruler who follows Tao moves away from benevolence and righteousness, and discards reason and ability, subduing the people by law. Only an absolute ruler can restore the world.[102]

Angus Charles Graham sketched the fundamentals of an "amoral science" largely on the basis of the Han Feizi, consisting of "adapting institutions to changing situations and overruling precedent where necessary; concentrating power in the hands of the ruler; and, above all, maintaining control of the factious bureaucracy."[103] More recently, Ross Terrill wrote that "Chinese Legalism is as Western as Thomas Hobbes, as modern as Hu Jintao. It speaks the universal and timeless language of law and order. The past does not matter, state power is to be maximized, politics has nothing to do with morality, intellectual endeavour is suspect, violence is indispensable, and little is to be expected rom the rank and file expect and appreciation of force." He calls "Legalism" the "iron scaffolding of the Chinese Empire", but emphasizes the marriage between Legalism and Confucianism.[104]

Administrative thought[edit]

Ten texts are listed in the Han imperial catalogue as belonging to the Fa Jia ("Legalists"). Fragments of the two Shenzi books of foundational philosophers Shen Buhai(400 BC–337 BCE), extant as late as the early eighteenth century, and Shen Dao(350-275 BCE) have been recovered, but only two texts have survived to modern day intact, namely the Book of Lord Shang, and the more widely read and "philosophically engaging" Han Fei Zi. Another six later books stopped being circulated more than a millennia ago. Many more texts and thinkers are at times arbitrarily identified by scholars as "Legalist".[105] Some of the recently translated Mawangdui Silk Texts are quite "Legalistic".[106]

Not a few scholars have suggested names other than "Legalist", to make clear the concern of those noted thereby, not even mainly with law, but with administration.[7][107] Though the syncretic Han Feizi speaks on law, like Shen Buhai it is much more concerned with "the role of the ruler and the means by which he may control a bureaucracy."[108][109] At it's basics, Fa-Jia simply means a group of philosophers (or "school") emphasizing the importance of Fa.[110][111] Sima Tan’s criteria for the philosophy simply refers to the view that kinship and social status should be disregarded by administrative protocols, which treat everyone equally.[112] The basic meanings of its term, Fa, are "method" and "standard",[113] but was articulated by sinologist Herrlee G. Creel as having a much broader range of meaning from model, method, technique, rule and regulation to law, often implying two or more at the same time. The bulk of texts use it in relation to penal law and administrative technique; the former the rule the people, the latter to control the officials.[114] In Imperial China, it tended to mean something like "government program" or "institution".[115]

In his History of Chinese Philosophy, Fung Yu-lan divided the Legalists into three groups, one laying stress on the concept of shi (circumstantial advantage, power, or authority) as espoused by Shen Dao; the second on fa 法 (law, regulation or, standard) of Shang Yang; and the third on the shu 術 (methods or strategy) of Shen Buhai.[116][117]

  • 'Shi' (, p 'shì', lit."situational advantage"): It is the position of the ruler, not the ruler himself or herself, that holds the power. Therefore, analysis of the trends, the context, and the facts are essential for a real ruler.
  • 'Fa' (Chinese, p 'fǎ', lit. "method" or "standard"): The law code must be clearly written and made public. All people under the ruler were equal before the law. Laws should reward those who obey them and punish accordingly those who dare to break them. Thus it is guaranteed that actions taken are systematically predictable. In addition, the system of law, not the ruler, ran the state, a statement of rule of law. If the law is successfully enforced, even a weak ruler will be strong.
  • 'Shu' (, p 'shù', lit. "technique" or "procedure"): Special tactics and 'secrets' are to be employed by the ruler to make sure others do not take over control of the state. Especially important is that no one can fathom the ruler's motivations, and thus no one can know which behavior might help them get ahead, other than following the laws.

However, though incorporated into the Han Feizi, Shen Dao lacked a recognizable group of followers.[118] Creel considered the Fa school to have stemmed from two schools of thinkers: one founded by Shang Yang, laying emphasis on penal law and mutual responsibility, the other, founded by Shen Buhai, concerned itself with methods of (impersonal bureaucratic) administration (shu) or the rulers role in the control thereof.[119] The latter sometimes even opposed penal law. Han Fei combined the two. This latter combination is commonly known as the Fa-Jia.[120][121] Creel comments that Sima Tan, inventor of the term Fa-Jia, was "clearly aware that the school had two emphases" meaning both "law" and "method", and may have used Fa for both.[122] Shen Buhai did not actually use the term Shu, he used Fa; Shu may have been invented to contrast Shen's doctrine with that of Shang Yang.[123] Because they did not endorse eachother's views, Creel often called the latter (Shen Buhai) group "administrators", "methodists" or "technocrats."[124] The Cambridge History of China nominally accepts the division, but Shen Buhai is still not widely precluded from the use of the term Legalist.

Despite their differences, Han Fei called both the "instruments of Kings and Emperors" and Li Si praised them equally, finding no contradiction between them. Excavated legal texts show a more pragmatic and eclectic approach than a reading of traditional accounts of Shang Yang would suggest, were by no means purely punitive, and were not harsher than was generally prevalent at the time. The Qin were not doctrinaire. Though anathema to Legalist philosophy, Confucianism and it's values too coexisted with Legalism during the reign of the First Emperor. Qin legal documents considered such matters as filial piety. One circulated letter reads that "The purpose of all laws (fa)... is to teach and lead the people, rid them of dissoluteness and depravity... and turn them toward goodness."[125]

Power and authority[edit]

Shen Dao focused on statecraft.[126] His theory on power may have been borrowed from the Book of Lord Shang.[127][128] Xun Kuang never references Shen Dao in relation to power, focusing on his theories on Fa.[129][130] He is remembered for his theories on power because Han Fei references him in this capacity for his similar arguments. For Shen Dao, “Power” (Shih) refers to the ability to compel compliance; it requires no support from the subjects, though it does not preclude this.[131] A basic difference between Confucianism and "Legalism" is in the authority to make policy. Proposing a return to feudal ideals, albeit his nobleman being anyone who possessed virtue,[28] Confucians granted this to "wise and virtuous ministers", allowed to "govern as they saw fit". Shen Buhai and Shang Yang monopolized policy in the hands of the ruler,[132] and Qin legal documents focus on rigorous control of local officials, and the keeping of written records.[133]

Shen Dao states that morality together with intellectual capability are insufficient to rule,[134] but position of authority is enough to attain influence and subdue the worthy.[135] Talent also cannot be displayed without power.[136] Shen Dao said: “The flying dragon rides on the clouds and the rising serpent wanders in the mists. But when the clouds disperse and the mists clear up, the dragon and the serpent become the same as the earthworm and the large winged black ant because they have lost what they ride."[137] Leadership is not a function of ability or merit, but is given by some a process, such as giving a leader to a group.[138] "The ruler of a state is enthroned for the sake of the state; the state is not established for the sake of the prince. Officials are installed for the sake of their offices; offices are not established for the sake of officials...[139][140] It's merit is that it prevents people from fighting each other; political authority is justified and essential on this basis.[141] For Han Fei, Fa (standards) itself is justified as preventing disputes in language or knowledge.[142]

Shen Dao does not completely disregard personal capability; he states that a ruler should give jobs using his "wisdom". He also considered moral capability useful in terms of authority. If the ruler is inferior but his command is practiced, it is because he is able to get support from people.[143] Han Fei criticized Shen Dao's theory as insufficient; power should amassed through laws (fa).[144] Government by moral persuasion and government by power (shih) are mutually incompatible.[145] Neither the ruler's authority nor the application of standards should depend on the ruler's personal qualities or cultivation.[146] In-order to actually influence, manipulate or control others in an organization and attain organizational goals it is necessary to utilize tactics (shu), regulation (fa), and rewards and punishment - the "two handles".[147][148] The latter is similar to the Behaviorists,[149] and determines social positions - the right to appoint and dismiss - and should never be relegated.[150] If people are appointed on the basis of reputation or worldy knowledge, then the ruler's power will fall to opinion and cliques (the ministers). Standards are his only protection.[151] Han Fei does stress that the leader has to occupy a position of substantial power before he is able to use these, or command followers. Competence or moral standing do not allow command.[152]

Though used in many areas of Chinese thought, Shih probably originated in the military field.[153] Sunzi would go on to incorporate Taoist philosophy of inacation and impartiality, and Legalist punishment and rewards as systematic measures of organization, recalling Han Fei's concepts of power (shih) and tactics (shu).[154]

Predecessors[edit]

The Qi city of Linzi was one of the largest and richest of the Spring and Autumn Period, and home to the Jixia Academy.

R. Eno of Indiana University writes that "If one were to trace the origins of Legalism as far back as possible, it might be appropriate to date its beginnings to the prime ministership of Guan Zhong, chief aide to the first of the hegemonic lords of the Spring Autumn period, Duke Huan of Qi (r. 685 - 643)."[155] The reforms of Guan Zhong (720-645 BCE) applied levies and economic specializations at the village level instead of the aristocracy, and shifted administrative responsibility to professional bureaucrats. Allyn Rickett, translator of the Guanzi text bearing his name considers him to have been one of the "chief models for a new type of professional bureaucrat and political adviser who came to the fore as the old hereditary officials proved inadequate for the task... On the other hand, Rickett judges him to have been "at least in most respects" an "ideal Confucan minister".[156] The Ming dynasty agricultural scientist Xu Guangqi frequently cited the Xunzi and Guanzi, and made use of rewards and punishments along the lines of the "Legalists".[157]

Most scholars date Mozi at around 470–391 BCE, being born around the time of the death of Confucius. Later perniciously criticized by Mencius,[158] the Mohist school otherwise "died out during the decades following the Qin conquest of 221", but was very influential in the Warring States period. Mozi might be considered the first to have "offered a strong intellectual challenge to Confucianism,"[159] and is generally considered to have been its main contender "during the two centuries prior the Qin hegemony."[160]

The Mohists advocated a unified, utilitarian ethical and political order, positing some of its first theories and initiating philosophical debate in China. To unify moral standards, they supported a "centralized, authoritarian state led by a virtuous, benevolent sovereign managed by a hierarchical, merit-based bureaucracy",[161] That social order is paramount seems to be implicit, recognized by all.[162] Compared with Plato, in their hermeneutics they contained the philosophical germs of what Sima-Tan would term the "Fa-School" ("Legalists"), contributing to the political thought of contemporary reformers.[161]

Rectification of names[edit]

Law and administration in "Legalism" are based on "matching language to reality." Language, such as that of legal code, is linked to social control. Declarations, such as those of a judge, produce social reality. This is relatable to the Confucian rectification of names. If words are not correct, they do not correspond to reality, and regulation fails. Law is "purified", rectified, or technically regulated language.[163] Shen Buhai uses a similar concept to the rectification of names for appointment, matching the words of the official or his title with his performance. Because that in the Analects of Confucius appears to have been written later, Herrlee G. Creel argues that the rectification of names originated in Shen Buhai; A.C. Graham dismisses this.[164]

The "Legalistic" version of the rectification of names is Fa.[165] With minimal training, anyone can use Fa to perform a task or check results.[166] For Guan Zhong and the Mohists, Fa recommended objective, reliable, easily used,[167][168] publicly accessible standards, opposing what Chad Hansen termed the "cultivated intuition of self-admiration societies", expert at chanting old texts. However, it could complement any traditional scheme, and Guan Zhong uses Fa alongside the Confucian Li. What Fa made possible was the accurate following of instructions.[169]

Providing a clear standard,[170] Fa compares something against itself, and then judges whether the two are similar, just as with the use of the compass or the L-square.[171][161] This constituted the basic conception of Mohists practical reasoning and knowledge. What matches the standard is the particular object, and thus correct; what doesn't is not. Knowledge is a matter of "being able to do something correctly in practice" — and in particular, being able to distinguish various kinds of things from one another. Evaluating correctness is thus determining whether distinctions have been drawn properly. It's aim is not an intellectual grasp of a definition or principle, but the practical ability to perform a task (dao) successfully.[161] They proposed it's use for reward and punishment, promotion and censure, drawing from the general population.[172]

Besides universal rules, Han Fei's Fa is used for appointment, measurement, language and reward. Because Fa (standards) are necessary for articulating terms, Fa is presupposed in any application of punishment. Applied through rewards and punishments, Fa provided guidance for behaviour and performance, and governed advancement. Han Fei stressed measurement-like links between rewards and punishments and performance.[173]

Fa or "standards"[edit]

Between Mozi's background as an engineer and his pacifist leanings, the Mohists became experts at building fortifications and sieges
Further information: Spring and Autumn period

The Mohists and the Guanzi text attributed to Guan Zhong are of particular importance to understanding Fa,[174] meaning "to model on" or "to emulate".[175][176] Feng Youlan considered Mozi to be "one of the most important figures of Chinese history."[177] In "The Seven Kinds of Standard", the Guanzi text lists seven kinds of Fa ("Standards"), these being "To be true, sincere, generous, giving, temperate, and compassionate."[174] Likening standards to the square and plumb-line,[48] the Guanzi, and more especially the Mohists explain fa as ideas, compasses, or circles, referring to an easily projectible standard of utility.[3][178][179][161]

Rejecting the Confucian idea of parents as a moral model as particular and unreliable, the driving idea of the Mohists was to find objective standards (Fa) for ethics and politics, as was done in any practical field, to order or govern society. These were primarily practical models rather than principles or rules.[180] Mozi said, "Those in the world who perform tasks cannot do without models (fa) and standards. There is no one who can accomplish their task without models and standards. Even officers serving as generals or ministers, they all have models; even the hundred artisans performing their tasks, they too all have models. The hundred artisans make squares with the set square, circles with the compass, straight lines with the string, vertical lines with the plumb line, and flat surfaces with the level. Whether skilled artisans or unskilled artisans, all take these five as models. The skilled are able to conform to them. The unskilled, though unable to conform to them, by following them in performing their tasks still surpass what they can do by themselves. Thus the hundred artisans in performing their tasks all have models to measure by. Now, for the greatest to order (zhi, also 'govern') the world and those the next level down to order great states without models to measure by, this is to be less discriminating than the hundred artisans."[161]

The influence of the Mohists on "Legalist" thinkers like Han Fei and Li Si is likely strong.[181] Chad Hansen argues that Shang Yang's Fa (or that of Xun Kuang or Han Fei) does not change meaning from that of the Mohists. Rather, Shang Yang's idea was that penal codes should be reformed to have the same kind of objectivity, clarity and accessibility as the craft-linked instruments.[48][182] Despite the framing of Han historians, the Legalists do not seem to think they are using Fa differently than anyone else. Theoretically, Han Fei's Fa exactly follows Mozi.[183] One Yin Wenzi would be variously classified by historians as Mohist, Daoist or Legalist, [184] and the Mohists and Legalists share the Winter section of the Lüshi Chunqiu.[185] An example of excavated legal texts consists of twenty-five abstract model patterns guiding legal procedure, based on actual situations.[186]

"Legalists"[edit]
Small bronze plaque containing an edict from the second emperor of the Qin dynasty. 209 BC.

Zichan(d. 496 BCE) was a high minister of the central Zhou state Zheng during the late Spring and Autumn period. Zichan reformed the state on a legal basis, enacting a harsh criminal code. He cast the state's code of law in bronze vessel to be displayed in public as a demonstration of permanence and incorruptibility, a first among the Zhou states. Shang Yang would make similar such gestures two hundred years later, and like him Zhichan reformed agricultural and commercial laws and changed social norms, and discouraged superstition.[187][188] Confucius(551 – 479 BCE) admired him; when a fire blaze had destroyed a part of the land, the duke wanted to undergo expensive sacrificial offerings, but Zichan admonished him to exert a more virtuous government.[189]

Li Kui wrote the Book of Law (Fajing, 法经) in the state of Wei, which was the basis for the codified laws of the Qin and Han dynasties, in 407 BC. His political agendas, as well as the Book of Law, had a deep influence on later thinkers such as Han Fei and Shang Yang, including the institution of meritocracy, and giving the state an active role in encouraging agriculture, purchasing grain to fill its granaries in years of good harvest to ease price fluctuations. The direct result of these pioneering reform measures was the dominance of Wei in the early decades of the Warring States era. He recommended Ximen Bao, credited as China's first hydraulic engineer, and Wu Qi as a military commander when Wu Qi sought asylum in Wei.[190][191]

As Prime Minister, Shang Yang reformed the State of Qin from 360-338 in a "comprehensive plan to eliminate the hereditary aristocracy", abolishing the old fixed landholding system (Fengjian) and direct primogeniture, making it possible for the people "to sell and buy" farmland, encouraging the peasants of other states to come to Qin. Shang Yang emphasized law (fa) as the most important device for upholding the power of the state. He insisted that it be made known and applied equally to all, posting it on pillars erected in the new capital. In 350, along with the creation of the new capital, a portion of Qin was divided into thirty-one counties, each "administered by a (presumably centrally appointed) magistrate". This was a "significant move toward centralizing Ch'in administrative power" and correspondingly reduced the power of hereditary landholders.[192][193][194]

Shang Yang deliberately produced equality of conditions amongst the ruled, a tight control of the economy, and encouraged total loyalty to the state, including censorship and reward for denunciation. He sought to establish the supremacy of what some have termed positive law at the expense of customary or "natural" law, and this meant absolutism, but it was an absolutism of law as impartial and impersonal. Law was what the sovereign commanded, but Shang Yang discouraged arbitrary tyranny or terror as destroying law.[195] The "Legalists" were not inspired by any ideology, had no messianic mission to accomplish, and did not claim a science. Neither did Shang Yang rely on any external apparatus of coercion, but upon the citizenry as manifesting the aims of the ruler. Publicly declared rules and regulations were to ensure order without effort on the part of the ruler - the ideal of wu-wei.[196]

Concerned only with political order and administrative efficiency, the "Legalists" were alone in the history of Chinese thought in emphasizing the significance of law to the existence and maintenance of social political order, and the inadequacy if not irrelevance of morality to it, embracing what some have termed "legal positivism". While in the modern west the rule of law is thought to be significant as a basis for liberal democracy, "Legalists" were concerned simply with the preconditions by which rule of law might exist.[197] Shang Yang said that "if there is an intelligent ruler or loyal ministers born in this age who is able to lead his country, then he should not be forgetful of the law for even one moment."[198]

Shang Yang's system used performance standards (Fa), of which law is one example, backed up by incentives and disincentives.[3] The Book of Lord Shang's discussion of bureaucratic control is simplistic, chiefly advocating punishment and reward.[3] Nevertheless, the book addresses many administrative questions, one of the most important forcing the populace to attend solely to agriculture and recruiting labour from other states. Historiographer Sima Tan's son Sima Qian accounts Shang as having divided the populace into groups of five and ten, instituting a system of mutual responsibility[199] tying status entirely to service to the state. It rewarded office and rank for martial exploits.[27][43][200][201] The recommendation that farmers be allowed to buy office with grain was apparently only implemented much later, the first clear-cut instance in 243 BCE.[202]

Objectivity was a primary goal of Shang Yang, wanting to be rid as much as possible of the subjective element in public affairs. The greatest good was order. History meant that feeling was now replaced by rational thought, and private considerations by public, accompanied by properties, prohibitions and restraints. In-order to have prohibitions, it is necessary to have executioners, hence officials, and a supreme ruler whose orders they would obey, to surpass subjective feelings. Virtuous men are replaced by qualified officials, objectively measured by law. The ruler should rely neither on his nor his officials deliberations, but on the clarification of law. Everything should be done by following the law,[203][204] whose transparent system of standards will prevent any opportunities for corruption or abuse.[205]

The impartiality of law[edit]
Small seal scripts were standardized by the First Emperor of China after he gained control of the country, and evolved from the larger seal scripts of previous dynasties.

The 12 characters on this slab of floor brick affirm that it is an auspicious moment for the First Emperor to ascend the throne, as the country is united and no men will be dying along the road.
Iron weight dated from 221 BC with 41 inscriptions written in seal script about standardizing weights and measures during the 1st year of Qin dynasty
Mold for making banliang coins

Of particular concern for the Legalists, the fourth century witnessed the emergence of discussions polarizing the concepts of self and private (si), commonly used in conjunction with profit and associated with fragmentation, division, partiality, and one-sidelines, with that of the state and "public"(gong), represented by the duke and referring to what is official or royal, that is, the ruler himself, associated with unity, wholeness, objectivity, and universality. The later denotes the "universal Way".[139]

The Mohists argued against nepotism, and for universal standards as represented by the centralized state, saying "If one has ability, then he is promoted. If he has no ability, then he is demoted. Promoting public justice (gong) and casting away private resentments (si) – this is the meaning of such statements." The "Legalist" Book of Lord Shang, drawing boundaries between private factions and the central, royal state, took up the cause of meritocratic appointment, stating "Favoring ones relatives is tantamount to using self-interest as one's way, whereas that which is equal and just prevents selfishness from proceeding." Linking the "public" sphere with justice and objective standards, for Han Fei, the private and public had always opposed each other.[139] Han Fei presents Fa as contrasting with private distortions and behaviour. Fa is never merely the ruler's desires.[206] Law (Fa) is not partial to the noble, does not exclude ministers, and does not discriminate against the common people.[207]

Han Fei's notion of zhi emphasizes straightness and the notion of an unbiased heart, saying "What we mean by zi is that, in doing one's duty, to act always impartially and honestly with an unbiased heart." This notion of honest conduct with unbiased intention underlies Qin and Han penal law. Biased judgement, or purposefully handing down judgements in which the punishment is not appropriate to the crime, is defined as a serious crime called buzhi ("not straight"). It is clearly distinguished from mistakes in judging or punishing a crime. Buzhi officials were sent to build the great wall, or exiled to the frontier. A son might be considered crooked for reporting his father, as trying to gain a reputation of honesty at the expense of his father's.[208] The Qin document "On the Way of Being an Official" proclaims the ideal of the official as a responsive conduit, transmitting the facts of his locale to the court, and its orders, without interposing his own will or ideas. It charges the official to obey his superiors, limit his desires, and to build roads to smooth the transmitting of directives from the center without modification. It praises loyalty, absence of bias, deference, and the appraisal of facts.[133]

Compared with the egoist Yang Chu, the "Legalist" Shen Dao is characterized by the Zhuangzhi as impartial and lacking selfishness, his great way embracing all things.[209] Wang Fuzhi speculated that the chapter "Essay on Seeing Things as Equal" was actually written by Shen Dao.[210] Upholding measurements and capacities, Shen Dao links laws to the notion of impartial objectivity associated with universal interest, reframing the language of the old ritual order to fit a universal, imperial and highly bureaucratized state.[139]

Shen Dao contrasts personal opinions with the merit of the objective standard, fa, as preventing personal judgements or opinions from being exercised; personal opinions destroy the law (Fa). Shen Dao's ruler "does not show favoritism toward a single person."[139]He cautions the ruler against relying on his own personal judgment.[211] His book, the Shenzi states "balances and scales are the means by which universal measures are established; books and contracts are the means by which universal trust is established; lengths and volumes are the means by which universal criteria are established; legal policies and ritual compendia are the means by which public justice is established. Wherever the universal good (gong) is established, partial interests are abandoned...

When an enlightened ruler establishes [gong], [private] desires do not oppose the correct timing [of things], favoritism does not violate the law, nobility does not trump the rules, salary does not exceed [that which is due] one's position, a [single] officer does not occupy multiple offices, and a [single] craftsman does not take up multiple lines of work... [Such a ruler] neither overworked his heart-mind with knowledge nor exhausted himself with self-interest (si), but, rather, depended on laws and methods for settling matters of order and disorder, rewards and punishments for deciding on matters of right and wrong, and weights and balances for resolving issues of heavy or light...[139]

In 1572 Zhang Juzheng, a legalistic, prime-minister like figure of the Ming Dynasty, had the young emperor of the time issue a warning edict against China's bureaucracy full of references to gong and si (public and private interests), with the reference that they had abandoned the public interest for their own private interests. It reads: "From now on, you will be pure in your hearts and scrupulous in your work. You will not harbor private designs and deceive your sovereign... You will not complicate debates and disconcert the government." It suggests that good government will prevail as long as top ministers were resolute in administration of the empire and minor officials were selflessly devoted to the public good. It is said that the officials became "very guarded and circumspect" following it's release. His "On Equalizing Taxes and Succoring the People" postulated that the partiality of local officials toward powerful local interests was responsible for abuses in tax collection, hurting both the common people and the Ming state.[212]

The Two Handles[edit]

Han Fei's administrative theory is based on the premise of self-interest.[213] The Legalists' view of the people as selfish is not exceptional, but are distinct from the Confucians in dismissing the possibility of reforming the elite, that being the ruler and ministers, or driving them by moral commitment. Every member of the elite pursues his own interests, and this is the source of thinkers "great concern with regard to the ongoing and irresolvable power struggle between the ruler and the members of his entourage."

It is because of this that Han Fei and other "Legalists" "insist on the priority of impersonal norms and regulations in dealing with the ruler-minister relations".[105] The target of Han Fei's fa (method, standards) in particular are the scholarly bureaucracy and ambitious advisers - the Confucians[214] Long sections of Han Fei's writings provide example of how ministers undermined various rules, and focus on how the ruler can protect himself against treacherous ministers, emphatically emphasizing their mutually different interests.[215]

Han Fei's rare appeal (among "Legalists") to the use of scholars (law and method specialists) nonetheless makes him comparable to the Confucians, in that sense. He insists that loyal ministers (like Guan Zhong, Shang Yang, and Wu Qi) exist, and upon their elevation with maximum authority. The ruler cannot inspect all officials himself, and must rely on laws and methods. Effectively neutralizing him, Han Fei reduces the ruler's role to the maintenance of the system of reward and punishments, determined according to impartial methods and enacted by specialists expected to protect him through their usage thereof.[216][217]

His book, the Han Feizi, may have been as a handbook for statecraft for his cousin, the King of Han.[218] Devoting the entirety of Chapter 14, "How to Love the Ministers", to "persuading the ruler to be ruthless to his ministers", Han Fei's enlightened ruler strikes terror into his ministers by doing nothing. The qualities of a ruler, his "mental power, moral excellence and physical prowess" are irrelevant. He discards his private reason and morality, and shows no personal feelings. What is important is his method of government. Law requires no perfection on the part of the ruler.

The philosophy of Han Fei likens the ruler to the tiger or leopard, which "overpowers other animals by its sharp teeth and claws." Without them he is like any other man. The ruler reigns over all by his power and position, with which he "commands and flourishes", and upon which his existence depends. To "avoid any possibility of usurpation by his ministers", power and the "handles of the law" must "not be shared or divided", concentrating them in the ruler exclusively. In practice, this means that he "must be isolated from his ministers".

The elevation of ministers endangers the ruler, with which he must be kept strictly apart. Punishment confirms his sovereignty; law eliminates anyone who oversteps his boundary, regardless of intention. Law "aims at abolishing the selfish element in man and the maintenance of public order", making the people responsible for their actions.[219]

Shu (statecraft)[edit]

Creel was the first to see that the translation of law would be misleading for Shen Buhai.[214] No text identifies Shen Buhai with penal law, some just the opposite.[220] Fung-Yun Lan called Shen Buhai the leader of the group [in the Legalist school] emphasizing shu, or methods of government.[221][222] Shen Buhai is convinced that it is impossible to make ministers loyal without techniques.[223] However statement that those near him will feel affection, while the far will yearn for him, stands in contrast to Han Fei,[224] who considered the relationship between the ruler and ministers irreconcilable.[105]

Liu Xiang wrote that Shen Buhai advised the ruler of men use technique rather than punishment, relying on persuasion to supervise and hold responsible, though very strictly.[67][225] Han Fei defined the techniques of Shen Buhai as "to bestow offices corresponding to [people's] abilities; to hold achievement accountable to claim; to grasp the handles of life and death; and to supervise the abilities of the thronging ministers. This is what the lord of men wields." Han Fei criticizes Shen's philosophy as lacking laws, but insists that the ruler use one of his techniques, xing-ming, to recruit ministers.[115][226][68]

It is said that when Shen Buhai lived the officials of the state of Han were at cross-purposes, and did not know what practices to follow.[227] Born around 400BCE, Shen Buhai was Chancellor of Han from 351BCE to 337BCE.[228] What he appears to have realized is that the "methods for the control of a bureaucracy" could not be mixed with the survivals of feudal government, and that government "cannot be staffed merely by getting together a group of 'good men'", but rather must be men qualified in their jobs. He never mentions virtue.[229]

Wu-Wei[edit]

The Huainanzi, an influential, syncretic treatise from the early Western Han Dynasty (206 B.C.– 9 A.D.) defines wu-wei as follows: “What is meant […] by wu-wei is that no personal prejudice [private or public will,] interferes with the universal Tao [the laws of things], and that no desires and obsessions lead the true course […] astray. Reason must guide action in order that power may be exercised according to the intrinsic properties and natural trends of things.”[230] Shen Buhai used the term wu-wei to mean that the ruler, though vigilant, should not interfere with the duties of his ministers. The only other book to use the term in this manner is the Tao Te Ching, and since it was composed later sinologist Herrlee G. Creel argued that it may therefore be assumed that Shen influenced the Tao Te Ching.[231] The Han Feizi's commentary on the latter asserts that perspectiveless knowledge - an absolute point of view - is possible, though the chapter may have been one of his earlier writings.[232]

Wu-Wei (or nonaction) might be said to be the political theory of the Legalists, if not becoming their general term for political strategy, playing a "crucial role in the promotion of the autocratic tradition of the Chinese polity".[233] Shen argued that if the government were organized properly, the ruler could be without action. He used the term wu-wei to mean that the ruler, though vigilant, should not interfere with the duties of his ministers. Relying on techniques also conceals the ruler's intentions, likes and dislikes, skills and opinions. Not acting himself, he can avoid being manipulated.[234] Nonaction ensures the power of the ruler and the stability of the polity. Sinologist Creel argued that wu-wei leaves the ruler free to supervise the government without interfering, which also maintains his perspective. The ruler plays no active role in it's functions. He should not use his talent even if he has it.[235] Not using his own skills, he is better able to secure the services of capable functionaries. He attempts to abstain from any arbitrary interference or subjective considerations - making an official's words his own responsibility.[236]

Appointment and verification[edit]
EN-HAN260BCE.jpg
Han state bronze candle holder

In the Han Dynasty secretaries of government who had charge of the records of decisions in criminal matters were called Xing-Ming, which Sima Qian and Liu Xiang attributed to the doctrine of Shen Buhai.[236][237] The more philosophically common equivalent Shen Buhai uses, ming-shih (name and reality),[237][238] links what would become a central concept of "Legalist" thought, the "Legalist doctrine of names", with the name and reality (ming shih) debates of the school of names.[239] It is relatable with the Confucian tradition in which a promise or undertaking, especially in relation to a government aim, entails punishment or reward.[240] It functions through binding declarations, like a legal contract. Verbally committing oneself, a candidate is allotted a job, indebting him to the ruler.[241] Han Fei's Fa was notoriously focused on Xing-Ming.[242]

Sima Qian posthumously (although inaccurate for Shang Yang) referred to the Fajia more generally as adherents of the teaching of (xing ming 刑名). He and Liu Xiang defined this as holding "actual outcome accountable to (the) claim (of each official)",[50][236] Noting all the details of a claim and then attempting to objectively compare them with his achievements, through passive mindfulness (the "method of yin") the ruler neither adds to nor detracts from anything, giving names on the basis of form (ming).[236] Ming sometimes has the sense of speech - so as to compare the statements of an aspiring office with the reality of his actions - or reputation, again compared with real conduct.[91] Assessing the accountability of his words to his deeds,[243] the ruler tests abilities, and attempts to "determine rewards and punishments in accordance with a subject's true merit",[244][115][182] ensuring that only those competent would be admitted to, or remain in office.[243] It is said that using names (ming) to demand realities (shih) exalts superiors and curbs inferiors,[245] provides a check on the discharge of duties, and naturally results in emphasizing the high position of superiors, compelling subordinates to act in the manner of the latter.[227]

A stele set up by Qin Shi Huang memorializes him as a sage that established Xing-Ming, and Emperor Wen of Sui is recorded as having withdrawn his favour from the Confucians, giving it to "the group advocating Xing-Ming and authoritarian government".[246] As protégé of a Han Dynasty Commandant of Justice that had studied under Li Si, Jia Yi was also student of Shen Pu-hai.[247] The Emperor Xuan of Han was said by Liu Xiang to have been fond of reading Shen Buhai, using Xing-Ming to control his subordinates and devoting much time to legal cases.[248][249]<

As early as the Eastern Han it's full and original meaning would be forgotten,[222] and would come to be regarded as being in opposition to Confucians. Yet the writings of Tung-Cung-shu discuss personnel testing and control in a manner sometimes hardly distinguishable from the Han Feizi. He also uses the term ming-shih, and dissuades against reliance upon punishments. As Confucianism ascended the term disappeared.[250]

In Chinese Thought: An Introduction S.Y. Hsieh suggests a set of assumptions underlying the concept of (xing-ming).

  • That when a large group of people are living together, it is necessary to have some form of government.
  • The government has to be responsible for a wide range of things, to allow them to live together peacefully.
  • The government does not consists of one person only, but a group.
  • One is a leader that issues orders to other members, namely officials, and assigns responsibilities to them.
  • To do this, the leader must know the exact nature of the responsibilities, as well as the capabilities of the officials.
  • Responsibilities, symbolized by a title, should correspond closely with capabilities, demonstrated by performance.
  • Correspondence measures success in solving problems, and also controls the officials. When there is a match, the leader should award the officials.
  • It is necessary to recruit from the whole population. Bureaucratic government marks the end of feudal government.[251]
Later thinkers[edit]

Not many passages of Shen Buhai remain extant, but Shen Dao uses Fa in the same sense, using impersonal administration to determine rewards and punishments in accordance with a subject’s "true" merit. He he also uses law. Shen Dao was referred to by the Confucian Xun Kuang as "beclouded by fa".

The reason why those who apportion horses use ce-lots, and those who apportion fields use gou-lots, is not that they take ce and gou-lots to be superior to human wisdom, but that one may eliminate private interest and stop resentment by these means. Thus it is said: 'When the great lord relies on fa and does not act personally, affairs are judged in accordance with fa.' The benefit of fa is that each person meets his reward or punishment according to his due, and there are no further expectations of the lord. Thus resentment does not arise and superiors and inferiors are in harmony. If the lord of men abandons fa and governs with his own person, then penalties and rewards, seizures and grants, will all emerge from the lord's mind. If this is the case, then those who receive rewards, even if these are commensurate, will ceaselessly expect more; those who receive punishment, even if these are commensurate, will endlessly expect more lenient treatment. If the lord of men abandons fa and decides between lenient and harsh treatment on the basis of his own mind, then people will be rewarded differently for the same merit and punished differently for the same fault. Resentment arises from this.[252]

Besides rules, Han Fei frequently philosophized the use of Fa (standards) for appointment, measurement, language and reward,[182] as in the following: "An enlightened ruler employs fa to pick his men; he does not select them himself. He employs Fa to weigh their merit; he does not fathom it himself. Thus ability cannot be obscured nor failure prettified. If those who are [falsely] glorified cannot advance, and likewise those who are maligned cannot be set back, then there will be clear distinctions between lord and subject, and order will be easily [attained]. Thus the ruler can only use fa."[108]

Han Fei insists on the perfect congruence between words and deeds. Fitting the name is more important than results. Therefore, ministers are rewarded or punished according to whether their results fit the task entrusted by their word, which a real minister fulfils.[253] A large claim but a small achievement is inappropriate to the original verbal undertaking, while a larger achievement takes credit by overstepping the bounds of office. [The brilliant ruler] "orders names to name themselves and affairs to settle themselves."[254]

"If the ruler wishes to bring an end to treachery then he examines into the congruence of the congruence of hsing (form/standard) and claim. This means to ascertain if words differ from the job. A minister sets forth his words and on the basis of his words the ruler assigns him a job. Then the ruler holds the minister accountable for the achievement which is based solely on his job. If the achievement fits his job, and the job fits his words, then he is rewarded. If the achievement does not fit his jobs and the job does not fit his words, then he will be punished."[255][256][257]

Zhang Juzheng (1525–1582) wrote that "it is not difficult to erect laws, but it is difficult to see they are enforced." His Regulation for Evaluating Achievements (kao cheng fa) assigned time limits for following government directives and made officials responsible for any lapses, enabling Zhang to monitor bureaucratic efficiency and direct a more centralized administration. That the rules were not ignored are a testament to his basic success.[258]

Later influence[edit]

A modern marble statue of the first Emperor of China, Qin Shi Huang

This intrastate realpolitik would end up devouring the philosophers themselves. Holding that if punishments were heavy and the law equally applied, neither the powerful nor the weak would be able to escape consequences, Shang Yang advocated the state's right to punish even the parent's tutor, and ran afoul of the future King Huiwen of Qin (c. 338–311 BC). Whereas at one point, Shang Yang had the power to exile his opponents (and, thus, eviscerate individual criticism) to border regions of the state, he was captured by a law he had introduced and died being torn into pieces by chariots. Similarly, Han Fei would end up being poisoned by his envious former classmate Li Si, who in turn would be killed (under the law he had introduced) by the aggressive and violent Second Qin Emperor that he had helped to take the thrones.

With the coming of the Han dynasty, the reputation of Legalism suffered from its association with the former Qin dynasty. Sima Tan, though the hailing the Fa "school" for "honoring rulers and derogating subjects, and clearly distinguishing offices so that no one can overstep [his responsibilities]", criticized the Legalist approach as "a one-time policy that could not be constantly applied."[259] The syncretic early Han Dynasty text, the Huainanzi writes that "On behalf of the Ch'in, Lord Shang instituted the mutual guarantee laws, and the hundred surnames were resentful. On behalf of Ch'u, Wu Ch'i issued order to reduce the nobility and their emoluments, and the meritorious ministers revolted. Lord Shang, in establishing laws, and Wu Ch'i, in employing the army, were the best in the world. But Lord Shang's laws [eventually] caused the loss of Ch'in for he was perspicacious about the traces of the brush and knife, but did not know the foundation of order and disorder. Wu Ch'i, on account of the military, weakened Ch'u. He was well practiced in such military affairs as deploying formations, but did not know the balance of authority involved in court warfare."[46] However, Jia Yi's writings simply blamed the fall of the dynasty on the education of the second emperor.[260]

Despite this, in the Discourses on Salt and Iron's the Lord Grand Secretary still used Shang Yang in his arguement against the dispersion of the people, stating that "a Sage cannot order things as he wishes in an age of anarchy". He recalls Lord Shang's chancellery as firm in establishing laws and creating orderly government and education, resulting in profit and victory in every battle.[261] Although Confucianism was promoted by the new emperors, the government continued to be run by Legalists. Emperor Wu of Han (140–87 BC) barred Legalist scholars from official positions and established a university for the study of the Confucian classics.[262] Although the emperor acted as a patron of Confucianism, his policies and his most trusted advisers were Legalist.[263] Michael Loewe called the reign of Emperor Wu the "high point" of Modernist (classically justified Legalist) policies, looking back to "adapt ideas from the pre-Han period."[264] An official ideology cloaking Legalist practice with Confucian rhetoric would endure throughout the imperial period, a tradition commonly described as wàirú nèifǎ (Chinese: 外儒内法; literally: "outside Confucian, inside Legalist").[265]

During the decay of the Han Dynasty, many scholars again took up an interest in "Legalism", Taoism and even Mohism.[266] Han sources "came to treat Legalism as an alternative to the methods of the Classicists."[267] It became commonplace to adapt Legalist theories to the Han state by justifying them using the classics, or combining them with the notion of the "way" or "pattern of the cosmos" ("The Way gave birth to law" Huangdi Sijing). Some scholars "mourne" the lack of pure examples of Daoism, Confucianism and Legalism in the Han dynasty more generally.[268] Usually referring to Warring States period philosophers, during the Han Fa-jia would be used for others disliked by the Confucian orthodoxy, like the otherwise Confucianistic reformers Guan Zhong and Xunzi,[269] and the Huang-Lao Taoists.[270] The Warring States period Confucian thinker Xun Zi was considered as having been influenced by and nourishing Legalist ideas, influencing (Li Si and Han Fei).[271] The influence of Legalism on Han Confucianism is very apparent, adopting Han Fei's emphasis of a supreme ruler and authoritarian system rather than Mencius's devaluation thereof, or Xun Kuang's emphasis on the Tao.[272]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Paul R. Goldin, Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese Legalism. p.4 http://www.academia.edu/24999390/Persistent_Misconceptions_about_Chinese_Legalism_
  2. ^ Pines, Yuri, "Legalism in Chinese Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), Introduction. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/chinese-legalism/
  3. ^ a b c d e f Jay L. Garfield, William Edelglass 2011, p.59 The Oxford Handbook of World Philosophy https://books.google.com/books?id=I0iMBtaSlHYC&pg=PA59
  4. ^ Paul R. Goldin, p.7 Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese Legalism Goldin http://www.academia.edu/24999390/Persistent_Misconceptions_about_Chinese_Legalism_ Even in imperial China, fa tended to mean something more like "government program" or "institution" than "law"
  5. ^ Pines, Yuri, "Legalism in Chinese Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), Introduction. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-legalism/
  6. ^ a b c d Chad Hansen, 1992 p.345 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA345
  7. ^ a b c Zhengyuan Fu, 1996 China's Legalists p.7
  8. ^ Herrlee G. Creel, 1974 p.120. Shen Pu-Hai: A Secular Philosopher of Administration, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 1.
  9. ^ Randall COLLINS 1998 p.148, THE SOCIOLOGY OF PHILOSOPHIES https://books.google.com/books?id=2HS1DOZ35EgC&pg=PA148
  10. ^ Pines, Yuri, "Legalism in Chinese Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), 2. Philosophical Foundations. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-legalism/
  11. ^ Christopher Hood 1998 p.16, The Art of the State: Culture, Rhetoric, and Public Management
  12. ^ Pines, Yuri, "Legalism in Chinese Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), 2. Philosophical Foundations. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/chinese-legalism/
    • Origins of Statecraft in China. Herrlee Glessner Creel
    • Benjanmin I. Schwartz, The World of Thought in Ancient China
  13. ^ Chen, Chao Chuan an Yueh-Ting Lee 2008 p.13. Leadership and Management in China
  14. ^ Wing-Tsit Chan, the Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, editor in chief, P.Edwards, Vol. 2, Lodon, 1967, p. 89
    • K. K. Lee, 1975 p.27, 32. Legalist School and Legal Positivism, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 2.
    • Dao Companion to the Philosophy of Han Fei. Shen Dao's Theory of fa and His Influence on Han Fei. Soon-ja Yang
    • Jay L. Garfield, William Edelglass 2011, p.65 The Oxford Handbook of World Philosophy https://books.google.com/books?id=I0iMBtaSlHYC&pg=PA65
  15. ^ (R.Eno) 2010, p.3 and p.7 LEGALISM AND HUANG-LAO THOUGHT Indiana University, Early Chinese Thought [B/E/P374] http://www.indiana.edu/~p374/Legalism.pdf
  16. ^ Pines, Yuri, "Legalism in Chinese Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), 1.2 Historical Context http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/chinese-legalism/
  17. ^ a b Herrlee G. Creel, Shen Pu-Hai: A Secular Philosopher of Administration, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 1.
  18. ^ Pines, Yuri, "Legalism in Chinese Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), Epilogue. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-legalism/#EpiLegChiHis
  19. ^ Pines, Yuri, "Legalism in Chinese Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), Epilogue. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-legalism/#EpiLegChiHis
  20. ^ a b c Ewan Ferlie, Laurence E. Lynn, Christopher Pollitt 2005 p.30, The Oxford Handbook of Public Management
  21. ^ a b Herrlee G. Creel, 1974 p.119. Shen Pu-Hai: A Secular Philosopher of Administration, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 1.
  22. ^ Creel, The Origins of Statecraft in China, I, The Western Chou Empire, Chicago, pp.9-27
    • Otto B. Van der Sprenkel, 'Max Weber on China', in History and Theory3(1964), 357.
  23. ^ Ross Terril 2003 p.68. The New Chinese Empire
  24. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.308 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA308
    • Ben-Ami Scharfstein 1995 p.21 Amoral Politics: The Persistent Truth of Machiavellism
    • Ellen Marie Chen, 1975 p.17 Reason and Nature in the Han Fei-Tzu, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 2.
    • Huang, Ray, China A Macro History. p.39
    • Leonard Cottrel, 1962 p.138 The Tiger of Chin
  25. ^ Pines, Yuri, "Legalism in Chinese Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), 2. Philosophical Foundations http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/chinese-legalism/
  26. ^ Arthur Waley, 1982. Three Ways of Thought in Ancient China. The Realists p.151.
  27. ^ a b c Herrlee G. Creel, 1974 p.124. Shen Pu-Hai: A Secular Philosopher of Administration, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 1.
  28. ^ a b K. K. Lee, 1975 p.24. Legalist School and Legal Positivism, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 2.
  29. ^ Edward L. Shaughnessy. China Empire and Civilization p26
  30. ^ Rickett, Guanzi. p. 3
  31. ^ a b http://khayutina.userweb.mwn.de/LEGALISM_2013/FILES/Hulsewe_Legalists_Qin_Laws.pdf A. F. P. Hulsewe. THE LEGALISTS AND THE LAWS OF CH'IN. p1
  32. ^ Zhengyuan Fu, 1996 China's Legalists p.4-5
  33. ^ Herrlee G. Creel, Shen Pu-Hai: A Secular Philosopher of Administration, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 1
  34. ^ Zhengyuan Fu, 1996 China's Legalists p.4
  35. ^ a b Pines, Yuri, "Legalism in Chinese Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), 1.2 Historical Context. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/chinese-legalism/
  36. ^ Huang, Ray, China A Macro History. p20
  37. ^ Arthur Waley, 1982. p.194 Three Ways of Thought in Ancient China. Epilogue
  38. ^ K. K. Lee, 1975 p.26. Legalist School and Legal Positivism, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 2.
  39. ^ Jay L. Garfield, William Edelglass 2011, p.64 The Oxford Handbook of World Philosophy https://books.google.com/books?id=I0iMBtaSlHYC&pg=PA64
  40. ^ Bo Mou 2009 p.207. Routledge History of Chinese Philosophy Volume 3. https://books.google.com/books?id=UL1-AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA208
  41. ^ Creel 1964: 155-6
  42. ^ a b Paul R. Goldin, p.16 Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese Legalism. http://www.academia.edu/24999390/Persistent_Misconceptions_about_Chinese_Legalism_
  43. ^ a b c Creel,What Is Taoism?, 94
  44. ^ Creel, 1974 p.4, 119 Shen Pu-hai: A Chinese Political Philosopher of the Fourth Century B.C.
  45. ^ a b Ralph D Sawyer, 1993. The Seven Military Classics of Ancient China. Wu-Tzu p.192, Notes to Wu-Tzu p.453
  46. ^ a b Ralph D Sawyer, 1993. The Seven Military Classics of Ancient China. Wu-Tzu p.201
  47. ^ Paul R. Goldin, Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese Legalism. p.18 http://www.academia.edu/24999390/Persistent_Misconceptions_about_Chinese_Legalism_
  48. ^ a b c Chad Hansen, University of Hong Kong. Lord Shang. http://www.philosophy.hku.hk/ch/Lord%20Shang.htm
  49. ^ a b http://www.indiana.edu/~p374/Legalism.pdf LEGALISM AND HUANG-LAO THOUGHT. Indiana University, Early Chinese Thought R. Eno.
  50. ^ a b Pines, Yuri, "Legalism in Chinese Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), 1. Defining Legalism http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/chinese-legalism/
  51. ^ Paul R. Goldin, Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese Legalism. p.15 http://www.academia.edu/24999390/Persistent_Misconceptions_about_Chinese_Legalism_
  52. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.344 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA344
  53. ^ Tae Hyun KIM 2010 p.15, Other Laozi Parallels in the Hanfeizi
  54. ^ Xunzi Volume 1. p 37. John Knoblock
  55. ^ Paolo D. Farah. "The Influence of Confucianism on the Construction of the Chinese Political and Juridical System". Retrieved 2015-10-30. 
  56. ^ Xuezhi Go, 2002. P.198 The Ideal Chinese Political Leader.
  57. ^ a b c d Pines, Yuri, "Legalism in Chinese Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), 2.1 Evolutionary view of History http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/chinese-legalism/
  58. ^ Jay L. Garfield, William Edelglass 2011, p.65 The Oxford Handbook of World Philosophy https://books.google.com/books?id=I0iMBtaSlHYC&pg=PA65
  59. ^ Knoblox Xunzi 148
  60. ^ Alejandro Bárcenas 2013, Han Fei's Enlightened Ruler
  61. ^ Chen, Chao Chuan an Yueh-Ting Lee 2008 p.110. Leadership and Management in China
  62. ^ Chen, Chao Chuan an Yueh-Ting Lee 2008 p.110. Leadership and Management in China
  63. ^ Jay L. Garfield, William Edelglass 2011, p.64 The Oxford Handbook of World Philosophy https://books.google.com/books?id=I0iMBtaSlHYC&pg=PA64
  64. ^ Chung-ying Cheng 2002. p.175. Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy. Integrating the onto-ethics of virtues (east) and the meta-ethics of rights (west)
  65. ^ Chen, Chao Chuan an Yueh-Ting Lee 2008 p.12-13. Leadership and Management in China
  66. ^ Chen, Chao Chuan an Yueh-Ting Lee 2008 p.8. Leadership and Management in China
  67. ^ a b Herrlee G. Creel, 1974. p.66 Shen-Pu Hai, A Chinese Political Philosopher of the Century B.C.
  68. ^ a b Makeham, J. (1990) p.89,91. THE LEGALIST CONCEPT OF HSING-MING: An Example of the Contribution of Archaeological Evidence to the Re-Interpretation of Transmitted Texts. Monumenta Serica, 39, 87-114. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40726902
  69. ^ a b Xuezhi Guo p.141, The Ideal Chinese Political Leader
  70. ^ Benjanmin I. Schwartz p.345, The World of Thought in Ancient China
  71. ^ Chen Qiyou 2000: 18.48.1049; 20.54.1176; 2.6.111; 17.45.998
  72. ^ Yuri Pines 2003 p.78 Submerged by Absolute Power
  73. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.352 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA352
  74. ^ Eirik Lang Harris 2013 p.1,5 Constraining the Ruler
  75. ^ Chen, Chao Chuan an Yueh-Ting Lee 2008 p.115. Leadership and Management in China Impartial
  76. ^ Yuri Pines 2003 p.78,81. Submerged by Absolute Power
  77. ^ Chen Qiyou 2000: 18.48.1049; 20.54.1176; 2.6.111; 17.45.998
  78. ^ A.C. Graham 1989. p.288. Disputers of the Tao. https://books.google.com/books?id=QBzyCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA288
  79. ^ (Graham 1989: 291)
  80. ^ Yuri Pines 2003 p.81. Submerged by Absolute Power
  81. ^ Mark Edward Lewis, 1999 p.18-19, Writing and Authority in Early China
  82. ^ Arthur Waley 1982. p.194
  83. ^ Remnants of Han Law. by A. F. P. Hulsewe. Page 7 (Introduction)
  84. ^ http://law.nus.edu.sg/sjls/articles/SJLS-2005-313.pdf5 The Internal Morality of Chinese Legalism. Singapore Journal of Legal Studies [2005] 313–347. Kenneth Winston
  85. ^ http://oriens-extremus.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/OE45-03.pdf Biases and Their Sources: Qin History in the Shiji, Yuri Pines (Jerusalem), pg 11.
  86. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.358 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA358
  87. ^ Paul R. Goldin, p.9 Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese Legalism. http://www.academia.edu/24999390/Persistent_Misconceptions_about_Chinese_Legalism_
  88. ^ A.C. Graham 1989. p.289. Disputers of the Tao. https://books.google.com/books?id=QBzyCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA288
  89. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.370 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA370
  90. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.372 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA372
  91. ^ a b Creel, 1959 p.203. THE MEANING OF HSING-MING. STUDIA SERICA: Sinological studies dedicated to Bernhard Kalgren
  92. ^ Eirik Lang Harris 2013 p.55 Constraining the Ruler
  93. ^ Jinfan Zhang 2014 p.151. The Tradition and Modern Transition of Chinese Law. https://books.google.com/books?id=AOu5BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA151
  94. ^ Mingjun Lu. p.349. Implications of Han Fei's philosophy
  95. ^ Ellen Marie Chen, 1975 p.6-8, 10, 14 Reason and Nature in the Han Fei-Tzu, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 2.
  96. ^ Mingjun Lu. p.349. Implications of Han Fei's philosophy
  97. ^ Ellen Marie Chen, 1975 p.10 Reason and Nature in the Han Fei-Tzu, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 2.
  98. ^ Ellen Marie Chen, 1975 p.6-8, 10, 14 Reason and Nature in the Han Fei-Tzu, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 2.
  99. ^ Joseph Needham, 1956 Science and Civilisation in China: Volume 2, History of Scientific Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=y4hDuFMhGr8C&pg=PA205
  100. ^ Ellen Marie Chen, 1975 p.6-8, 10, 14 Reason and Nature in the Han Fei-Tzu, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 2.
  101. ^ Jay L. Garfield, William Edelglass 2011, p.65 The Oxford Handbook of World Philosophy https://books.google.com/books?id=I0iMBtaSlHYC&pg=PA65
  102. ^ Ellen Marie Chen, 1975 p.6-8, 10, 14 Reason and Nature in the Han Fei-Tzu, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 2.
  103. ^ Paul R. Goldin, Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese Legalism. p.14-15 http://www.academia.edu/24999390/Persistent_Misconceptions_about_Chinese_Legalism_
  104. ^ Ross Terril 2003 p.68-69. The New Chinese Empire https://books.google.com/books?id=TKowRrrz5BIC&pg=PA358
  105. ^ a b c Pines, Yuri, "Legalism in Chinese Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), 2.2 Defining Legalism http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/chinese-legalism/
  106. ^ http://www.chinaknowledge.de/Literature/Daoists/huangdisijing.html
  107. ^ Creel,What Is Taoism?, 92
  108. ^ a b Paul R. Goldin, Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese Legalism. p.10 http://www.academia.edu/24999390/Persistent_Misconceptions_about_Chinese_Legalism_
  109. ^ Creel,What Is Taoism?, 93, 101,103
  110. ^ S.Y. Hsieh, 1995. p.81 Chinese Thought: An Introduction. https://books.google.com/books?id=-E5LZeR7QKwC&pg=PA81
  111. ^ Paul R. Goldin, Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese Legalism. p.3 http://www.academia.edu/24999390/Persistent_Misconceptions_about_Chinese_Legalism_
  112. ^ Paul R. Goldin, Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese Legalism. p.8 http://www.academia.edu/24999390/Persistent_Misconceptions_about_Chinese_Legalism_
  113. ^ Paul R. Goldin, Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese Legalism. p.7-8 http://www.academia.edu/24999390/Persistent_Misconceptions_about_Chinese_Legalism_
  114. ^ S.Y. Hsieh, 1995. p.81 Chinese Thought: An Introduction. https://books.google.com/books?id=-E5LZeR7QKwC&pg=PA81
  115. ^ a b c Paul R. Goldin, Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese Legalism. p.7-8 http://www.academia.edu/24999390/Persistent_Misconceptions_about_Chinese_Legalism_
  116. ^ (Fung 1952: 1.318)
  117. ^ Dao Companion to the Philosophy of Han Fei. Shen Dao's Theory of fa and His Influence on Han Fei. Soon-ja Yang
  118. ^ S.Y. Hsieh, 1995. p.93 Chinese Thought: An Introduction. https://books.google.com/books?id=-E5LZeR7QKwC&pg=PA93
  119. ^ DENIS TWITCHETT and JOHN K. FAIRBANK, 2008. p.74 CAMBRIDGE HISTORY OF CHINA. https://books.google.com/books?id=A2HKxK5N2sAC&pg=PA74
  120. ^ Creel,What Is Taoism?, 103
  121. ^ Herrlee G. Creel, 1974 p.122. Shen Pu-Hai: A Secular Philosopher of Administration, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 1.
  122. ^ Herrlee G. Creel, 1974 p.122. Shen Pu-Hai: A Secular Philosopher of Administration, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 1.
  123. ^ A.C. Graham 1989. p.283. Disputers of the Tao. https://books.google.com/books?id=QBzyCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA283
  124. ^ S.Y. Hsieh, 1995. p.81 Chinese Thought: An Introduction. https://books.google.com/books?id=-E5LZeR7QKwC&pg=PA81
  125. ^ DENIS TWITCHETT and JOHN K. FAIRBANK, 2008. p.74-75 CAMBRIDGE HISTORY OF CHINA. https://books.google.com/books?id=A2HKxK5N2sAC&pg=PA74
  126. ^ Antonio S. Cua 2003 p.362, Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy https://books.google.com/books?id=yTv_AQAAQBAJ&pg=PA363
  127. ^ S.Y. Hsieh, 1995. p.93 Chinese Thought: An Introduction. https://books.google.com/books?id=-E5LZeR7QKwC&pg=PA93
  128. ^ Shen Dao's Own Voice, 2011. p.205. Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011
  129. ^ S.Y. Hsieh, 1995. p.93 Chinese Thought: An Introduction. https://books.google.com/books?id=-E5LZeR7QKwC&pg=PA93
  130. ^ Paul R. Goldin, Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese Legalism. p.8 http://www.academia.edu/24999390/Persistent_Misconceptions_about_Chinese_Legalism_
  131. ^ Shen Dao's Own Voice, 2011. p.203-205. Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011
  132. ^ Creel,What Is Taoism?, 107
  133. ^ a b Mark Edward Lewis, 1999 p.22, Writing and Authority in Early China
  134. ^ Shen Dao's Own Voice, 2011. p.203-205. Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011
  135. ^ Shen Dao's Own Voice, 2011. p.202. Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011
  136. ^ Chen, Chao Chuan an Yueh-Ting Lee 2008 p.113. Leadership and Management in China
  137. ^ Shen Dao's Own Voice, 2011. p.203-205. Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011
  138. ^ John Emerson 2012. p.11. A STUDY OF SHEN DAO
  139. ^ a b c d e f Erica Brindley, The Polarization of the Concepts Si (Private Interest) and Gong (Public Interest) in Early Chinese Thought. p.6, 8, 12-13, 16, 19, 21-22, 24, 27
  140. ^ John Emerson 2012. p.11. A STUDY OF SHEN DAO
  141. ^ Shen Dao's Own Voice, 2011. p.200,202. Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011
  142. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.366 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA366
  143. ^ Shen Dao's Own Voice, 2011. p.203-205. Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011
  144. ^ Shen Dao's Own Voice, 2011. p.205. Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011
  145. ^ Shen Dao's Own Voice, 2011. p.203-205. Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011
  146. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.366 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA366
  147. ^ Chen, Chao Chuan an Yueh-Ting Lee 2008 p.114,146. Leadership and Management in China
  148. ^ Yuri Pines 2003 p.76 Submerged by Absolute Power
  149. ^ Chen, Chao Chuan an Yueh-Ting Lee 2008 p.114,146. Leadership and Management in China
  150. ^ Yuri Pines 2003 p.76 Submerged by Absolute Power
  151. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.366 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA366
  152. ^ Chen, Chao Chuan an Yueh-Ting Lee 2008 p.113. Leadership and Management in China
  153. ^ John Emerson 2012. p.11. A STUDY OF SHEN DAO
  154. ^ Chen, Chao Chuan an Yueh-Ting Lee 2008 p.12. Leadership and Management in China
  155. ^ http://www.indiana.edu/~p374/Legalism.pdf R Eno, Indiana University
  156. ^ Ricket, Guanzi (1985) p.10
  157. ^ Joanna Handlin Smith 2009 p.252. The Art of Doing Good: Charity in Late Ming China
  158. ^ Chinese University Press. Mozi, Ian Johnston. p 28. Translation of a distillation of Mohist thought. Faber (1877) p. 4.
  159. ^ Mohist Thought. Indiana University, Early Chinese Thought [B/E/P374] – Fall 2010 (R. Eno). p1
  160. ^ Chinese University Press. Mozi, Ian Johnston. p xxii
  161. ^ a b c d e f Fraser, Chris, "Mohism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2015 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2015/entries/mohism/
  162. ^ Bo Mou 2009 p.145,147. Routledge History of Chinese Philosophy Volume 3. https://books.google.com/books?id=UL1-AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA145
  163. ^ Mark Edward Lewis 2010. p.237-238. The Early Chinese Empires
  164. ^ A.C. Graham 1989. p.284. Disputers of the Tao. https://books.google.com/books?id=QBzyCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA284
  165. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.348-349 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA348
  166. ^ Bo Mou 2009 p.143. Routledge History of Chinese Philosophy Volume 3. https://books.google.com/books?id=UL1-AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA143
  167. ^ Bo Mou 2009 p.143. Routledge History of Chinese Philosophy Volume 3. https://books.google.com/books?id=UL1-AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA143
  168. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.348-349 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA348
  169. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.348-349 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA348
  170. ^ Bo Mou 2009 p.143. Routledge History of Chinese Philosophy Volume 3. https://books.google.com/books?id=UL1-AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA143
  171. ^ Bo Mou 2009 p.143. Routledge History of Chinese Philosophy Volume 3. https://books.google.com/books?id=UL1-AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA143
  172. ^ Bo Mou 2009 p.145,147. Routledge History of Chinese Philosophy Volume 3. https://books.google.com/books?id=UL1-AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA145
  173. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.348-349 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA348
  174. ^ a b Paul R. Goldin, Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese Legalism. p.19 http://www.academia.edu/24999390/Persistent_Misconceptions_about_Chinese_Legalism_
  175. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.349 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA349
  176. ^ Bo Mou 2009 p.145. Routledge History of Chinese Philosophy Volume 3. https://books.google.com/books?id=UL1-AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA145
  177. ^ A History of Chinese Philosophy (1952). Youlan Feng, Derk Bodde. p76
  178. ^ Paul R. Goldin, Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese Legalism p.6 http://www.academia.edu/24999390/Persistent_Misconceptions_about_Chinese_Legalism_
  179. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.347-348 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought
  180. ^ Bo Mou 2009 p.143-144. Routledge History of Chinese Philosophy Volume 3. https://books.google.com/books?id=UL1-AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA143
  181. ^ Bo Mou 2009 p.147. Routledge History of Chinese Philosophy Volume 3. https://books.google.com/books?id=UL1-AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA143
  182. ^ a b c Chad Hansen, 1992 p.308, 349 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA349
  183. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.346,349,366 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA346
  184. ^ David R. Knechtes and Taiping Chang 2014. p.1916. Ancient and Early Medieval Chinese Literature (vol.3 & 4). https://books.google.com/books?id=OWLPBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA1916
  185. ^ Mark Edward Lewis 2010. p.237-238. The Early Chinese Empires
  186. ^ DENIS TWITCHETT and JOHN K. FAIRBANK, 2008. p.75 CAMBRIDGE HISTORY OF CHINA
  187. ^ Aspects of Legalist Philosophy and the Law in Ancient China. Matthew August LeFande
  188. ^ Walker, Robert Louis. The Multi-state System of Ancient China. 1953.
  189. ^ Source: Luo Shilie 羅世烈 (1992), "Zichan 子產", in: Zhongguo da baike quanshu 中國大百科全書, Zhongguo lishi 中國歷史 (Beijing/Shanghai: Zhongguo da baike quanshu chubanshe), Vol. 3, p. 1620. http://www.chinaknowledge.de/History/Zhou/personszichan.html
  190. ^ Zhang, Guohua, "Li Kui". Encyclopedia of China (Law Edition), 1st ed.
  191. ^ Needham, Joseph (1986). Science and Civilization in China: Volume 4, Part 3. Taipei: Caves Books, Ltd.
  192. ^ S.Y. Hsieh, 1995. p.83 Chinese Thought: An Introduction https://books.google.com/books?id=-E5LZeR7QKwC&pg=PA83
  193. ^ DENIS TWITCHETT and JOHN K. FAIRBANK, 2008. p.33, 35, 76 CAMBRIDGE HISTORY OF CHINA
  194. ^ Duyvendak, The Boot of Lord Shang, pp. 18-19
  195. ^ K. K. Lee, 1975 p.27-30, 40-41. Legalist School and Legal Positivism, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 2.
  196. ^ K. K. Lee, 1975 p.27-30, 40-41. Legalist School and Legal Positivism, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 2.
  197. ^ K. K. Lee, 1975 p.27-30, 40-41. Legalist School and Legal Positivism, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 2.
  198. ^ Jinfan Zhang 2014 p.151. The Tradition and Modern Transition of Chinese Law. https://books.google.com/books?id=AOu5BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA151
  199. ^ DENIS TWITCHETT and JOHN K. FAIRBANK, 2008. p.76 CAMBRIDGE HISTORY OF CHINA
  200. ^ S.Y. Hsieh, 1995. p.83 Chinese Thought: An Introduction https://books.google.com/books?id=-E5LZeR7QKwC&pg=PA83
  201. ^ Paul R. Goldin, Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese Legalism. p.16-17 http://www.academia.edu/24999390/Persistent_Misconceptions_about_Chinese_Legalism_
  202. ^ DENIS TWITCHETT and JOHN K. FAIRBANK, 2008. p.77 CAMBRIDGE HISTORY OF CHINA
  203. ^ S.Y. Hsieh, 1995. p.88 Chinese Thought: An Introduction https://books.google.com/books?id=-E5LZeR7QKwC&pg=PA88
  204. ^ Stephen Angle 2003 p.537, Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy
  205. ^ Jay L. Garfield, William Edelglass 2011, p.66 The Oxford Handbook of World Philosophy https://books.google.com/books?id=I0iMBtaSlHYC&pg=PA66
  206. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.367 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA367
  207. ^ Jinfan Zhang 2014 p.90. The Tradition and Modern Transition of Chinese Law. https://books.google.com/books?id=AOu5BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA90
  208. ^ Zhang Zhaoyang, 2011 p.3-6. Monumenta Serica, The Legal Concept of Zhi
  209. ^ Antonio S. Cua 2003 p.362, Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy
  210. ^ Hansen, Chad, "Zhuangzi", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2015 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2015/entries/zhuangzi/
  211. ^ Shen Dao's Own Voice, 2011. p.202. Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011
  212. ^ H. Miller 2009 p.27. State versus Gentry in Late Ming Dynasty China, 1572-1644
  213. ^ Christian von Dehsen Christian von Dehsen, Philosophers and Religious Leaders https://books.google.com/books?id=XZrbAAAAQBAJ&pg=PT400
  214. ^ a b Chad Hansen, 1992 p.347 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA347
  215. ^ Roger Boesche Asian Philosophy Vol. 15, No. 2, 2005 p.162, Han Feizi's Legalism Versus Kautilya's Arthashastra
  216. ^ Yuri Pines 2003 p.77,83. Submerged by Absolute Power
  217. ^ (Chen Qiyou 2000: 2.6.107)
  218. ^ Ronnie Littlejohnz 2011 p.60, Confucianism: An Introduction
  219. ^ Ellen Marie Chen, 1975 p.2,4, 6-9 Reason and Nature in the Han Fei-Tzu, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 2.
  220. ^ Creel, What Is Taoism?, 101
  221. ^ Creel, 1959 p.200. THE MEANING OF HSING-MING. STUDIA SERICA: Sinological studies dedicated to Bernhard Kalgren
  222. ^ a b Makeham, J. (1990) p.88. THE LEGALIST CONCEPT OF HSING-MING: An Example of the Contribution of Archaeological Evidence to the Re-Interpretation of Transmitted Texts. Monumenta Serica, 39, 87-114. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40726902
  223. ^ Xuezhi Go, 2002. p.143 The Ideal Chinese Political Leader.
  224. ^ Creel, 1959 p.201. THE MEANING OF HSING-MING. STUDIA SERICA: Sinological studies dedicated to Bernhard Kalgren
  225. ^ Makeham, J. (1990) p.92, 98. THE LEGALIST CONCEPT OF HSING-MING: An Example of the Contribution of Archaeological Evidence to the Re-Interpretation of Transmitted Texts. Monumenta Serica, 39, 87-114. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40726902
  226. ^ S.Y. Hsieh, 1995. p.92 Chinese Thought: An Introduction https://books.google.com/books?id=-E5LZeR7QKwC&pg=PA92
  227. ^ a b Creel, 1959 p.206. THE MEANING OF HSING-MING. STUDIA SERICA: Sinological studies dedicated to Bernhard Kalgren
  228. ^ S.Y. Hsieh, 1995. p.90 Chinese Thought: An Introduction https://books.google.com/books?id=-E5LZeR7QKwC&pg=PA90
  229. ^ Herrlee G. Creel, 1974 p.125. Shen Pu-Hai: A Secular Philosopher of Administration, Journal of Chinese Philosophy Volume 1.
  230. ^ John M. Hobson, The Eastern Origins of Western Civilisation (Cambridge 2004), p. 190.
  231. ^ S.Y. Hsieh, 1995. p.92 Chinese Thought: An Introduction https://books.google.com/books?id=-E5LZeR7QKwC&pg=PA92
  232. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.371 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA371
  233. ^ Xuezhi Go, 2002. p.198 The Ideal Chinese Political Leader.
  234. ^ S.Y. Hsieh, 1995. p.92 Chinese Thought: An Introduction https://books.google.com/books?id=-E5LZeR7QKwC&pg=PA92
  235. ^ Xuezhi Go, 2002. p.198 The Ideal Chinese Political Leader.
  236. ^ a b c d Makeham, J. (1990) p.91. THE LEGALIST CONCEPT OF HSING-MING: An Example of the Contribution of Archaeological Evidence to the Re-Interpretation of Transmitted Texts. Monumenta Serica, 39, 87-114. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40726902
  237. ^ a b Creel, 1959 p.199-200. THE MEANING OF HSING-MING. STUDIA SERICA: Sinological studies dedicated to Bernhard Kalgren
  238. ^ Makeham, J. (1990) p.87. THE LEGALIST CONCEPT OF HSING-MING: An Example of the Contribution of Archaeological Evidence to the Re-Interpretation of Transmitted Texts. Monumenta Serica, 39, 87-114. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40726902
  239. ^ Makeham, J. (1990) p.87,89. THE LEGALIST CONCEPT OF HSING-MING: An Example of the Contribution of Archaeological Evidence to the Re-Interpretation of Transmitted Texts. Monumenta Serica, 39, 87-114. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40726902
  240. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.365 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA349
  241. ^ Makeham, J. (1990) p.98, 100, 111. THE LEGALIST CONCEPT OF HSING-MING: An Example of the Contribution of Archaeological Evidence to the Re-Interpretation of Transmitted Texts. Monumenta Serica, 39, 87-114. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40726902
  242. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.349 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA349
  243. ^ a b Makeham, J. (1990) p.90. THE LEGALIST CONCEPT OF HSING-MING: An Example of the Contribution of Archaeological Evidence to the Re-Interpretation of Transmitted Texts. Monumenta Serica, 39, 87-114. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40726902
  244. ^ S.Y. Hsieh, 1995. p.81 Chinese Thought: An Introduction https://books.google.com/books?id=-E5LZeR7QKwC&pg=PA81
  245. ^ Creel, 1959 p.202. THE MEANING OF HSING-MING. STUDIA SERICA: Sinological studies dedicated to Bernhard Kalgren
  246. ^ Creel, What Is Taoism?, 104-105, 112
  247. ^ Herrlee G. Creel. Shen Pu-Hai: A Chinese Political Philosopher of the Fourth Century B. C.. p.151-152
  248. ^ Herrlee G. Creel. Shen Pu-Hai: A Chinese Political Philosopher of the Fourth Century B. C. p.155
  249. ^ Han-shu 9.1a; Dubs, Han-shu II. 189, 299-300
  250. ^ Creel, 1959 p.210. THE MEANING OF HSING-MING. STUDIA SERICA: Sinological studies dedicated to Bernhard Kalgren
  251. ^ S.Y. Hsieh, 1995. p.90 Chinese Thought: An Introduction https://books.google.com/books?id=-E5LZeR7QKwC&pg=PA90
  252. ^ Paul R. Goldin, Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese Legalism. p.8-9 http://www.academia.edu/24999390/Persistent_Misconceptions_about_Chinese_Legalism_
  253. ^ A.C. Graham 1989. p.284. Disputers of the Tao. https://books.google.com/books?id=QBzyCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA283
  254. ^ Makeham, J. (1990) p.96, 98. THE LEGALIST CONCEPT OF HSING-MING: An Example of the Contribution of Archaeological Evidence to the Re-Interpretation of Transmitted Texts. Monumenta Serica, 39, 87-114. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40726902
  255. ^ Makeham, J. (1990) p.96, 98. THE LEGALIST CONCEPT OF HSING-MING: An Example of the Contribution of Archaeological Evidence to the Re-Interpretation of Transmitted Texts. Monumenta Serica, 39, 87-114. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40726902
  256. ^ Chad Hansen, 1992 p.365 A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=nzHmobC0ThsC&pg=PA365
  257. ^ A.C. Graham 1989. p.284. Disputers of the Tao. https://books.google.com/books?id=QBzyCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA284
  258. ^ H. Miller 2009 p.32. State versus Gentry in Late Ming Dynasty China, 1572-1644
  259. ^ http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-legalism/ 1. Defining Legalism (Shiji 130: 3289–3291; for translations cf. Smith 2003: 141; Goldin 2011: 89).
  260. ^ Mark Csikszentmihalyi 2006 p.6. Readings in Han Chinese Thought. https://books.google.com/books?id=pQnC2FYVkzgC&pg=PA6
  261. ^ Ben-Ami Scharfstein 1995 p.51-52 Amoral Politics: The Persistent Truth of Machiavellism
  262. ^ Creel (1953), p. 159.
  263. ^ Creel (1953), pp. 166–171.
  264. ^ Mark Csikszentmihalyi 2006 p.xxiv, xix Readings in Han Chinese Thought
  265. ^ Fu (1996), p. 8.
  266. ^ Fan Dainian, Robert S. Cohen, 1996 Chinese Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology https://books.google.com/books?id=vi4GCAAAQBAJ&pg=PA178
  267. ^ Mark Csikszentmihalyi 2006 p.xix Readings in Han Chinese Thought
  268. ^ Mark Csikszentmihalyi 2006 p.xx, 26. Readings in Han Chinese Thought https://books.google.com/books?id=pQnC2FYVkzgC&pg=PA26
  269. ^ Rickett, Guanzi. p3 " The political writings are usually described as Legalist, but 'Realist' might make a description. For the most part they tend to present a point of view much closer to that of the realistic Confucian, Xunzi than either the highly idealistic Confucianism of Mencius or the Draconian Legalism advocated by Shang Yang"
  270. ^ http://www.indiana.edu/~g380/4.8-Huang-Lao-2010.pdf HUANG - LAO IDEOLOGY. Indiana University, History G380 – class text readings – Spring 20 10 – R. Eno. "When Sima Qian and other early historians discuss the intellectual trends of the early Han, they frequently refer to a school of thought known as "Huang-Lao"... As any quick survey of the texts will indicate, these documents are deeply syncretic, that is to say they draw together selected ideas from many different schools and attempt to present them in a harmonious arrangement. Among these schools, Laozi-style Daoism is clearly foremost. However, Legalism and certain militarist schools contribute a very significant portion of these ideas as well. Mohist and Confucian influences can also be detected, but their contributions are generally scattered and do not shape the overall structure of the texts."
  271. ^ Fan Dainian, Robert S. Cohen, 1996 Chinese Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology https://books.google.com/books?id=vi4GCAAAQBAJ&pg=PA178
  272. ^ Lihsueh Lin, 1990 p.444. Three Mainstays. Journal of Chinese Philosophy v.17

Sources[edit]

  • Barbieri-Low, Anthony, trans. The Standard Measure of Shang Yang (344 B.C.) (2006)
  • Creel, Herrlee G. (1953), Chinese Thought from Confucius to Mao Tsê-tung, University of Chicago Press, ISBN 978-0-226-12030-0. 
  • Duyvendak, J.J.L., trans. The Book of Lord Shang: A Classic of the Chinese School of Law. London: Probsthain, 1928.
  • Fu, Zhengyuan (1996), China's Legalists: The Earliest Totalitarians and Their Art of Ruling, M.E. Sharpe, ISBN 978-1-56324-779-8. 
  • Goldin, Paul R. (2011), "Persistent misconceptions about Chinese 'Legalism'", Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 38 (1): 88–104, doi:10.1111/j.1540-6253.2010.01629.x.  (preprint) See also
  • Graham, A.C., Disputers of the TAO: Philosophical Argument in Ancient China (Open Court 1993). ISBN 0-8126-9087-7
  • Lai, Karyn L. (2008), An Introduction to Chinese Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-1-139-47171-8. 
  • Pu-hai, Shen. "Appendix C: The Shen Pu-hai Fragments." Shen Pu-hai: A Chinese Political Philosopher of the Fourth Century B.C. Translated by Herrlee G. Creel. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1974.
  • Qian, Sima. Records of the Grand Historian, Qin Dynasty. Translated by Burton Watson. New York: Columbia University Press, 1993.
  • Schwartz, Benjamin I. (1985), The World of Thought in Ancient China, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, ISBN 978-0-674-96191-3. 
  • Watson, Burton, trans. Han Fei Tzu: Basic Writings. New York: Columbia University Press, 1964.
  • Xinzhong,Yao, Introduction to Confucianism (2000). ISBN 978-0-521-64312-2
  • Potter, Pittman, From Leninist Discipline to Socialist Legalism : Peng Zhen on Law and Political Authority in the PRC2 (2003). ISBN 978-0-8047-4500-0

External links[edit]