Hubbry Logo
MoziMoziMain
Open search
Mozi
Community hub
Mozi
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Mozi
Mozi
from Wikipedia

Key Information

Mozi
"Mozi" in seal script (top) and regular script (bottom) characters
Chinese墨子
Literal meaningMaster Mo
Transcriptions
Standard Mandarin
Hanyu PinyinMòzǐ
Bopomofoㄇㄛˋ ㄗˇ
Gwoyeu RomatzyhMohtzy
Wade–GilesMo4-tzu3
Tongyong PinyinMò-zǐh
IPA[mwô.tsɹ̩̀]
Wu
SuzhouneseMeʔ-tzy
Yue: Cantonese
Yale RomanizationMahk-jí
JyutpingMak6 zi2
IPA[mɐk̚˨ tsi˧˥]
Southern Min
Tâi-lôBa̍k-tsú
Middle Chinese
Middle ChineseMok-tsí
Old Chinese
Baxter–Sagart (2014)*C.mˤak tseʔ
Personal name
Chinese
Transcriptions
Standard Mandarin
Hanyu PinyinMò Dí
Bopomofoㄇㄛˋ ㄉㄧˊ
Wade–GilesMo4 Ti2
Tongyong PinyinMò Dí
IPA[mwô.tǐ]
Yue: Cantonese
Yale RomanizationMahk Dihk
JyutpingMak6 dik6
IPA[mɐk̚˨ tɪk̚˨]
Southern Min
Hokkien POJBa̍k Ti̍k
Middle Chinese
Middle ChineseMok Dek
Old Chinese
Baxter–Sagart (2014)*C.mˤak Lˤewk

Mozi,[note 1] personal name Mo Di,[note 2][3] was a Chinese philosopher, logician, and the founder of the Mohist school of thought, making him one of the most important figures of the Warring States period (c. 475 – 221 BCE). Alongside Confucianism, Mohism became the most prominent organized school of the Hundred Schools of Thought throughout the period. The Mozi is an anthology of writings traditionally attributed to Mozi and to his followers.

Born in what is now Tengzhou, Shandong, Mozi and his followers argued strongly against both Confucianism and Taoism, with a philosophy emphasizing universal love, social order, the will of Heaven, sharing, and honoring the worthy. Mohism was actively developed and practiced across the Warring States–era in China. Mohism fell out of favor following the establishment of the Qin dynasty in 221 BCE.

While tradition assumes the destruction of many Mohist texts in 213 BCE as part of Emperor Qin Shi Huang's burning of books and burying of scholars, traces of Mohism can still be seen late in the early Han (from 202 BCE), in syncretic texts like the Huainanzi of c. 139 BCE. As Confucianism became the dominant school of thought over the fading legalism system during the Han dynasty (202 BCE – 220 CE), Mohism disappeared almost entirely by the middle of the Western Han period of 202 BCE to 9 CE.[4] Mozi is referenced in the 6th-century CE Thousand Character Classic, which records that he was saddened when he saw the dyeing of pure white silk, which to him embodied his conception of austerity as simplicity and chastity.

Life

[edit]
Mozi was born in Lu (seen toward the north, with a small coastline along the Yellow Sea) and spent some time as a government minister in Song (a landlocked state to the south of Lu).

Most historians believe that Mozi was a member of the lower artisan class who managed to climb his way to an official post. Mozi was a native of the state of Lu (modern Tengzhou, Shandong), although for a time he served as a minister in the state of Song.[5] Similar to Confucius, Mozi was known to have maintained a school for those who desired to become officials serving in the different ruling courts of the Warring States.[6]

Mozi was a carpenter and was extremely skilled in creating devices (see Lu Ban). Though he did not hold a high official position, Mozi was sought out by various rulers as an expert on fortification. He was schooled in Confucianism in his early years, although he viewed Confucianism as being too fatalistic, with an overemphasis on elaborate celebrations and funerals, which Mozi considered to be detrimental to the livelihood and productivity of the common people. Mozi managed to attract a large following during his lifetime, rivaling that of Confucius. His followers—mostly technicians and craftspeople—were organized in a disciplined order that studied both Mozi's philosophical and technical writings.[citation needed]

According to some accounts of the popular understanding of Mozi at the time, he had been hailed by many as the greatest hero to come from Henan. His passion was said to be for the good of the people, without concern for personal gain or even for his own life or death. His tireless contribution to society was praised by many, including Confucius's disciple Mencius. Mencius wrote in Jinxin (Chinese: 孟子盡心; pinyin: Mengzi jinxin) that Mozi believed in love for all mankind, noting that, as long as something benefitted mankind, Mozi would pursue it even if it meant "hurting his head or his feet". Zhang Tai Yan said that, in terms of moral virtue, even Confucius and Laozi could not compare to Mozi.[citation needed]

Mozi travelled from one crisis zone to another throughout the ravaged landscape of the Warring States, trying to dissuade rulers from their plans of conquest. According to the chapter "Gongshu" in the Mozi, he once walked for ten days to the state of Chu in order to forestall an attack on the State of Song. At the Chu court, Mozi engaged in nine simulated war games with Gongshu Ban, the chief military strategist of Chu, and overturned each one of his stratagems. When Gongshu Ban threatened him with death, Mozi informed the king that his disciples had already trained the soldiers of Song in his fortification methods, so it would be useless to kill him. The Chu king was forced to call off the war. On the way back, however, the soldiers of Song, not recognizing Mozi, would not allow him to enter their city, and he had to spend a night freezing in the rain. After this episode, he also prevented the state of Qi from attacking the State of Lu. He taught that the defense of a city did not depend only on fortification, weaponry, and food supply, but rather that it was also important to keep talented people close by and to put trust in them.[citation needed]

Philosophy

[edit]
The Mohists were experts at building fortifications and siege defenses.

Mozi's moral teachings emphasized introspection, self-reflection, and authenticity, rather than obedience to rituals. He observed that people often learned about the world through adversity.[7] By reflecting on one's own successes and failures, one attains true self-knowledge rather than mere conformity to ritual.[8] Mozi exhorted people to lead a life of asceticism and self-restraint, renouncing both material and spiritual extravagance.

Like Confucius, Mozi idealized the Xia dynasty and the ancients of Chinese mythology, but he also criticized the Confucian belief that modern life should be patterned on the ways of the ancients. Mozi argued that what is thought of as "ancient" was actually innovative in its time, and thus should not be used to hinder present-day innovation.[9] Though Mozi did not believe that history necessarily progresses, as did Han Fei Zi, he shared the latter's critique of fate (, mìng). Mozi believed that people were capable of changing their circumstances and directing their own lives, which could be achieved by applying one's senses to observing the world, as well as judging objects and events by their causes, functions, and historical bases.[10] This was the "three-prong method" Mozi recommended for testing the truth or falsehood of statements. His students later expanded upon this theory to form the School of Names.

Mozi tried to replace what he considered to be the long-entrenched Chinese ideal of strong attachments to family and clan structures with the concept of "impartial caring" or "universal love" (兼愛, jiān ài). He argued directly against Confucians, who had philosophized that it was natural and correct for people to care about different people in different degrees. Mozi, in contrast, argued that people in principle should care for all people equally, a notion that philosophers in other schools found absurd, as they interpreted this notion as implying no special amount of care or duty towards one's parents and family.

Overlooked by those critics, however, was a passage in the chapter on "Self-Cultivation" which stated, "When people near-by are not befriended, there is no use endeavoring to attract those at a distance."[11] This point was also precisely articulated by a Mohist in a debate with Mencius (in the Mengzi), where the Mohist argued, in relation to carrying out universal love, that "we begin with what is near." Also, in the first chapter in the Mozi on the topic of universal love, Mozi argued that the best way of being filial to one's parents is to be filial to the parents of others. The foundational principle was therefore that benevolence, as well as malevolence, is requited, and that one would be treated by others as one treats others. Mozi quoted a popular passage from the Book of Odes to bring home this point: "When one throws to me a peach, I return to him a plum." One's parents will be treated by others as one treats the parents of others. Mozi also differentiated between "intention" and "actuality", thereby placing a central importance on the will to love, even though in practice it might very well be impossible to bring benefit to everyone.

In addition, Mozi argued that benevolence comes to human beings "as naturally as fire turns upward or water turns downward", provided that persons in positions of authority illustrate benevolence in their own lives. In differentiating between the ideas of "universal" (jian) and "differential" (bie), Mozi said that "universal" originated from righteousness while "differential" entailed human effort.

Mozi also held a belief in the power of ghosts and spirits, although he is often thought to have only worshipped them pragmatically. In fact, in his discussion on ghosts and spirits, he remarked that, even if they did not exist, communal gatherings for the sake of making sacrificial offering would play a role in strengthening social bonds. Furthermore, for Mozi the will of Heaven (, tiān) was that people should love one another, and that mutual love by all would bring benefit to all. Therefore, it was in everyone's interest that they would love others "as they love themselves". According to Mozi, Heaven should be respected because failing to do so would subject one to punishment. For Mozi, Heaven was not the "amoral", mystical nature of the Daoists; rather, it was a benevolent, moral force that rewarded good and punished evil. Similar in some ways to the beliefs systems found in the Abrahamic religions, Mozi believed that all living things lived in a realm ruled by Heaven, and Heaven possessed a will which was independent from, and higher than, the will of people. Thus Mozi wrote that "Universal love is the Way of Heaven", since "Heaven nourishes and sustains all life without regard to status."[12] Mozi's ideal of government, which advocated a meritocracy based on talent rather than background, also followed his idea of Heaven.

Mozi opposed the Confucian idea of "Destiny",[13] promoting instead an idea of "anti-fatalism" (非命). Where the Confucian philosophy held that a person's life, death, wealth, poverty, and social status were entirely dependent upon destiny and therefore could not be changed, Mozi argued that hard work and virtuous acts could change one's position in life.

Ethics

[edit]
Confucian philosopher Mencius was one of several critics of Mozi, in part because Mozi's philosophy was believed to lack filial piety.

Mohist ethics is considered a form of consequentialism, according to which the morality of an action, statement, teaching, policy, judgment, and so on, is determined by the consequences that it brings about. In particular, Mozi thought that actions should be measured by the way they contribute to the benefit of all members of society. With this criterion, Mozi denounced things as diverse as offensive warfare, expensive funerals, and even music and dance, which he saw as serving no useful purpose. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Mohist consequentialism, dating back to the 5th century BCE, is the "world's earliest form of consequentialism, a remarkably sophisticated version based on a plurality of intrinsic goods taken as constitutive of human welfare".[14] Consequentialist theories vary over exactly which consequences are relevant, though they all share the same basic outcome-based structure. With Mozi's overwhelming focus on "benefit" (, li) among other ends, and his explicit focus on making moral evaluations in light of them, Mozi's ethics indeed shares this consequentalist structure. For interpreting Mozi, however, there is some debate over how to understand the consequences Mozi seems most concerned with, and therefore over which kind of consequentialism to ascribe to him.

Some believe the best descriptor to be state consequentialism.[15] According to this reading, Mohist ethics makes moral evaluations based on how well the action, statement, etc., in question contributes to the stability of a state.[15] Such state-related goods include social order, material wealth, and population growth. By centering his ethical theory around the promotion of such state-related ends, Mozi shows himself to be a state consequentialist. Unlike hedonistic utilitarianism, which views pleasure as a moral good, "the basic goods in Mohist consequentialist thinking are ... order, material wealth, and increase in population".[16] During Mozi's era, war and famines were common, and population growth was seen as a moral necessity for a harmonious society. Mozi opposed wars because they wasted life and resources while interfering with the fair distribution of wealth, yet he recognized the need for strong urban defenses so he could maintain the harmonious society he desired.[17] The "material wealth" of Mohist consequentialism refers to basic needs like shelter and clothing, and the "order" of Mohist consequentialism refers to Mozi's stance against warfare and violence, which he viewed as pointless and a threat to social stability.[18] Stanford sinologist David Shepherd Nivison, in The Cambridge History of Ancient China, writes that the moral goods of Mohism "are interrelated: more basic wealth, then more reproduction; more people, then more production and wealth ... if people have plenty, they would be good, filial, kind, and so on unproblematically".[16] In contrast to Jeremy Bentham, Mozi did not believe that individual happiness was important; the consequences of the state outweigh the consequences of individual actions.[16]

Alternative readings locate the main focus of Mozi's consequentialism in the welfare of the people themselves rather than that of the state as a whole.[19] Such interpretations as Chris Fraser's argue that it is a mistake to view Mozi's focus on the collective well-being of a population as a focus on the well-being of the state itself rather than its constituents. In this way, Mozi tended to evaluate actions based on whether they provide benefit to the people, which he measured in terms of an enlarged population (states were sparsely populated in his day), a prosperous economy, and social order. Indeed these are collective goods rather than individual ones, which is a major difference between Mohist consequentialism and modern, Western versions. However, this reading emphasizes that collective goods are better considered as aggregated individual goods rather than as state goods.

This consequentialist structure supports Mohist ethics and politics, which survives in the form of 10 core doctrines:

  1. Promoting the Worthy
  2. Identifying Upward
  3. Universal Love (sometimes called "Inclusive Care")
  4. Condemning Aggression
  5. Moderation in Use
  6. Moderation in Burials
  7. Heaven's Intent
  8. Understanding Ghosts
  9. Condemning Music
  10. Condemning Fatalism

Each of these doctrines is justified on the grounds that it produces the best consequences for society, and that all people stand to benefit from adopting them. Promoting the worthy, for example, encourages people in positions of power to hire competent and worthy subordinates to fill posts, rather than hire friends and relatives instead. The reasoning here is that someone better qualified for the job will perform better and enable society as a whole to benefit. Identifying upward refers to the idea that people in subordinate positions in society must look to their superiors as models for their own conduct. Provided that the superiors are indeed morally competent and worthy of emulation, the rest of society will always have a reliable guide for their own actions, thereby giving rise to social benefits.

Universal love refers to the basic normative attitude the Mohists encourage us to adopt towards others. The idea is that people ought to consider all others as being part of their scope of moral concern. Indeed this is perhaps the most infamous of Mohist doctrines, and was criticized early on by philosophers such as Mengzi, who held that the doctrine was akin to renouncing one's family. However, close readings of the texts by modern scholars have shown the demands of Mohist universal love to be much more mild and reasonable.[20] Additionally, given the accretional nature of the texts, the audience of such texts may have changed depending upon the Mohists' social influence, and so the demands for universal love made on rulers, for example, is considerably higher than that made on the masses.[21] At its most basic, however, the doctrine merely encourages a general attitude of care towards others. However, this does not require that we renounce all forms of special relationships we have with our families and friends. In fact, the Mohists introduce the problem that universal love is meant to solve by lamenting the fact that fathers and sons don't care for each other, and so must instead adopt an attitude of universal love.[22] Conversely, the Mohists hope, when people adopt an attitude of universal love, society as a whole will benefit.

Dovetailing with this idea is that of condemning aggression. The main targets of this doctrine are undoubtedly the rulers of the various warring states in China, who regularly embarked on expansionist military campaigns in order to increase their territory, power, and influence. However, such campaigns were enormously taxing on the population, disrupting regular farming cycles by conscripting able-bodied people for these military ends. Additionally, the practices is ethically wrong for the same reason that robbery and murder are wrong. In fact, according to Mozi, the two are actually one and the same; for what is an expansionist war of aggression other than robbery and murder on a grand scale? And yet, Mozi laments, those rulers who execute robbers and murderers engage in the very same practices. With respect to universal love, indeed part of the reason why rulers believe it is acceptable to invade and conquer other states while it is not acceptable for their own subjects to rob and steal from one another is that the people in neighboring states are not part of the rulers' scope of moral concern. If rulers were to instead include these people and refrain from wars of aggression, all states, those attacking and those defending, will benefit.[citation needed]


Moderation in use and moderation in burials are the main Mohist ideas about frugality. In one's own projects, utility ought to be the only consideration.

What is the purpose of houses? It is to protect us from the wind and cold of winter, the heat and rain of summer, and to keep out robbers and thieves. Once these ends have been secured, that is all. Whatever does not contribute to these ends should be eliminated.[18]

— Mozi, Mozi (5th century BC) Ch 20

The Mohists took particular offense to the practice of extremely lavished funerals and demanding mourning rituals. Such funerals and rituals would potentially bankrupt an entire clan, at least temporarily, and disrupt its farming practices. For the dead in higher positions of authority, this disruption would affect an even greater number of people. Again, the point here is to promote benefit across society, and the Mohists believe that adopting frugal practices will do so.[citation needed]

Mozi's ideas about ghosts and spirits follow from their religious beliefs in a morally consistent universe. Heaven, it is argued, is the ultimate moral standard, while ghosts and spirits serve as Heaven's enforcers. Both doctrines, when adopted, promote societal benefit both by enabling people to rely upon an objective standard to guide their actions (namely, Heaven), and by acting as a sort of cosmic authority capable of enacting rewards and punishments.[citation needed]

Mozi's condemnation of music rests on the same economic considerations as their general ideas of frugality. In ancient China, grand musical ceremonies established by rulers would place enormous financial and human strains on populations, and so Mozi condemned such ceremonies for this reason. Mozi did not object to music in principle—"It's not that I don't like the sound of the drum" ("Against Music")—but only because of the heavy tax burden such activities placed on commoners and also due to the fact that officials tended to indulge in them at the expense of their duties.[citation needed]

Finally, the Mohists rejected the idea of fatalism, or the idea that there is fate. The Mohists reject this idea on the grounds that it encourages lazy and irresponsible behavior. When people believe that there is fate, and that the consequences of their actions lie beyond their control, people will not be encouraged to improve themselves, nor will they be willing to take responsibility for disasters. As a result, society will suffer, and so the doctrine that there is fate ought to be rejected.[citation needed]

Works and influence

[edit]
A page covered in Chinese writing
A page from the Mozi

"Mozi" is also the name of the philosophical anthology written and compiled by followers of Mozi. The text was formed by an accretional process that took place over a period of hundreds of years, beginning perhaps during or shortly after Mozi's lifetime, and lasting until perhaps the early Han dynasty.[23] During the Han dynasty, as Confucianism came to be the official school of political thought, Mohism gradually lost both its adherents and influence while simultaneously being partly incorporated into more mainstream political thought.[24] The text was eventually neglected, and only 58 of the text's original 71 books (pian) survive, some of which, notably the later Mohist Canons, contain significant textual corruptions and are fragmentary in nature.[25] The anthology can be divided into 5 main groups, which are determined on the basis of both chronological and thematic features:

  • Books 1-7 consist of short, miscellaneous essays containing summaries of Mohist doctrines, anecdotes about Mozi, and ideals about meritocratic government. Some appear to be relatively late texts, expressing mature Mohist political and ethical thought on some topics.
  • Books 8-37 contain the Mohists' key essays on the ten "core" Mohist doctrines. Though they exhibit explicit thematic unity, textual evidence suggests that the Mohists revisited their core doctrines throughout their activity, responding to objections and addressing issues unresolved in earlier, often shorter and simpler expositions.
  • Books 38-39 are a series of polemics against the Ru (Confucians). They are often grouped with books 8-37, though they do not expound a positive doctrine, and their purpose is entirely critical.
  • Books 40-45 are often referred to as the "dialectical books." These are often considered "later Mohist" writings, though actual chronological details about them are difficult to glean. They are written in an idiosyncratic style, and focus on a broad range of issues that go well beyond those of the Mohist core doctrines, including logic, epistemology, optics, geometry, and ethics.
  • Books 46-51 are dialogues. They are probably later, and likely fictional, exhibiting Mozi in conversation with various interlocutors.
  • Books 52-71 are chapters on military affairs, specifically focusing on preparing for defensive warfare.

The Mozi is a rich source of insight into early Chinese dynastic history, culture, and philosophy. The text frequently cites ancient classics, such as the Shang Shu, and at times departs from the received version, giving scholars insight into the textual development of such classics as well.

The texts portray Mozi as a mouthpiece for Mohist philosophy and not much else. This picture contrasts that of Confucius and Mencius found in the Lunyu (Analects) and Mengzi respectively, wherein the thinkers in question are portrayed as expressing emotions, chiding students, and even making mistakes. (Consider Mengzi's disastrous advice to the King of Qi to invade the state of Yan.)[26] To contrast, Mozi has little if any personality in the text, instead serving only as a mouthpiece for Mohist philosophy.

Mohism, like other schools of thought at the time, was suppressed under the Qin and died out completely under the Han, as its more radical adherents gradually dissolved and its most compelling ideas became absorbed by mainstream political thought. The influence of Mozi is still visible in many Han dynasty works written hundreds of years later. For example, the Confucian scholar Gongsun Hong describes the Confucian virtue of ren ("benevolence") in Mohist terms.[27] Additionally, Mohist epistemology and philosophy of language had a profound influence on the development of classical Chinese philosophy in general.[28] In fact, Mohism was so prominent during the Warring States period that philosophical opponents, including Mencius and some authors of the Daoist anthology, the Zhuangzi, lament the very prevalence and widespread influence of their ideas.[29]

In modern times, Mohism has been given a fresh analysis. Sun Yat-Sen used "universal love" as one of the foundations for his idea of Chinese democracy. More recently, Chinese scholars under Communism have tried to rehabilitate Mozi as a "philosopher of the people", highlighting his rational-empirical approach to the world as well as his "proletarian" background. The body in the Mozi is constructed by xing (, 'body'), xin (, 'heart'), qi (, 'energy') 'which is in accord with the Pre-Qin thinkers' understanding to the body. While xing refers to the flesh-bloody part of human being, the concept of xin focuses on the aspect of cognition and is closely related to the concept of shan (, 'goodness'), ai (, 'love'), zhi (, 'will') and xing.[30]

Some views claim that Mozi's philosophy was at once more advanced and less so than that of Confucius. Indeed the Mohists were radical political reformers who sought primarily to benefit the masses and challenge the practices of the ruling orthodoxy, often targeting a perceived wasteful aristocracy whom they referred to as "the gentlemen of the world." The Mohist idea of "universal love" embraced a broader idea of human community than that of the Confucians, arguing that the scope of individuals' moral concern should include all people. Opponents of this idea often claimed that "universal love" was akin to renouncing one's family,[31] and indeed more strict Mohists living in Mohist communities as the school flourished may have exhibited such behavior. However, there is some scholarly debate over just how radical the provisions of universal love actually are, and, as can be seen from the example of Gongsun Hong above, the less radical components of the doctrine were eventually absorbed by mainstream thought.

Mozi is also famous for his ideas about frugality, such as those concerning moderating expenses and eliminating wasteful ceremonies including music and funerals. A common misconception is that the Mohists eschewed all forms of art, but of course the Mohists' targets are more specifically elaborate, state-sponsored rituals that would place incredible financial burdens upon a mostly peasant population. This can be seen from Xunzi's own arguments against Mozi in book 10 of the Xunzi "Enriching the State," where Xunzi argues against Mozi that prominent displays of wealth on the part of the state is necessary to maintaining social order.

Some modern-day supporters for Mozi[who?] (as well as Communism) make the claim that Mohism and modern Communism share a lot in terms of ideals for community life. Others[who?] would claim that Mohism shares more with the central ideas of Christianity, especially in terms of the idea of "universal love" (in Greek, "agape"), the "Golden Rule", and the relation of humanity to the supernatural realm. However, Mohism is undoubtedly a product of Warring States China, a period of tremendous political violence and turmoil. The Mohists were political reformers, but they did not seek to challenge the monarchical model of government that prevailed during that time, and sought instead to reform from within by encouraging governments to hire competent people to carry out political tasks, care for their people inclusively, eliminate frivolous government spending, and halt all wars of aggression.

In many ways the influence of Mohism was a victim of its own successes, and it is fairly easy to understand its decline. The Mohists' ideas about the importance of meritocracy and universal love were gradually absorbed by mainstream Confucian thinking. Their opposition to offensive warfare became irrelevant once the various Warring States were unified under the Qin and later Han dynasty, and their religious superstitions were eventually replaced with less supernatural accounts. So their most promising ideas were metabolized by the tradition, while their more radical and anachronistic ones were gradually discarded, leading to their demise during the Han dynasty.

Mohism and science

[edit]

According to Joseph Needham, Mozi (collected writings of those in the tradition of Mozi, some of which might have been by Mozi himself) contains the following sentence: 'The cessation of motion is due to the opposing force... If there is no opposing force... the motion will never stop. This is as true as that an ox is not a horse.' which, he claims, is a precursor to Newton's first law of motion.[32] Mozi also contains speculations in optics and mechanics that are similarly strikingly original, although their ideas were not taken up by later Chinese philosophers. The Mohist tradition is also highly unusual in Chinese thought in that it devoted time to developing principles of logic.[33]

He is the first to describe the physical principle behind the camera, also known as the camera obscura.[34][note 3][35]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia

Mozi (c. 470–391 BCE), personal name Mo Di, was a Chinese philosopher active during the early (c. 479–221 BCE), renowned as the founder of , a rival school to that prioritized impartial concern for all (jian ai), opposition to aggressive warfare, and utilitarian policies aimed at enhancing social order, population, and material welfare.
His teachings, recorded in the composite text Mozi compiled between the 5th and 3rd centuries BCE, critiqued Confucian rituals, prolonged mourning, and familial partiality as wasteful and divisive, instead advocating merit-based governance, frugality in funerals and music, and adherence to Heaven's moral will as an objective standard for right action.
Mozi and his followers formed disciplined communities that provided defensive military technologies, such as counter-siege devices, to weaker states, while developing early Chinese contributions to logic, , , and ; though waned after the Qin unification in 221 BCE, it influenced later thinkers like Xunzi and represented consequentialism's earliest systematic form outside .

Life and Historical Context

Origins and Early Influences

Mozi, personal name Mo Di, was traditionally born around 470 BCE in the state of Lu, a region encompassing parts of modern , including areas near present-day Tengzhou. Early biographical accounts, preserved in later texts like the Shiji and Mohist writings, indicate humble origins outside the aristocratic elite, likely from a lower social stratum associated with manual labor or crafts, contrasting with the scholarly shi class of contemporaries like . This non-elite background is evidenced by traditions describing Mozi as a skilled carpenter who wore coarse clothing and maintained a practical, unadorned lifestyle, reflecting the utilitarian ethos that later characterized . Such roots positioned him to critique ritualistic hierarchies favored by Zhou nobility, prioritizing empirical utility amid societal upheaval. The early Warring States period (c. 475–221 BCE), into which Mozi was born, marked the fragmentation of Zhou dynasty authority, with intensifying interstate conflicts in regions like Lu, where rival powers vied for dominance through warfare and alliances. Lu itself, a cultural heir to Zhou traditions, experienced internal strife and external pressures from states such as Qi and Chu, exposing inhabitants to the costs of prolonged disorder, including resource depletion and population losses estimated in the tens of thousands annually across the era. These conditions, documented in contemporaneous records like the Zuo zhuan, fostered Mozi's formative emphasis on pragmatic governance over ceremonial formalism, as regional instability demanded responses grounded in measurable benefits rather than inherited customs. Limited evidence suggests early exposure to technical skills, possibly including , , or , aligning with Mohist later proficiency in defensive and . Traditions link Mozi's name ("Mo" connoting or dark ) to artisanal trades, implying hands-on that informed his advocacy for standardized, efficient production methods amid the era's technological adaptations to warfare. While direct familial details remain absent from primary sources, this artisan milieu in Lu provided a counterpoint to elite Confucian , shaping a worldview attuned to collective welfare through verifiable outcomes rather than familial or ritual pedigrees.

Career as Artisan-Philosopher and Diplomat

Mozi, originally trained as an possibly in or mechanics, critiqued and distanced himself from service in the state of Lu due to its prevailing Confucian emphasis on elaborate rituals, which he viewed as excessively costly and unproductive. Around 430 BCE, during the early , he established a dedicated following of Mohist disciples, forming a quasi-military under a hierarchical structure led by a grand master (juzi), trained in both ethical doctrines and practical technologies for state defense. As an itinerant advisor, Mozi traversed rival states to urge rulers toward policies of thrift, merit-based appointments, and opposition to aggressive expansion, often leveraging his expertise to demonstrate tangible outcomes. In a prominent diplomatic effort circa the mid-5th century BCE, he journeyed to the state of and persuaded its king to abandon an planned assault on the vulnerable state of by presenting scale models of defensive countermeasures against Chu's innovative ladders and engines, invented by the craftsman ; this intervention highlighted the high costs and likely failure of the offensive, averting devastation through empirical proof of defensive viability. Mozi further served as a technical consultant to rulers, specializing in fortifications and resistance, where he outlined precise methods for constructing city walls, moats, watchtowers, and anti-ladder devices to bolster smaller states against larger aggressors. His followers extended this role, deploying as defensive specialists to aid beleaguered cities, emphasizing preparations that maximized population welfare and over extravagance or fatalistic inaction. These activities underscored 's consequentialist approach, prioritizing verifiable benefits in and warfare deterrence.

Key Interventions and Death

Mozi's most notable interventions centered on averting offensive warfare through demonstrations of defensive . In one documented case, upon learning that the state of planned to assault using a cloud ladder—a hinged, mobile siege platform invented by the artisan Gongshu Ban—Mozi journeyed on foot for ten days from to the court. Confronting King Hui of , Mozi constructed an impromptu of 's defenses, employing his belt as the city wall, an hide as the , and ashes to represent terrain variations. He then detailed nine specific countermeasures, such as erecting supplementary mobile walls taller than the attacker's ladders, deploying archers in positions, and pouring scalding liquids from elevated platforms, illustrating the prohibitive and resource demands of the assault. This empirical persuasion led the king to halt the campaign, preserving 's sovereignty without bloodshed. Such actions exemplified Mohist emphasis on practical in statecraft, with Mozi repeatedly traversing Warring States territories to rulers against , often leveraging prototypes of fortifications, ballistic devices, and logistical analyses to quantify the futility of conquest. These efforts, preserved in the eponymous text's military chapters, underscore causal linkages between defensive preparedness and deterrence, rather than reliance on or fate. Mozi died around 391 BCE, amid the intensifying rivalries of the Warring States era. His immediate successors, including the disciple Qin Huali, upheld the school's and core tenets, fostering cohesion through hierarchical leadership and shared commitment to verifiable efficacy in and . This continuity is reflected in subsequent textual records of Mohist and application, which prioritize observable outcomes over metaphysical appeals, enabling the lineage to navigate geopolitical turmoil for generations.

Core Doctrines of Mohism

Universal Impartial Concern (Jian Ai)

Mozi's doctrine of jian ai, or universal impartial concern, advocates extending care and benefit to all individuals without distinctions of kinship, proximity, or status, treating others' families, states, and persons as one's own to maximize mutual welfare and minimize harm. This principle, central to Mohism, is articulated in chapters 14 through 16 of the Mozi, where it is positioned as the ethical foundation for aligning human actions with Heaven's intent, as exemplified by ancient sage-kings such as Yao, Shun, Yu, Tang, Wen, and Wu, whose impartial governance reportedly brought order and prosperity to the world. Unlike absolute egalitarianism, jian ai incorporates a practical hierarchy oriented toward producing the greatest overall benefit, allowing for differentiated efforts based on capacity to yield social utility rather than rigid equality in affection or resources. The doctrine is supported by analogical arguments emphasizing reciprocity and non-harm: just as one would not attack one's own state or grieve selectively for others' losses, impartial concern ensures that rulers regard subjects universally, fathers extend broadly, and individuals avoid or by valuing all lives equally, thereby fostering over conflict. These proofs draw on historical precedents from texts like the "Oath of Yu" and "Great Oath," where impartial policies under sage rule eliminated disorder, demonstrating causal links between universal concern and societal stability—partiality exacerbates strife, while impartiality extends benefits akin to scaled to all, reducing incentives for favoritism-driven harms such as or interstate . Mozi critiques the Confucian ethic of graded love (bie ai), which prioritizes kin and superiors, as inherently self-serving and destabilizing: by favoring relatives over strangers, it justifies (aiding at others' expense) and neglect, perpetuating disorder rather than universal harmony, whereas jian ai functions as a proto-utilitarian standard, verifiable through outcomes like enhanced state welfare and reduced violence when implemented by leaders. This opposition highlights Mohism's emphasis on causal realism, where impartial policies empirically promote collective prosperity over partial ones that breed inequality and conflict, as partial love "causes disorder" by creating loopholes for .

Rejection of Offensive Warfare

Mohists rejected offensive as a policy that generates net societal harm, employing consequentialist calculations to show that its costs in resources, lives, and stability far exceed any gains for the aggressor or broader order. This position, detailed in the "Fei Gong" (Condemnation of Offensive War) chapters of the Mozi (compiled around the late 5th to early 4th century BCE), rested on empirical assessments of 's outcomes rather than deontological prohibitions alone. The economic drain formed a core argument, as offensive preparations consumed , metals, and labor that could otherwise sustain populations and bolster state . Mozi analogized that the resources for equipping armies—such as shields or provisioning troops—sufficed to fill granaries and clothe families, averting and that warfare instead exacerbated through depleted treasuries. losses compounded this inefficiency, with Mozi estimating that one campaign could kill "several myriad" (tens of thousands) of people, rivaling deaths from plagues or floods but inflicted deliberately, thereby eroding the essential for , defense, and . Offensive actions also ignited cycles of , as the victimized state harbored enduring hatred toward the aggressor, fostering retaliatory wars that mirrored an escalating or , destabilizing interstate relations over generations. Mozi exemplified the viability of alternatives through direct intervention circa the 5th century BCE, when he hastened to the state of to dissuade its ruler from invading . By demonstrating via a the defensive countermeasures that would render Chu's efforts futile and costly, he convinced the king to abandon the offensive, preserving Song without battle and illustrating how credible deterrence curbed aggression. Unlike absolute pacifism, this rejection targeted unprovoked offense while endorsing defensive measures as causally efficacious for maintaining peace, since weak defenses invite predation whereas robust ones align incentives toward restraint and mutual benefit.

Opposition to Fatalism and Promotion of Agency

Mozi and his followers explicitly rejected the doctrine of ming (fate or destiny), which asserts that human wisdom, effort, and actions exert no influence over outcomes such as wealth, poverty, order, or chaos, as detailed in chapters 35–37 of the Mozi titled "Against " (Feiming). This view was critiqued as a rationalization for rulers' incompetence and the populace's indolence, fostering societal disorder by discouraging productive labor and moral governance; for instance, fatalists were accused of using ming to evade accountability for failures in administration, resulting in widespread poverty and instability. Mohists countered that such predeterminism lacks empirical foundation, as it cannot be observed or heard in practice, and contradicts verifiable historical successes achieved through deliberate human intervention rather than resignation to . To refute ming, Mohists invoked precedents from ancient sage-kings, demonstrating causal efficacy of agency: King Tang of Shang, ruling a territory of approximately 100 li square amid chaos under tyrant Jie, expanded to imperial dominion within one generation through policies of mutual benefit and impartial concern, not predestined fortune. Similarly, King Wen of Zhou, starting from a comparable modest domain of 100 li square, overcame disorder via strategic effort and virtuous rule, establishing order that his successor Wu consolidated empire-wide. These cases illustrate that governance outcomes correlate directly with rulers' willful actions—planning, merit-based appointments, and rejection of favoritism—rather than an inexorable fate, as tyrants like Jie and Zhou precipitated ruin through contrary neglect, underscoring human choices as the operative causes. Mohism promoted si (will or deliberate effort) as the primary driver of prosperity, grounded in observable patterns where intentional preparation yields results, such as agricultural yields from plowing and sowing versus famine from idleness, or fortified states enduring sieges through engineering foresight rather than fatalistic passivity. This emphasis privileges causal realism, affirming that individuals and states can shape destinies via empirical methods—testing doctrines against historical efficacy, sensory evidence, and beneficial consequences—thus encouraging agency to align human endeavors with objective standards for mutual welfare over deterministic excuses. By denying predestination's supremacy, Mohists advocated proactive intervention, evidenced by correlations between disciplined effort in crafts, warfare defense, and policy and tangible advancements in security and abundance.

Heaven's Will as Objective Standard

In Mohist doctrine, Heaven's Will (Tian Zhi) functions as the supreme, impartial arbiter establishing an objective criterion for distinguishing righteous conduct from wrongdoing, serving as a transcendent fa (model or standard) that rulers and individuals must emulate. Heaven desires the promotion of universal benefit (li) through inclusive care and the elimination of harm, condemning partial favoritism toward kin, state, or class as contrary to its intentions. This standard is discerned not through anthropomorphic revelation but via Heaven's observable conduct—providing sustenance and order impartially to all under heaven—thus grounding ethics in patterns of cosmic equity rather than subjective human preferences. Heaven enforces its will through correlated outcomes, rewarding alignment with impartial benefit via prosperity, population growth, and social stability, as exemplified in the historical successes of sage-kings like Yao and Shun who promoted universal welfare. Conversely, it punishes defiance and partiality—such as tyrannical aggression—with calamities and decline, as seen in the fates of four notorious tyrants (Jie, Zhou, You, and Li) whose favoritism led to state ruin and natural upheavals interpreted as retributive responses. These patterns reflect causal regularities observable in history, where states practicing partiality suffered famines, floods, or defeats, while those conforming to Heaven's equity thrived, emphasizing empirical correlations over superstitious fiat. By rooting moral obligation in conformity to Heaven's deontological commands—independent of contingent results or relativistic norms like Confucian propriety—Tian Zhi provides a non-arbitrary foundation for Mohist , where the pursuit of aggregate benefit gains normative force from divine rather than mere utility calculation. This framework critiques schools endorsing human-centered , positing Heaven's transcendent authority as verifiable through its consistent endorsement of across eras and rulers. matters subordinately, as true demands actions mirroring Heaven's pattern of broad benevolence, ensuring agency amid causal .

Mohist Epistemology and Methods

Standards of Judgment (San Biao)

The San Biao (三表), or "three standards," constitute the Mohist framework for evaluating the validity of doctrines, policies, or claims, as articulated in the Mozi chapter 35, "Against , Part 1" (非命上). These criteria emphasize verifiable evidence over unexamined tradition or authoritative pronouncements, requiring that a be assessed through three interconnected tests: historical precedent rooted in the practices of ancient sage-kings, as documented in reliable records; alignment with sensory experience accessible to the eyes and ears; and practical outcomes observed when the doctrine is implemented in governance or society, yielding measurable benefits such as order and prosperity for the state and populace. This tripartite method prioritizes and causal efficacy, distinguishing from Confucian deference to sage wisdom without empirical scrutiny. In application, the San Biao serve as a sequential filter: a doctrine lacking endorsement from exemplary ancient precedents fails the first test, rendering further evaluation unnecessary; those passing must then conform to observable realities, excluding unsubstantiated assertions; finally, successful implementation must demonstrably promote social utility, such as reducing disorder or enhancing collective welfare, thereby validating causal claims about its effects. Mohists deployed this approach in persuasive debates, arguing, for instance, that offensive warfare contravenes the standards by diverging from sage-kings' defensive policies, conflicting with sensory evidence of its destructive consequences, and failing to deliver net benefits upon trial in historical states. By grounding judgment in these objective benchmarks, the San Biao reject reliance on charismatic authority or ritual precedent alone, favoring instead a proto-empirical process that anticipates elements of the modern scientific method through hypothesis testing via observation and experimentation. This epistemological stance underscores Mohist causal realism, positing that true doctrines must demonstrably influence outcomes predictably and beneficially, rather than merely appealing to interpretive traditions prone to subjective . Scholarly analyses confirm the San Biao's role in Mohist argumentation as a tool for resolving disputes empirically, evidenced by their use in refuting rivals like fatalists, whose doctrines fail sensory and applicative tests by ignoring observable human agency in averting calamities. The criteria's emphasis on intersubjective verifiability—drawing on shared historical texts, perceptual data, and replicable trials—positions as advocating a standard of judgment resilient to dogmatic entrenchment, prioritizing truth conducive to practical over ideological conformity.

Dialectical Argumentation and Logic

The Mohists developed systematic techniques for dialectical disputation (bian), as preserved in the Later Mohist chapters of the Mozi, including the Canon (Jing) and Lesser Pick (Xiaoqu), dated to approximately the mid-to-late Warring States period (circa 330–221 BCE). These methods focused on clarifying distinctions between right and wrong through precise naming (ming), analogical reasoning, and refutation of inconsistencies, aiming to resolve disputes via objective criteria rather than rhetorical flourish. The Xiaoqu explicitly outlines the purpose of such dialectics: to "inquire into the successions of good government and misrule" by examining linguistic and conceptual precision, marking an early effort to formalize argumentation in Chinese thought. Central to Mohist logic were small-large (xiaoda) analogies, which probed the of predicates to expose contradictions; for example, a small horse with large eyes remains small, but a large horse with impaired vision qualifies as blind, illustrating non-proportional application of terms. Sorites-like chains further refined this, as in debates over gradual transitions—e.g., successive additions of do not abruptly yield softness, challenging paradoxical claims of identity or difference. These tools, embedded in the Canons' aphoristic definitions (e.g., "sameness obtains when parts are indistinguishable"), provided a framework for verifiable , predating analogous developments in other schools. Against sophists such as Hui Shi, whose ten relativistic paradoxes emphasized perspectival sameness (e.g., "the way is one and the same as great and small"), Mohists countered with empirical and analogical tests to affirm fixed referents and causal distinctions, rejecting undecidability in favor of Heaven-aligned standards. This defensive rigor, though fragmentary due to textual transmission losses, initiated a tradition of structured , verifiable in remnants like the Canons' 1,500+ entries on categories such as "this/not-this" oppositions. Scholarly reconstructions confirm these as China's earliest systematic logical inquiries, prioritizing definitional clarity over mere verbal agility.

Empirical Testing and Anti-Superstition Stance

The Mohists employed rigorous empirical standards to evaluate claims, emphasizing direct observation, historical testimony, and practical testing as outlined in their san biao (three gauges) method: alignment with the precedents of ancient sage-kings, verification through the senses of hearing and sight, and confirmation via real-world application and outcomes. This framework demanded causal explanations rooted in observable regularities rather than unsubstantiated assertions, marking an early insistence on methodical scrutiny akin to proto-scientific . In the Mohist Canons, knowledge derivation is tied explicitly to sensory input—"this" denoting the immediately perceivable—rejecting reliance on inference alone without evidential grounding. Applied to supernatural phenomena, this epistemology rejected blanket credulity while affirming beliefs supported by evidence. In the "Ming Gui" (Explaining Ghosts) chapter, Mozi defended the of ghosts and spirits against skeptics by marshaling empirical-like proofs: over ten historical accounts of ghostly apparitions witnessed by multiple observers, instances of correlated rewards or punishments following moral actions, and the observable societal utility of such beliefs in enforcing where human oversight failed. He argued that denying ghosts required rejecting equivalent testimonies for mundane events, such as eyewitness reports of distant battles, thus critiquing inconsistent standards rather than the phenomena themselves. Unverifiable specifics, like claims of ghostly curses without sensory or precedential support, were implicitly sidelined in favor of generalized causal patterns observable in rewards for benevolence and penalties for vice. In , Mohists extended this to , urging rulers to test proposals against empirical outcomes rather than unverified omens or traditions that could rationalize . Doctrines were deemed valid only if they yielded measurable benefits, such as reduced disorder through verifiable mechanisms, subordinating mystical interpretations to causal realism. This anti-arbitrary stance fostered a rationalist temper, influencing later Chinese by prioritizing natural causation in the Canons' analyses of , , and logic, where agency receded in favor of explainable processes like leverage or .

The Mohist Community and Practices

Structure of the Mohist School

The Mohist school maintained a hierarchical organization led by a grand master (juzi), with Mozi (fl. ca. 430 BCE) as the founder and initial leader, followed by successors who oversaw branching groups during the 4th and 3rd centuries BCE. Early texts such as the Hanfeizi (ca. 233 BCE), Zhuangzi, and Lüshi Chunqiu (ca. 239 BCE) reference at least six such groups, each functioning as a disciplined network capable of moral advocacy, government service, and defensive operations. This structure emphasized meritocracy, appointing roles based on competence and virtue rather than birth or lineage, in contrast to the aristocratic emphases of Confucian and other elite schools that prioritized ritual propriety and hereditary status. Internally, the school divided into upper () and lower (xia) echelons, with the upper focusing on ethical and logical , while the lower specialized in practical crafts, , and applications. Leaders, often termed Mohist officers (mozhang), emerged from working-class backgrounds and coordinated followers organized in circles, fostering a paramilitary-like that included rigorous and mutual accountability. Loyalty to the juzi and collective principles was paramount, reinforced through communal —members contributed resources to shared funds and adhered to frugal living standards, facing expulsion for violations. This oath-like commitment to group efficacy, evidenced in accounts of during defensive missions, sustained the school's operations across states like and . The merit-based hierarchy and practical divisions enabled Mohists to offer tangible services to rulers, such as fortifications and , which prolonged the school's influence amid Warring States competition until its decline post-221 BCE. By prioritizing demonstrable utility over traditional hierarchies, this organization causally supported Mohist longevity, allowing adaptation to demands unlike more insular philosophical lineages. Later branches, including those under figures like Song Xing (ca. 330 BCE), reflected evolving traditions such as Xiangli, Xiangfu, and Dengling, though unity fragmented over time.

Technological Innovations and Engineering

The Mohists distinguished themselves through practical expertise in defensive engineering, particularly during the (c. 475–221 BCE), where they served as consultants to smaller states facing aggression from larger powers. The Mozi text's later chapters (52–71) comprise technical treatises on siege warfare, focusing on fortifications and countermeasures to offensive technologies like scaling ladders, battering rams, and tunneling. These sections outline construction methods for reinforced city walls, moats, and watchtowers, emphasizing empirical testing of designs for efficacy in real combat scenarios. Specific innovations described include defensive mechanisms such as extendable counter-ladders equipped with hooks to dislodge attackers, angled parapets to prevent stable footing for climbers, and coordinated systems for launching projectiles or incendiaries from elevated positions. In one account preserved in the Mozi, the school's founder demonstrated these principles using a to the king, countering nine siege weapons devised by Gongshu Ban by proposing corresponding defenses, thereby averting an attack on the state of without bloodshed. Archaeological evidence from Warring States sites, including rammed-earth walls and bastioned gates at locations like the ancient Zhao capital , corroborates the practicality of these designs, showing multi-layered barriers and integrated defensive features that match textual specifications for deterring assaults. Such enhanced state resilience by raising the costs of , allowing resource-poor polities to withstand superior forces longer; however, it also contributed to tactical stalemates, potentially prolonging the era's endemic conflicts by favoring attrition over quick conquests.

Advocacy for Meritocracy and Frugality

Mozi advocated elevating officials based on demonstrated ability rather than hereditary privilege, arguing that rulers should select and promote individuals through rigorous testing of their skills in governance, akin to archery contests where accuracy determines success regardless of origin. This meritocratic system critiqued the prevailing aristocratic practices, including those favored by Confucians who emphasized familial ties and ritual propriety over empirical competence, positing that nepotism led to inefficient administration and state decline during the Warring States period (475–221 BCE). Mohists proposed tiered promotions, starting from local roles and advancing via proven results in resource management and public order, to ensure rulers benefited from the most capable advisors amid constant interstate conflicts. In parallel, Mozi promoted as a utilitarian imperative, condemning extravagant funerals and that consumed labor and materials without yielding societal benefits. Funerals, he contended, should be simple—confined to basic burial with minimal mourning periods—to avoid diverting able-bodied workers from agriculture and defense, calculating that elaborate rites impoverished families and weakened states by idling populations for months. Similarly, opposition to targeted courtly orchestras and feasts as non-productive luxuries that exhausted stores and efforts, redirecting them instead toward like fortifications, with cost-benefit analyses showing such excesses correlated with and military vulnerability in resource-scarce eras. These principles interconnected through Mohist consequentialism, where maximized administrative efficiency, and conserved resources for collective welfare, influencing select Warring States rulers who employed Mohist engineers and advisors for defensive projects, thereby adopting elements of talent elevation over lineage in crisis governance. Such practices, verifiable in historical records of Mohist interventions like city wall fortifications, demonstrated tangible efficiency gains, as states prioritizing skilled personnel over aristocrats achieved better outcomes in prolonged warfare.

The Mozi Text and Authorship

Overall Composition and Dating

The Mozi constitutes a composite anthology rather than a unified composition, assembled from writings attributed to Mozi (fl. ca. 430 BCE) and successive generations of his disciples, reflecting the school's evolving doctrines during the Warring States period. Scholarly analysis identifies distinct strata: the core chapters (primarily chapters 8–10 and 11–13, expounding the ten principal theses) and dialogues (chapters 46–71 in traditional numbering), which employ rhetorical and anecdotal styles closest to Mozi's era, dated broadly to the late 5th and early 4th centuries BCE based on linguistic features, historical allusions, and cross-references with contemporary texts like the Zuo zhuan. These sections prioritize practical advocacy over abstract theorizing, consistent with early Mohist priorities. Later additions, notably the Mohist Canons (chapters 40–43, including Jing and Jing shuo) and related dialectical appendices, exhibit more technical terminology, formalized argumentation, and epistemological inquiries, indicating composition by second- or third-generation Mohists in the mid-to-late 4th or early BCE. Linguistic evidence, such as evolving grammatical compounds and lexical innovations absent in earlier strata, supports this relative , resolving earlier authenticity debates by distinguishing authentic Mohist developments from potential interpolations. The full corpus originally comprised 71 pian (chapters), transmitted on bamboo slips and silk manuscripts, with the surviving 53 chapters standardized through editorial efforts in the Western , likely under Liu Xiang (ca. 77–6 BCE), who cataloged and excised duplicates. This editing preserved the text's layered formation while adapting it to imperial bibliographic norms, as evidenced by Han catalog descriptions in the Hanshu.

Principal Dialogues and Core Arguments

The principal chapters of the Mozi (chapters 8–37) present Mohist doctrines through triadic essays—designated as "upper," "middle," and "lower" variants—each elaborating one of ten core theses, such as exalting the worthy and identifying with superiors. These texts adopt a rhetorical format of persuasive speeches attributed to Mozi, often introduced with phrases like "Our Teacher Master Mo says," aimed at convincing rulers or elites through practical refutations of rival views, particularly Confucian partiality. Unlike the later abstract canons, these early sections emphasize concrete analogies, historical precedents from sage-kings, and consequentialist calculations of benefit (li) to all under Heaven, while invoking the three standards (san biao) for validation: alignment with ancient sages' practices, verifiable outcomes in the present, and endorsement by the people. In the "Impartial Concern" (Jian Ai, chapters 14–16), Mozi's arguments unfold as direct addresses refuting graded love (ci you bie), which he claims fosters disorder by privileging kin or state over others. He employs analogies, such as equating partial favoritism to a scenario where one prefers a neighbor's son for care over one's own due to impartial skill, arguing that universal concern without distinctions maximizes mutual benefit and averts conflict, much like sage-kings Yao and Shun who promoted inclusive welfare. Practical refutations target Confucian hierarchies, positing that partiality invites retaliation—e.g., if State A aggresses on B for favoring its own, endless warfare ensues—while yields reciprocity and prosperity for rulers and subjects alike. The "Condemnation of Offensive War" (Fei Gong, chapters 17–19) features Mozi's speeches debating rulers on aggression's futility, quantifying its costs: offensive campaigns kill hundreds of thousands, waste grain for millions, and orphan multitudes, yielding no net gain even for victors. Analogies liken war to self-harm, as if ten families mutually plunder, all suffer exhaustion without profit, or to theft writ large, violating Heaven's impartial will. While prohibiting unprovoked attacks, the arguments allow Heaven-sanctioned punitive expeditions against tyrants, citing historical models like Tang's overthrow of Jie, but stress defensive fortifications and diplomacy as superior for state survival. These formats prioritize empirical utility and causal chains—e.g., aggression begets mutual destruction—over ritual or familial bonds, distinguishing Mohist persuasion as action-oriented advocacy for policy reform.

Later Canons: Authenticity and Evolution

The Later Mohist Canons, comprising chapters 40–45 of the Mozi text, consist of terse aphoristic statements (jing) paired with explanatory commentaries (shuo), addressing topics in logic, semantics, , and natural phenomena. These materials, including the Daqu (Greater Selection) and Xiaoqu (Lesser Selection), focus on dialectical methods such as analogical reasoning (bi) and disputation (bian) to resolve debates over right and wrong (shi fei). Attributed to third-generation Mohists active from the late fourth to mid-third century BCE, they represent an evolution from Mozi's earlier narrative dialogues toward formalized argumentation. Authenticity debates center on stylistic divergences: the Canons' fragmented, definition-heavy format contrasts with the dialogic structure of core Mozi chapters, prompting some scholars to question integration during Han dynasty compilations (circa 206 BCE–220 CE). However, comparative philological analysis, including lexical patterns and technical terminology shared with contemporaneous texts like the Gongsun Longzi, supports their origin within the Mohist lineage as integral appendices developed by splintered school branches. No direct authorship is named, reflecting anonymous collective authorship typical of Warring States technical treatises, though internal references imply group deliberation under juzi (grand masters). The Daqu and Xiaoqu exemplify dialectical sophistication, employing analogies of effort (xia-ke style) to model causal relations and ethical prioritization, such as grading benefits in universal care without negating proximity-based practice. These texts advance proto-logical principles, including the ("of two, one must obtain") and non-contradiction, applied to semantic disputes like "hard and white" (whether qualities inhere separately). In , they formalize early through explanations of shadows, reflections, and visual perspective, positing mechanistic models where light rays interact with surfaces proportionally. Mechanics precursors appear in discussions of levers, weights, and motion, using quantitative analogies (e.g., doubling halves effort) to predict outcomes in contexts. Such innovations underscore the school's shift toward empirical verification, though textual corruption has obscured full reconstruction.

Ancient Reception and Rivalries

Conflicts with Confucianism

Mozi's critiques of , articulated in the "Against the Confucians" (Fei Ru) chapters of the Mozi text (compiled circa 4th–3rd century BCE), centered on the perceived impracticality and harm of key Confucian doctrines. He denounced elaborate Confucian rituals, such as extended periods and opulent funerals, as economically burdensome, claiming they depleted state resources, interrupted productive labor, and hindered defensive preparations against aggression, thereby failing to benefit the populace or Heaven's will. Mozi contrasted these with utilitarian alternatives that prioritize tangible welfare, arguing that rituals should serve social utility rather than expressive or hierarchical functions. A core contention was Mozi's rejection of Confucian "partial love" (bie ai), which favors relatives and superiors in graded degrees, positing it as a source of interstate rivalry, familial discord, and inefficient . In its place, Mohists advanced "impartial love" (jian ai), an egalitarian concern for all that purportedly minimizes harm and maximizes mutual aid, directly challenging the Confucian extension of benevolence (shu) from self and kin outward. Confucian responses, led by (circa 372–289 BCE), countered that Mohist impartiality erodes foundational human bonds, rendering (xiao) and fraternal deference void; Mencius analogized it to caring for all birds as one's own, which leaves none specially cherished, and insisted it defies innate moral sentiments sprouting from family ties. He further charged that such doctrines foster moral confusion akin to , prioritizing abstract equality over the differentiated roles (fen) that sustain and ethical growth. Disputes extended to governance and personnel selection, where Mohists urged meritocratic appointment based on verifiable skills in benefiting the state—such as engineering or logistics—overriding birth or ritual propriety, to ensure competent rule amid Warring States exigencies (475–221 BCE). Confucians rebutted this as reductive and prone to exploitation by the unscrupulous, emphasizing instead the selection and cultivation of virtuous exemplars (junzi) through moral education, ritual observance, and innate dispositions toward benevolence (ren) and righteousness (yi), which yield holistic leadership beyond mere utility. These exchanges, evident in cross-references between Mozi and Mengzi, sharpened Confucian defenses of tradition against Mohist rationalism, though later Confucians dismissed Mohism's framework as overly mechanistic, neglecting the irreducibly relational and emotive dimensions of human flourishing.

Engagements with Daoism and Legalism

Mohists critiqued Daoist philosophy for promoting and a form of akin to wu-wei, arguing that such views discouraged active human agency essential for societal benefit. In Mozi chapters 35–37, "Against Fatalism," they systematically refute the doctrine of ming (predetermined fate), asserting that outcomes like wealth, poverty, or state stability depend on deliberate policies and efforts rather than inexorable destiny, as evidenced by historical cases where righteous led to while neglect caused ruin. This directly challenges the Daoist ideal of non-interference, which Mohists interpreted as passive acceptance that fosters indolence and disorder, contravening Heaven's mandate for impartial action to maximize universal welfare. To counter , Mohists rejected subjective or contextual interpretations of (way), insisting instead on objective criteria validated by Heaven's will, the practices of ancient sages, and observable benefits to the populace, as outlined in their "three gauges" for evaluating doctrines. Daoists, conversely, derided Mohist rigor and universal prescriptions as contrived impositions on natural spontaneity, with texts like the Zhuangzi portraying Mohist defensive and campaigns as futile, overly engineered contrivances that distort authentic, effortless conduct. In engagements with Legalism, Mohism exhibited alignments in pragmatic consequentialism and administrative efficiency but diverged on foundational ethics. Both traditions endorsed meritocratic selection of officials based on competence to advance state utility, with Mohists influencing Legalist advocacy for elevating over hereditary privilege to ensure effective . Shared emphases included centralized bureaucracies and policy assessments by practical outcomes, such as order and enrichment, prioritizing these over ritualistic traditions. Key differences arose in moral constraints: Mohists tempered utility with Heaven's transcendent, impartial oversight, viewing it as a divine standard that binds rulers to universal benefit and prevents arbitrary power, whereas Legalists subordinated to the sovereign's will, employing harsh laws, rewards, and punishments without divine accountability and dismissing Mohist as weakening state cohesion. Legalist thinkers like critiqued Mohist idealism as naive and disruptive to authoritarian control, favoring over appeals to heavenly mandates.

Evaluations of Mohist Utilitarianism

Mohist consequentialism, often characterized as proto-utilitarian for its emphasis on maximizing aggregate benefit (li) through impartial concern (jian ai) for all under Heaven, derives normative force from divine sanction via Heaven's will rather than empirical aggregation alone. This framework evaluates actions by their capacity to promote broad welfare metrics, such as increased population, wealth accumulation, and mutual aid, as outlined in core doctrines like "Elevating the Worthy" and "Conforming to the Will of Heaven." Ancient assessments, particularly from rival schools, recognized its practical orientation toward state-level outcomes, including meritocratic selection that enhanced administrative efficiency in adopting polities and defensive strategies that mitigated conquest risks during the Warring States era (ca. 475–221 BCE). Confucian detractors, led by Mencius, lambasted this ethic for disregarding intrinsic relational goods, such as graded affections rooted in filial piety (xiao), which they deemed foundational to human flourishing and social cohesion. In Mencius 3A:5, he equates Mohist impartiality with dehumanizing uniformity, portraying it as treating kin and strangers alike, thereby eroding familial bonds and fostering moral anarchy akin to animal behavior without hierarchical distinctions. Xunzi echoed this by arguing that Mohist frugality and benefit fixation undermine ritual (li) and music, essential for aesthetic cultivation and political legitimacy, ultimately yielding poverty, disorder, and weakened authority rather than sustainable prosperity. The doctrine's internal logic demonstrates textual consistency in subordinating diverse goods—security, economy, population—to a unified consequential standard validated by Heaven's impartial oversight, averting subjective relativism. Yet, ancient critiques highlighted tensions in applying impartiality universally, as practical reciprocity often falters amid human variability, potentially allowing rulers to redefine "benefit" opportunistically and enable tyrannical overreach under consequentialist guise. Mohist responses, embedded in dialectical chapters, defend aggregation as Heaven-aligned without intrinsic hierarchies, but fail to fully resolve how partial implementations square with absolute impartiality, exposing vulnerabilities to exploitation in governance.

Decline, Rediscovery, and Modern Assessments

Factors in Mohist Decline Post-Warring States

The unification of under the in 221 BCE eliminated the interstate warfare that had sustained Mohist influence, as Mohists had organized into groups specializing in defensive fortifications and resistance for beleaguered states during the (475–221 BCE). With centralized imperial control, the demand for such itinerant military experts evaporated, depriving Mohism of its primary practical role and patronage base. Qin's Legalist policies further marginalized rival schools through the 213 BCE edict ordering the burning of non-utilitarian texts, which targeted philosophical works outside state-approved doctrines, though some Mohist technical writings on and survived due to their alignment with practical engineering needs. Mohism's ideological rigidity exacerbated its eclipse, as its doctrine of impartial, utilitarian love (jian ai) clashed with the hierarchical familial loyalties and propriety emphasized by , which proved more adaptable to the Han empire's bureaucratic requirements for social order and elite education. Unlike , which evolved to support imperial examinations and administrative hierarchies from the Han's establishment in 206 BCE, lacked a framework for in a unified state, retaining an anti- stance that alienated aristocratic patrons reliant on ceremonial traditions. Later developments, including specialized canons on logic, ethics, and proto-scientific inquiries dated to the mid- to late fourth century BCE, shifted focus inward to technical debates, detaching the school from broader political engagement and failing to attract successors amid the Han's promotion of Confucian orthodoxy by 136 BCE. Empirical evidence of marginalization appears in Han-era texts, where Mohist ideas are sporadically quoted in compilations like the Yanshi jiuwen but without organized adherents or institutional support, contrasting with Confucianism's dominance in state academies and . The school's association with lower-class artisans and merchants, rather than scholarly elites, further diminished its prestige in a Han society valuing literati cultivation over utilitarian craftsmanship. By the early Western Han (circa 100 BCE), had effectively vanished as a distinct movement, its texts preserved fragmentarily but its doctrines supplanted by ideologies better suited to imperial stability.

Transmission and Revival in Imperial China

The Mozi text survived into the Han dynasty (206 BCE–220 CE) primarily through selective quotations in later compilations and eclectic works, such as the Han Feizi and Huainanzi, which preserved fragments amid the broader marginalization of Mohist thought following the Qin unification. By the end of the Han period, the received text had become fragmented, with the traditional seventy-one chapters reduced to fifty-three extant ones, as later chapters on technical subjects like fortifications and defensive engineering were retained for practical utility while philosophical sections faded from prominence. This preservation reflected a shift toward valuing Mohist contributions to military technology, including descriptions of siege defenses and mechanical devices, over its ethical doctrines. During the (960–1279 CE), Neo-Confucian scholars, including (1130–1200 CE), mounted philosophical critiques of , dismissing its impartial care (jian ai) as undermining hierarchical social bonds and ritual propriety central to . Despite this ideological rejection, the Mozi's technical chapters on defensive warfare—such as those detailing city walls, ladders, and tunneling countermeasures—continued to circulate in military treatises, ensuring textual survival due to their applicability in an era of persistent border threats from Liao and Jin forces. This pragmatic retention aligned with Song innovations in weaponry and fortifications, where Mohist principles informed engineering practices without reviving the school's broader worldview. A notable revival occurred in the (1644–1912 CE), driven by evidential scholarship (kaozheng xue) during the Qianlong (1735–1796 CE) and Jiaqing (1796–1820 CE) reigns, when philologists like Bi Yuan (1730–1797 CE) produced annotated editions emphasizing textual emendations. Sun Yirang (1848–1908 CE) advanced this with his comprehensive collation Mozi jiangu (completed circa 1897 CE), which corrected corruptions through comparative analysis of ancient variants and inscriptions, restoring scholarly appreciation for Mohist logic and science amid late imperial interest in empirical methods. These efforts elevated the Mozi within military classics, influencing Qing defenses against Western incursions by highlighting its and , though philosophical reevaluation remained secondary to textual fidelity.

20th-21st Century Scholarship and Interpretations

In the mid-20th century, A. C. Graham's 1978 monograph Later Mohist Logic, Ethics, and Science marked a pivotal revival of interest in the later Mohist texts, analyzing their contributions to dialectical reasoning, ethical , and proto-scientific inquiry into and , attributing the school's origins to a of craftsmen amid Warring States technical demands. Graham emphasized the Mohists' empirical method of and (bian), distinguishing it from Confucian ritualism, though he noted the texts' fragmentary state reflects post-Qin suppression. Building on this, 21st-century scholars like Chris Fraser have reframed as an early form of rather than strict , arguing in The Philosophy of the Mozi (2016) that its prioritize objective efficacy (li) through Heaven's will and social utility, with jian ai ("impartial concern") functioning as a for maximizing order and minimizing harm via standardized norms, not aggregate happiness. Fraser's translation The Essential Mozi (2020) highlights logical canons as tools for semantic precision, countering earlier dismissals of Mohist thought as simplistic. Debates persist, with critics like Changchi Hao contending that Mozi's divine command elements and rejection of partiality preclude Benthamite , as benefits are hierarchically tied to Heaven-ordained roles rather than impartial . Archaeological excavations of Warring States sites, including mechanisms and fortified walls at sites like Yongcheng, align with Mohist descriptions of defensive technologies such as counter-siege ladders and scaling defenses in chapters 14–71, validating the school's practical focus amid empirical trial-and-error methods. These findings underscore Mohism's causal realism in linking to state survival, though direct attribution to Mohist practitioners remains inferential. Contemporary Chinese scholarship nuances jian ai beyond Western egalitarian lenses, interpreting it as a pragmatic extension of familial care to promote mutual benefit (li) and state stability, incorporating graded duties to superiors while challenging hereditary privilege through merit selection, thus avoiding anachronistic projections of modern left-leaning that ignore its anti-aggression, order-preserving intent. Proponents highlight its realism in curbing offensive wars via cost-benefit analysis, evidenced by Mohist interventions in historical sieges; detractors argue it underemphasizes innate hierarchies, potentially eroding motivational kin loyalties central to social cohesion. Such analyses, often in peer-reviewed journals, reflect a shift from 20th-century overlays toward context-specific .

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.