Chapter 36 6. Controversy without conclusion

From Confucius to Han Fei, the pre-Qin philosophers competed for each other, played a colorful movement in the history of our nation's ideology and culture, and left a lot of questions that are still puzzling and debated. But although there are many topics, in general there are only two. which two? One is how to govern the country, and the other is how to behave. The philosophy of life is the way of life.The debate on the way of survival stems from differences in two aspects, one is the theory of human nature, and the other is the methodology.Taoism does not talk about human nature, because there is no need for it.In their view, human nature is human nature, otherwise how can it be called sex (essence)?Mozi, Mencius, and Xunzi believed that human nature lies in the difference between humans and animals, otherwise how can it be called human nature?

So, what is the difference between humans and animals? Mozi believed in labor, while Mencius and Xunzi believed in ethics.Mozi said that without labor, people cannot survive; Mencius and Xunzi said that without propriety and righteousness, people are not as good as animals.Xunzi even said that what makes a human being is only "two-legged and hairless"?In the relationship between father and son and the difference between men and women! Therefore, Mozi valued righteousness, and Xunzi respected propriety.Mozi advocated self-reliance, each doing his best, distribution according to work, and equal opportunities.Xunzi advocated the distinction between high and low, seniority and youth, severity, and wealth and poverty (rationality).Mozi's value is fairness and justice, and Xunzi's is order and civilization.

As for Mencius's proposition, it is benevolent to the people and love things, to seek the good and reject the evil, to respect the virtuous and respect the elders, and to distinguish right from wrong.These propositions are divided into benevolence, righteousness, propriety and wisdom, and combined they are collectively called righteousness.Confucius said to achieve benevolence, and Mencius said to obtain righteousness. This is the difference between Confucius and Mencius.Their common values ​​are benevolence and morality. Only Han Fei believed that human nature is evil. This involves methodology.

Han Fei's methodology is "philosophy of struggle".His famous saying is called "Ice and charcoal are not used for a long time, and cold and heat do not come at the same time".That is to say, the two sides of the contradiction are irreconcilable, life and death are either black or white.Therefore, since there is evil in human nature, it is impossible to have goodness.Therefore, neither the rule of virtue nor the rule of etiquette works, only threats and temptations, severe punishments and severe laws, double-faced and three-handed. Confucius' methodology is "the golden mean".Moderate means not going to extremes, mediocrity means not singing high-profile.If you don't go to extremes, you can neither say that human nature is evil, nor can you say that human nature is good, and it is best not to mention it.If you don't make a high-profile statement, you can't seriously advocate returning to Yao and Shun or Shang and Zhou.If possible, I will call it the Eastern Zhou Dynasty!

Lao Tzu's methodology is "just say the opposite".He also has a famous saying, "When misfortune comes, happiness rests on it, and when blessings come, misfortune rests on it."That is to say, both contradictory and opposing sides can transform into each other under certain conditions.According to this logic, good is evil, and evil is good; good can become evil, and evil can also become good.So Lao Tzu does not talk about the good and evil of human nature. However, Laozi does not talk about human nature, but about governing the country.This is a common topic among schools of thought, the only difference being: Taoist self-government, Mohist rule, Confucian rule of virtue, and Legalist rule of law.As a result, Han Fei and Lao Tzu cherished each other because they both talked about inaction; Mohism and Legalism came to the same goal because they both talked about monarchy.On the contrary, Mencius, who neither talked about freedom nor equality, advocated civil rights.

No one can stop history from joking. The choice of path is clear.Generally speaking, Taoism talks about the way of heaven, Mohism talks about the way of emperors, Confucianism talks about the way of kings, and Legalism talks about overbearing.To talk about the way of heaven is to go back to ancient times; to talk about the way of emperors is to go back to Yao and Shun; to talk about the way of kings is to go back to Shang and Zhou.These are all backwards.Only by being domineering can one go to Qin and Han Dynasties. So the legalists won. However, Legalism's supremacy was only short-lived.In the early Han Dynasty, Huang Lao was honored, and Emperor Wu respected Confucianism.Since then, the governance techniques of successive dynasties have actually adopted both Confucianism and Legalism, and mixed use of kings and tyrants.In academic circles and scholarly circles, Confucianism and Taoism complement each other, and the three religions merge.

That is to say, in the field of ideology, Confucianism and Legalism jointly become the "ruling party", but one is in front of the stage and the other is behind the scenes, and one has a red face and the other a bad face.Taoism has become an "opposition party" and sometimes participates in politics, but most of them take turns with Buddhist thought.Only the Mohist School became an "underground party", secretly popular at the bottom of society, and its ideas were partially realized by Liangshan heroes and Jianghu gangs. So, has the contention of a hundred schools of thought come to an end in this way?

No. Indeed, the weapon of critique cannot replace the critique of the weapon.Likewise, the critique of weapons cannot replace the weapons of critique.For example, the debate on governing the country was cut off by Qin Huang and Han Wu with their swords and scepters, but the problem was not really resolved.Otherwise, how could there have been the 1911 Revolution? Looking at it this way, the three-hundred-year debate has no conclusion. It is normal to have no conclusion.In fact, there may never be a conclusion on issues such as whether human nature is good or evil; the common value of all human beings also needs to be considered by all human beings.The question is, in the era of philosophers, do we have room for in-depth thinking and the possibility of realizing value?I can't seem to see it.

Like liberty and equality. Equality is advocated by both Mozi and Han Fei.Equality plus freedom is the value of Zhuangzi.Escape travel is freedom, and the theory of equalization of things is equality.That's pretty remarkable.It is a pity that Zhuangzi's equality cannot be realized; his understanding of freedom is problematic.In fact, freedom has never been a gift, and it has never been part of nature.Taking nature as equality and whimsy as freedom, in the end there can only be no freedom and no equality. Mozi and Han Fei were even worse, from equality to autocracy. This has to ask why.

In fact, looking back at the arguments of the philosophers, we will find that all the doubts and debates did not go beyond the scope of secular life, which is quite different from other national thinkers who were also in the Axial Age.In the face of suffering, the Jewish prophets and Sakyamuni transcended the world; in the face of nature, the ancient Greek philosophers went to speculation.They are all asking about the ultimate existence of human beings, and about the origin and origin of the world.This is what the pre-Qin scholars did not care about.Even Lao Tzu's Tao is not the "post-physics" of ancient Greece, but the "post-ethics" of China.

It is clear that our civilization, even in its most active age, lacks the two dimensions of religion and science.Perhaps, this is the reason, or one of the reasons.If yes, what is the deeper reason? This is related to the past 3,700 years. Our fate and choices can only be discussed slowly from the long-term.What can be done at this moment is to first take a look at how the emperors of Qin, Han and Wu created the "First Empire" in Chinese history.

---

Notes: